Strategic and tactical realities in CMBS

[Stagler]

I can understand why Russia doesnt want a NATO country on its own border, and it is aiming for the correct thing, a buffer zone or "country" i.e Novorussia. It makes strategic sense from a self preservation and protection perspective. I just done agree on the way they are pursuing their aim.

[Weer]

T-72BM?

What is that?

[ikalugin]

here is another video of Russian troops in Ukraine:

Again, nothing conclusive as to that it is a Russian regular unit and not separatists using the equipment provided by Russia. Or for example Russian unit transferring arms to a separatist unit.

 

Some points on it:

- cammo patern they claim to be Russia exclusive is not clearly seen.

- there are no T72BMs, only T72Bs of various vintages.

Edited January 20, 2015 by ikalugin

[Stagler]

T-72BM was purported to be Rogatka before it got cancelled or ceased development.

[ikalugin]

T-72BM was purported to be Rogatka before it got cancelled or ceased development.

Rogatka = T72B2. T72BM and T72BA often refer to the post 1987 T72B versions, which received K5 ERA and other upgrades (T72 models identification/classification is a very lengthy and confusing topic).

 

p.s.

http://periscope2.ru/2015/01/19/8298/

this article does discuss the military part after the historical/political one. Note that the author suggest a more classical encirclement move, including a strike on Rostov-Mariople axis, with later northern turn. 

Edited January 20, 2015 by ikalugin

[BTR]

T-72BM was also once an export designation for T-72B '89 at one point in time I believe. 

[Stagler]

Western reporting identified the upgrade package as the "M". Russian designation is always a rough thing, especially where platforms like the T-72 is involved and there literally tens of variants.

[Sgt Joch]

Again, nothing conclusive as to that it is a Russian regular unit and not separatists using the equipment provided by Russia. Or for example Russian unit transferring arms to a separatist unit.

 

 

 

again that is why these debates always go nowhere, Russians say there is no proof that Russians are in Ukraine. You post a video of a Russian troop convoy in Ukraine with Russian soldiers wearing Russian military uniforms in Russian vehicles with Russian marking and you guys say you have no proof that they are not "separatists" who just happen to act exactly like a Russian regular Army unit.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Sgt Joch

[Weer]

I didn't see any tactical markings on the vehicles.

[Sgt Joch]

Here is another video filmed by locals near Krasnodon recently:

 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP9eT1laFw4

 

 

honestly, these are real easy to find if you look for them.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Sgt Joch

[ikalugin]

Here is another video filmed by locals near Krasnodon recently:

 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP9eT1laFw4

 

 

honestly, these are real easy to find if you look for them.

The videos indeed are many in number, and the notion that Russia supplies separatist forces is not disputed. What those videos do not prove is that regular Russian Armed Forces participate directly in fighting.

[Battlefront.com]

Egad, and we go down the rabbit hole. Here's how this discussion goes all the time:

Argument -> Russia is not supporting the separatists. Show me the evidence!!

Counter -> there is plenty of evidence, here it is!

Argument -> OK, I see weaponry that could only have come from Russian, that doesn't prove Russia is involved.

Counter -> you have to be kidding me, right?

Argument -> no, I'm totally serious! It's all Ukrainian lies! Our media says we're not fighting there, so we must not be

Counter -> just like you weren't in Crimea when Putin said Russian forces were Ukrainians with Russian arms, uniforms, body armor, and AFVs purchased on eBay?

Argument -> well, no, of course we were lying then. We couldn't tell the truth because people would not be happy about what we were doing. But now we're not lying. Well, except for all the military hardware we're obviously sending into Ukraine Russia keeps saying aren't there. Other than that the Russian government and media should be trusted over all others!

Counter -> thanks for proving my point.

Argument -> again, I say where is the proof that Russian military is involved in Ukraine!

Counter -> besides the ones captured and sent back to Russia in a prisoner exchange? Besides the fresh graves in Pskov? Or the fact that the Russian government was forced to admit that they were killed outside of the country? How about the plaque of the 18th Mech Brigade (I can double check, but I think it was the 18th) commemorating their recent dead? How about all the separatists who say they are fighting with organized Russian military? How about the special forces vehicles driving around killing separatist leadership that isn't complying? How about... oh, why am I bothering?

Argument -> but that proves nothing!

Counter -> if by "nothing" you mean "everything", then I agree!

Argument -> no, I'm serious. Entire columns of vehicles could just drive themselves into Ukraine and then be manned by Ukrainians there. There's no proof that it's Russian military.

Counter -> well, someone is crewing them and they are coming from Russia, so effectively it's Russian military.

Argument -> no it isn't! In my mind as long as Putin doesn't say it's our forces, it's not our forces. Even though everybody other than Russia was telling the truth about Crimea, it's clear to me that everybody else is lying about the current fighting in Ukraine!

Counter -> do you see how foolish this line of argument is?

Argument -> prove it!

Counter -> (sigh) this gets very tiring.

Steve

[sburke]

The videos indeed are many in number, and the notion that Russia supplies separatist forces is not disputed. What those videos do not prove is that regular Russian Armed Forces participate directly in fighting.

Then when Russians are captured, they are simply declared as having "gotten lost". There don't seem to be any other instances I can think of where regular soldiers have "gotten lost" and crossed an international border recently. Either we need to rate Russian soldiers in CMBS, even elite ones as tactically incompetent. ie they can't even verify their location or somebody is lying. I know it is a stretch to think Putin might lie about where his soldiers are, but oh wait yeah he already did that.

[Battlefront.com]

Interesting line of thought, or one could trust the sources he sees without verifying those, for example like with the AK100 usage myth. Note - AK100 is actually a 100mm ship borne cannon, Ukrainian media was showing those rifles off, while in reality they were fairly regular AK74Ms (for example in case of Strelkov), which in turn is a 1991 version of the rifle.

Perfect example of what I was talking about. Russian media lies about huge facts, such as Russia not being directly involved in the fighting in Ukraine. Ukraine media makes some mistakes about little facts, such as "AK-100", and it is considered the same thing as Russia's lies.

Russian arguments require enormous amounts of selective "logic" for the Russian lies to be continued. Russia's position is that it is not aiding the fighting in Ukraine and it is up to the Ukrainians to prove otherwise. The Ukrainians early on had difficulty doing this because Russia was trying VERY hard to have "plausible deniability". So it was difficult. So we got the "AK-100" reporting.

Later, when Russia became more desperate, it started to ship things into Ukraine that could only have come from Russia. T-72s of any type, BTR-82, 12.7mm sniper rifles, special forces vehicles that exist in small numbers even within Russia, electronic warfare vehicles, etc. etc. etc. Evidence of all this exists and has been verified multiple times in multiple places by multiple sources.

The response from Russians is still the same... "8 months ago someone reported seeing AK-100s, so the rest of this evidence can't be believed. On the other hand, even though the Russian government and media were lying about our invasion of Crimea, our government and media is to be trusted".

Sorry, Russia has ZERO credibility. Ukrainian media might be imperfect in the details, but it is by far more reliable because it does not have to lie about the big picture. Russian media, on the other hand, must lie EVERY SINGLE DAY on a grand scale.

 

Add in a preconception, exposure to conspiracy theories (such as the perceived influence of various actually fringe groups on the unfolding events), selective sourcing and you would get a well made, consistent, well descriptive, yet ultimately false version.

Problem is, the official position of Russia is a known lie. Russia also has nothing even close to "investigative journalism" to uncover the truth from within (and why is that, I don't have to wonder?) Therