VladimirTarasov
-
Posts
817 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by VladimirTarasov
-
-
4 minutes ago, panzermartin said:
Bahh terrorizing poor people and distracting them from real life. Its Cold war again but with internet.
Sadly... Before all this I was actually hoping Russia and the west will become close friends or something. Was naive of me to think. Geopolitics, interests, influence, will never permit this. We'll always be politically enemies till the end.
-
Yes, I helped the Lithuanian government in making that. Apparently we need spies in order to reach Vilnyus' in half a day.
Seriously this is getting out of control... Lithuania is in NATO, and Russia is not going to put one soldier on its soil unless it wants to go to war with all of NATO. I hate how they are hyping up this Russian aggression stuff every coming month. You know there is a saying from a country forgot which one but I remember it "if you say something 40 times it will happen"
-
18 minutes ago, panzermartin said:
Oh boy. How can they still pull things like that. Everyone has been bombing them lately.
It's not as easy as bombing them sadly, you need ground forces to do the fatal blows unless you are willing extreme collateral damage. Conventional warfare is best for Air Forces to take part in, when it's a mix of conventional and not conventional it gets very troubling.
-
Just now, Machor said:
Very soon we'll be seeing a counterpoint to Vladimir's third point:
"Mosul Iraq battle: 'Tens of thousands of civilians' used as IS human shields"
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37797700
"Islamic State (IS) militants have abducted tens of thousands of civilians from around the Iraqi city of Mosul to use as human shields, the UN says.
The group also killed some 190 former members of Iraq's security services and 42 civilians, apparently for refusing to obey its orders, the UN adds."God speed to the Iraqi army, hopefully Iraq and its allies can take Mosul from those devils. It's sad how groups like these resort to human shields DELIBERATELY without local support in majority cases...
-
3 hours ago, sburke said:
Nice try on blaming the US, but it is Russia's use of veto power that has kept the UN unable to do anything to try and help this situation. So I guess you think that it is okay for a state to murder it's citizens for trying to get better political representation and it is their fault for asking for reform that caused the whole mess. Nice level of newspeak apologizing.
No no no no, Jesus Christ, this is double standard, so the US can stick its nose together with its allies into Syria because people are uprising, support terrorist groups, just because Assad is at blame, and it's still perfectly fine? So then Russia shouldn't get blamed for supporting Donbas uprising and arming groups there since there was already a uprising of some sort. Bottom line is, Assad has millions living under his control and they aren't uprising against him and majority are Sunni which throws away the claims of deliberate targeting of Sunni Muslims. Russia is actually legally correct here, it has come to the aid of a government, and I am glad our bombs are blasting terrorist groups in Syria to hell. Also you leave out other things in your argument:
1. Many LEGITIMATE rebels have already reconciled with the government in a non-violent way, and they are given local authority and they are happy with it.
2. Many of these "rebels" have switched over to ISIS, and especially members from FSA which the US/Turkey/Saudis support as a proxy.
3. The state is not PURPOSELY murdering civilians in a systematic way, let's put it this way. Their air fleet is old, their equipment is old, and those rebel groups of whom which you support KILL any civilains that flee towards the government side. It happened in Eastern Aleppo, Russia stopped bombing East Aleppo for 10 days now, and guess what happens to any innocents that flee to the government side during this pause? THEY GET KILLED. I'm more than sure there have been individual cases where government troops have committed a crime, but who's to say the US hasn't either or Russia hasn't? You can't just support head choppers that kill kids for supporting Assad, because Assad is a bad guy. That's sick and despicable.
-
14 minutes ago, cool breeze said:
To all the pro Syrian insurrection people, what kind of bad stuff did Assad do before the rebellion started that makes y'all think he needed to be deposed?
Personally having a met a few Syrians of which some have said, Assad isn't good but he's better than whatever the opposition has to offer, which I've come to agree with. Assad has done bad things in Syria, however yet not one evidence has been showed that he has deliberately targeting a specific religious group (Western rhetoric being Sunnis) because 80 plus % of his armed forces and majority of the population under government control is Sunni. Let's put it into perspective, ALL of the rebel groups are supported by foreign countries which have a history of supporting terrorist groups for many causes. (Afghanistan anyone?) Turks control some, US and allies control alot. I understand some Westerners LOVE taking down a legitimate government and installing another one without the say of a large chunk of a population, however it is really getting too far now.
Seriously, Russia is thrown down the drain for supporting rebels which have mostly played a regional role, the farthest their offensives going is in their region, however it is okay to support groups with direct and indirect ties to Al-Qaeda and Nusra, and also other regional terrorist groups that wish to topple the government and install a even more terrible regime, which by far will be worse than anything the Assads have done.
-
59 minutes ago, panzermartin said:
Religious zealots of any kind just keep people in the dark ages and are very much responsible for turning once brilliant civilizations into depressive ruins. I'm very, very sorry for Syria. Apart from the horrific death toll, most of the country was an Unesco protected site. And to see all those rare monuments of human history being sadistically blown to pieces by Jihadists is one of the biggest cultural disasters of our era. Even the nazis had some respect for historical heritage. Those guys, are undeniably the lowest point humanity can reach.
Not most westerners can support Assad because 98% of their media and politicians are down for groups like Jaish-Al-Fateh, and the following 2000000 other groups with links to Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations taking control because it offers the US influence and control over the area. Evil Assad's barrel bombs will always hit hospitals, RuAF will always hit bakeries and orphanages but the rebel artillery pieces, mortar pieces, never kill anyone in Syria. Furthermore, just before the siege of East Aleppo the 1.5 million sieged in West Aleppo by rebels were a figment of our imagination.
It is very obvious that what happened in Syria is exactly the same tried in Libya, with some major/minor differences. Jihadists even when moderate have been documented on being nuts and radical. But since those groups pose no threats to the US, they are free game to use in Syria. But let's keep bashing and sanctioning Russia for stuff that looks pretty compared to what Western government's have been doing in the middle east, especially Syria. Sorry for the whataboutism again btw, we have to ignore those and focus on Russian aggression.
PS: when I mean 20000 it's obviously an exaggeration by alot, but there are dozens of groups tied to Al-Qaeda and Nusra which evidence shows have received indirect and direct support from US proxies, allies, or directly.
-
11 hours ago, antaress73 said:
Russian arty will not Kill m1s often but will Kill sub-systems making them much less formidable.
I'm currently pissed off at one of my runs where I had precision shells land on a Bradley (120mm) perfectly onto the hull under the main gun and the only thing it did was kill the engine... IRL the main gun would be in heaven, and the crew under the impact would be done for. I'm not sure if he can rely on Russian arty against US vehicles since they survive such hits without much damage.
-
BTRs can handle the Bradleys at close range without issue but be very worried about his tanks considering you are lacking heavy armor.
-
13 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
I'm not surprised to hear that Russia has it's own Adam Sandler and Kevin Costner
Steve
We also have some in which no comparison can be drawn
-
4 minutes ago, Krater said:
Standard Soviet AK pouches hold 3 or 4 magazines, so I'd say it's at least that much, or more likely 2x of that.
Plus the magazine in the rifle of course.
-
On 10/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Battlefront.com said:
We've been over this before. It was a Russian operation from the very start (i.e. February 2014). *ALL* the evidence supports this. Ukrainians definitely did join, but Russians kept pouring in over the border. The primary fighting forces were heavily Russian, sometimes in whole units (Cossacks and Chechens, for example). Locals were mostly there to man checkpoints.
The combat performance was, and still is, poor. What percentage is Russian vs. Ukrainian doesn't affect their rather poor combat record.
Yes I wasn't actually disagreeing about there being poor performance, but I'm just bringing to light the good performance record because you were making it seem as if the local force is totally incapable of anything.
On 10/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Battlefront.com said:Sure, but that's what happens when "coal miners" suddenly have huge amounts of SAMs delivered by Russia. But overall, Slavyansk was a major rout for the Russian led "separatists" that were there. Girkin was soundly defeated and the "separatists" have been claiming they will return ever since. Not going to happen.
Who said they were all "coal miners" anyone who said that obviously has no clue about the separ formations. Without the proper evidence we'll have to assume the MANPADs that the separatists started off with were captured from Ukrainian stock, since they did raid military positions at the time. However it is most likely that later on Russia supplied SAMs, but it is also recorded the separatists captured AA weaponry from Ukraine's army.
On 10/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Battlefront.com said:Very, very, very few Ukrainian military defected to the Russians. What did happen was a carefully, and well executed civilian ambush that resulted in an unwinable situation where either the Ukrainians had to start killing civilians to escape or they had to effectively surrender. This was the result of poor Ukrainian leadership and good Russian special ops. IIRC almost all of the Ukrainian soldiers of the VDV unit (25th Air Mobile, IIRC) returned to Ukrainian lines without their equipment. They were definitely demoralized because Ukraine had not gotten it's act together yet. After that disaster the Ukrainians understood what not to do and for the most part avoided losing units to civilian ambushes.
Correct very few not like hundreds switched over. Anyways, we have seen the result of Ukraine's response to these "civilain ambushes" intensity on how they treated the local populace increased folds over.
On 10/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Battlefront.com said:Correct. Which is why only a few T-64s showed up from Russia. There was plenty of photographic evidence of T-64s being transported within Russia on trucks and trains, either out of Crimea or from a base somewhere in that area, into Ukraine. But as you said, they quickly ran out of "plausible deniability" tanks and instead went with older T-72s. Therefore, obviously, all T-72s were from Russia.
Could be, Russia did supply weaponry I don't recall disagreeing with you recently on that topic, but we can't find an accurate number for those supplies, but we do have accurate numbers on how much weaponry and equipment have been captured from Ukraine don't we agree? So I'm just going against the claims that DPR/LPR totally operated or even mostly operated with Russian supplied weaponry which is not true for the most part.
On 10/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Battlefront.com said:Now, let's just remember what we're arguing here. And that the poor, independent "coal miners" desperately fought back against the mighty Ukrainian Army with nothing more than the shirts on their backs and pointy sticks.
The way media shows a certain belief should not lead you to judge the conflict. There were rebels which at the start and I have video proof if you want that can show locals with their regular clothes fighting.
On 10/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Battlefront.com said:Agreed, if by "volunteers" you mean Russian Federation citizens, many of whom were currently serving in the Russian Armed Forces but were on "vacation". If that's what you are talking about, we have no disagreement.
We'd have to go into statistics for that one to make any viable judgement on the performance of volunteers.
On 10/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Battlefront.com said:No, they've suffered most of the pain of the war that Russia insists on continuing. The important fighting has mostly been determined by Russian units, be they tank or artillery or communications or electronic warfare or special forces.
So Yanukovych gets kicked out by Ukrainians because he abused them, yet Ukrainians of Donbas let Russia forcefully insist this war on them? I think you're denying the majority local support for DPR/LPR or Russian involvement or what say you.
On 10/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Battlefront.com said:Yes, and that something is "their performance was overall not very good, which is why Russian had to send in it's regular military starting in June".
Which I've said... I think we're lost in our argument. My point from the start was locals now are capable, I never denied Russia sending in the military to propel those locals. I was trying to imply that locals have had effective cases before (even when lacking the superiority the Ukrainian military had over them) when equipped and in formation (why I said NOW the DPR/LPR can handle a next hypothetical offensive better than previously)
On 10/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Battlefront.com said:Based on what evidence? The only offensive operations I know of in the last year were defeats for the "separatists". In fact, after one fairly major one there was some evidence that Russia forbid more offensives.
Look at the improvements and training standards they have now, they also have battle experience against Ukrainians and their formations are not under-strength. In 2015 there was a battle for Marinka I believe and it was the rebels who launched an offensive where they were repelled, but then the rebels repulsed the counter-offensive following. I'm not sure of any other battle that year or I can't remember one.
-
13 hours ago, John Kettler said:
On an almost infinitely smaller scale, I'd like to ask: What is the current ammo load is for a Motor Rifle infantryman and, if different, a paratrooper? I've read the Motor Rifleman of the Cold War had a whopping 90 rounds total--one magazine in his AK and two spares.
Not sure about the Soviet trooper, but as my father was in the military and seen combat during the Soviet Union in Afghanistan I'm pretty sure he had more than 3 magazines to spare. IIRC wartime I'd for sure have 6-8 magazines. Plus we could always resupply if needed.
Regarding Russian movies, we have quite a few good ones, but then we have disastrous ones that make me want to unwatch.
-
41 minutes ago, hattori said:
Man, Russia is spending a lot of money on this, I bet they'll be happy once oil starts going back up.
When's that?
-
3 hours ago, Raptorx7 said:
Hm...
I see a few potential problems with this.
1. We'll need doors now because it'll be hard for the crew to get in through the top hatches. I'm thinking armored Delorean style doors to be exact.
2. This thing is going to stick out like a sore thumb
3. The radome might be a little to low to the ground
Overall though, the AWACS Abrams looks like it could be a huge hit!
Yes, I'm glad you've decided to go with that design choice. The hatches should be through the blow out panels that have transparent ammo in them so the loader, gunner, and commander can get through.
-
4 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:
Separatists practically routed from these positions so the Ukrainians did not pay much of a price at all. If you watch watch videos of those battles you will see separatists exhausted and panicked. Where they did pay a price was when Russian line units were involved.
They weren't routed in the sort of "OMG IM GETTING DESTROYED WAY" but they did withdraw from many places after putting up fights, let's face it getting to form a local force isn't easy on your own, you need to get everything together, train men find veterans in the region, capture vehicles, train your troops. The rebels still put up fights in many cases.
4 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:This argument itself isn't very convincing. During 2014 there was not a single military base or military stockpile or military factory in Donbass. There is no way that the separatists could have possibly acquired an upwards estimate of 700 tanks and many more APCs, the majority of which were never in the Ukrainain arsenal without extensive Russian support.
Incorrect, multiple raids onto Ukrainian positions to capture bases and the vehicles in them were conducted bro. You could easily find a base raid from the Donbas war if you search it up man, I'm too lazy to link you up since I'm sleepy, I'll try to tomorrow if you can't find anything. The Separ terrorist thugs didn't have 700 tanks man, that would have changed the outcome of this war hugely if that was true. Majority of the thugs' equipment is from Ukrainian forces, and I'm sure wiki could show you a raid incident
4 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:I think he means the vacationers (Russian far-right groups with military background that were mixed in with separatists), not the official Russian troops.
Yeah, I assumed he meant actual evil Russian troops my mistake.
5 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:For both airport battles the claims made by both sides are similar: Ukraine lost 200 with about 300 wounded (contentious figure and should be taken with a grain of salt) and the Russians lost 800+ with about 2000 wounded. The land itself is not strategic as the Ukrainian army has line of sight over almost the entirety of the airport and the buildings themselves are practically rubble and the runway is no longer a runway. This is reflected by the fact that both sides are not willing to fight over it in its current state.
Ukraine lost around 200 men killed which is confirmed, the rebels are around the same as the Ukrainians in losses for the battle until the end phase of it where Somali and Sparta held off quite a few assaults. Anyways the casualties on both sides are in the hundreds and around the same for that battle. The thing with taking the airport is it was a propaganda victory, it hit Ukrainian morale hard. Plus in event of ATO 3.0 it can serve as a strategic point. The battle for the airport was mostly volunteers and local troops, Luhansk airport however confrimed even seeing a T-90 which probably Russian troops took part of. Anyways, I'm not roasting you bro
you always get me when you say that I let out a good laugh.
-
4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Depends on the timeframe, however non-Ukrainian fighters have always been an extremely large part of the separatist forces. In fact, at the beginning stages they were the majority from the leaders down to the fighters.
Come on Steve, you do know that Ukrainians in east Russia could have easily pulled the maidan ousting in Donbas right? If you really think more than 20% of the forces in Ukraine started off with non-Ukrainians then I believe there are issues in your case, however of course you aren't totally wrong, and there was support coming in for the rebels from Russia of course, but if you think that all of this happened and the people of Donbas just let it be, that's a miscalculation.
4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:Actually, the price was very low.
It was low compared to the rest of the conflict when Russkii intervention geared up, but losing more than 4 choppers and quite a few armored vehicles in Slaviansk is still a high cost. The rebels of course operating solely on Ukrainian equipment at the time was not going to stand to fight against the fully equipped Ukrainian troops. Considering also that in Slaviansk some Ukrainian troops switched sides after meeting the locals protesting them. (Vice news video) rebels did what they could and stalled the Ukrainians, anyways the rebels now have been formed into better shape, and they constantly have drills and are more cohesive and organized. Same thing could be said for our Ukrainian friends.
4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:The evidence is not complete. This shows only what was lost and initially Russia tried to have plausible deniability by inserting Soviet era equipment into Ukraine. But we've been all over this and the vast amounts of hardware in the hands of the "separatists" is in some cases more than the Ukrainian Army had to start with. So while you continue to spin the fantasy tail that "separatists" were poorly equipped with only captured equipment, the mountain of evidence accumulated by non-Kremlin sources shows this to be a massive lie.
The most Russia could have snuck in are older T-72Bs, our reserve tank fleet is a mess and I highly doubt that they could restore whole battalions worth of tanks from the T-64 fleet that's decaying and I'm not even sure if it's in reserve-reserve so to speak. LostArmor provides many info on how much vehicles were taken and solely based on photos, unconfirmed raids to capture vehicles should add little more onto their lists.
4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:No, I'm going by the fact that it took the "separatists", backed by regular Russian internal troops, special forces, regular units, C2, logistics, etc. took months to take a rather meaningless airport. Then months later totally failed to defeat the Ukrainians at Debaltseve until major Russian units were committed to the battle. I also rely upon the Western reporters who were there and interviewed/observed the combat performance on the "separatist" side
Of course I never argued the miilita's of that time could launch a effective counter-offensive like in Debaltsevo with the success it was done, however even then most of the units in terms of manpower used were locals/volunteers. Anyways, I think we agree on the main point that Russian intervention whether in smaller or greater amounts than claimed propelled the rebel forces, which could have been in great danger. But my point is locals and volunteers have shared most of the weight of this war. And let's be honest, the Ukrainians launched short ranged ballistic missiles at rebel targets, some of them killing innocents of course, but that beside the point, if you could not sweep up the whole problem which started in May and geared into Russian offensives in middish August then that says some things about the local force's capabilities. And my main point was NOW the rebels have been formed into a good enough force to do good enough to meet the demands thrown against them if Ukraine uses their right on launching another anti-terrorist operation.
Anyways, I'm not trying to hype up the DPR/LPR, Ukraine has also reformed and increased combat effectivity, and even with their conscripts (I think of conscripts as capable troops regardless honestly) can put up a fight, but you're throwing out the local/volunteer force out the window now. There is another point you can get across in criticizing the DPR/LPR government. I'm sure you know some volunteer units pillaged and looted, and were corrupt. But it was largely solved after rebel commanders killed the corrupt units off, largely they are reformed now.
-
13 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Plus, I question how competent Sparta would be in a full on military conflict. This is not because it's incompetent (though it might very well be), rather it's a simple numbers game. In a pitched battle between a well motivated Russian BMG and a US Special Forces company, my money would be on the Russian BMG all else being equal. After a certain point, firepower matters far more than fighting prowess.
Sparta just like many other DPR/LPR battle groups have been quite competent and on there own even if for example they lost a city a major breakthrough towards population centers or the capitals of the regions were not reached and stalled the Ukrainians, and let's not forget most of this fighting force are locals, some volunteers. And most of them have no actual military experience beyond conscription. Anyways, this of course played a role in how effective a rebel formation was, but results were achieved not to say Ukrainians weren't able to take locations like Slaviansk, Kramatorsk, Mariupol albeit at a high price.
Anyways, yes there were polite men deployed to Donbas to assist Militia forces at certain times, however what most of the Militias were fighting with were captured from Ukrainian formations. My evidence being: http://lostarmour.info/analytics/
Yes, Russian weapons did trickle into some Militia hands however those weren't game changers, usually the rare equipment like T-72B3s operated by Russian servicemen were game changers of course. But we can't deny most of the fighting was bared solely on the rebels since the start. So yes there were incompetent and competent Rebel units same as the Ukrainian forces.
14 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:The fighting value of the "separatists" in 2014, many of whom were Russian service members "on vacation", was very poor.
That's contradicting your own arguments from before that the Russian troops reversed the Ukrainian's gains... Make up your mind Russian servicemen are poor, or the show runners? Obviously they had a huge impact because they were so capable. Don't play the Ukrainian cyborgs vs Russian inferior card
14 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:In the airport and Debaltseve battles the "separatists" suffered massive casualties while achieving almost nothing
Ukrainian politicians also claimed in Slaviansk 470 rebels died which was total bull crap, and proven to be wrong. In the Airport and Debaltseve the Ukrainians suffered heavy casualties and lost important strategic land, and also the strategic image of the Donetsk airport. The Ukrainian government is suppose to be taken with the grain of salt the same way the Rebel government is in terms of claims... Independent research proves out to be way better than taking the claims of any side. And you appear to be going by Ukrainian claims. The Separatist terrorists with no support from the local population actually achieved alot by taking those objectives.
1 hour ago, Machor said:You may want to read this interview with a Russian (ethnic Buryat) tanker who was wounded while fighting in Ukraine with his regular unit:
Relevant highlights from the interview:
"— Вы вместе с ополченцами воевали? Общие задачи были у вас?
— Нет. Они просто... Займут один рубеж, и когда надо ехать дальше врага дожимать, ополченцы отказываются ехать. Говорят: мы туда не поедем, там опасно. А у нас приказ наступать дальше. И захочется — не прикажешь им. Ну и дальше едешь."
[- Did you fight together with the militia? Did you have common objectives? - No. They just... occupy a boundary, and when it's necessary to advance and press upon the enemy, the militia refuse to do so. They say: "We won't go further; it's dangerous." And we have been ordered to advance. Even if we'd like to - we can't order them. So we press on.]
"— Так вы вообще не координировались?
— Нет. Ополченцы — они странные. Стреляют, стреляют. Потом останавливаются. Как на работу ходят. Никакой организации нет. Нету главы, боекомандования, все вразнобой."
[- Did you not coordinate at all? - No. The militia are weird. They shoot, shoot, and then stop. As if their shift is over. They have no organization whatsoever. No leadership, command; total chaos.]
Opinion of one soldier shouldn't be taken as a collective answer to a force with 30K plus men. I'm sure there were incompetent rebel units, but I also know of competent ones.
-
11 minutes ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
More disturbingly, here's some video raising some serious doubts about the protective package on what is suspected to the production model Armata
The simulation has spotting issues as far as I'm concerned, the optics need to be tweaked which could have resulted in a different outcome. Plus crew survivability has not been modeled correctly... Big let down if this is true IMO.
-
25 minutes ago, JUAN DEAG said:
They are largely irrelevant. If Russia's satellites are in trouble then Russian motor-rifle troops will be there to save the day. The Russian commanders (the ones that are doing the commanding) still have their experience while Motorola and the likes sit there and look pretty.
Motorola headed the most experienced and special battalion among the militias, you're acting as if the local force don't have a defensive capability currently bro. Russian motor troops arrived in 2014 and 2015 when counter-offensives were needed, and even then it wasn't full Russian fledged Russkii Motor troops, obviously a mix of local troops ect, ect, in most cases Russian advisory and supporting groups.
-
AWACs capability onto the Apachbrams AHM64A2
-
1 hour ago, Jammersix said:
I've been playing with the idea of replacing the coax with a Bushmaster.
But I don't want to make this thing unreasonable.
Bushmaster IV is not unreasonable, 40mm can do quite some damage. However that's a silly idea anyways, put an extra 120mm on it with a extra loader and you have 2 M829A3s coming out at 6-9 rounds a minute. The loader's weapon on top should be switched to a TOW-2B and the commander's machine gun should be a Bushmaster cannon. The future of combat is against heavy armored forces, gotta think outside the box
-
Looks like a solid plan, firepower is the main focus of any Russian offensive, you have to focus it on the right spots and immensely so the defense can crack. I'm interested in the outcome
-
43 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Yes, but what did they do exactly? Did they occupy buildings? Did they arrest people? Did they kill people? Did they take anything back to the DPR with them that they shouldn't have? These are details which might shed light on the situation, it might not. But the information I've seen has been about as useless to this discussion as what you just wrote.
Going by strictly some articles, no killings recorded. Not sure about anything else however, possible arrests? Not enough info to draw something out from there. Anyways, I'm replying here in a short summarized way so we don't go back and forth. Your argument has just as much credibility as mine, since we both have no real evidence to piece together, I'll agree to disagree and as long as the front doesn't heat up over this matter these speculations should be harmless.
Yes commanders have been killed by internal feuds but it's nothing on say Syria's level (rebel allies wise) irrelevant to the point though. Usually traitors within DPR/LPR kill with a reason, and my point was that I don't see any recent reasons for DPR/LPR units to kill him, or for Moscow to kill him. He's obeyed top brass orders and has done well. That's where my suspicion comes in from, and that's why I assume Ukraine (which is more likely IMO but still no evidence other than speculations) did it.
I'm only saying this because there has been multiple assassination attempts from the SBU (some which have been successful) against DPR/LPR commanders. And I'd draw this individual case to not be a internal feud issue. Not saying there weren't any in fighting between corrupt commanders.
55 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:In a hot war with Ukraine it will be the Russian armed forces that save them, as they have several times already, not a single militia leader.
Well this is more than partially true, 2014 was a major savior to DPR/LPR, but looking at the force structure today, the local force should be well prepared for defensive operations well atleast prepared to follow organized battle against an offensive. Militia units on their own have fought most of the battles, at critical times Russian troops have been confirmed by various evidence to have come into action, however the numbers are still over exaggerated in most cases. I don't think IF Ukraine assassinated Pavlov it would be to hurt the DPR/LPR forces structure majority wise, it could be for grudge purposes, or because he's in charge of the only special forces battalion of DPR/LPR forces. Anyways, we'll have to wait and see if any leaks, or evidence comes out.
US/ NATO v. Russia - Misperceptions.
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Uniting all of Europe on Jihadi scums side is all the support the US needed to provide. the US is supporting dozens of terrorist groups which are allied with the Nusra front which is former Qaeda. All the TOWs provided by Saudi Arabia and the US which have ended up killing regime tanks, training these groups together in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Turkey. The US almost went to war over Syria over gas when the same rebel groups have been using chemical weapons on Regime troops. Well documented if you follow the conflict closely, and have good sources. But I'm sure you believe the US has not supported the rebels with weapons, training, advisory, and intelligence... Even your media has it. Come on now, you're denying reality.
Okay, going by that rhetoric you believe there is no majority support for Russian backed forces in Donbas, which is debunked by many people on the net. I never denied Syrian rebels having local support in some areas, however if you look at Aleppo where the majority 1.5 million population is under government control, no one is protesting infact rebels are bombing them with shells, but of course you'll only see the part where a Russian bomb pulverizes terrorist position where they were holding hostages so they can just film it on camera and scream for your attention. In reality you're supporting terrorists and that's the end case.
Soviet Union in Afghanistan has done collateral damage but that's a total different story from a totally different regime. And Chechnya... That's self explanatory, look at Russia in the 90s what did you expect precision clean work? Same stuff over and over. Yes Russia uses accurate weapon systems but even if it was 100% precision missiles like our western allies use a bomb is a bomb look at this link:
Precision?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/26/syria-coalition-airstrikes-civilian-death-toll-amnesty-international
BUT, I totally support US airstrikes against ISIS vermin. I understand collateral damage terrorists use people as hostage. Now imagine the Assad regime. Lacking intelligence, precision weaponry, competence, discipline, organization. But listen here, let me show you something CNN or Fox News never shows
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415586/Syrian-rebels-attack-historic-Christian-village-residents-speak-language-Jesus.html
http://news.trust.org/item/20161028064428-7l63p/
Um no, but being apart of a group where it has happened, makes you just as responsible for such incidents. There is a video of rebels beheading a 11 year old however, I refuse to let the people here see such disgusting vile acts. I can PM you it instead if you'd like. And here's what your government has to say about it
"one incident won't stop funding"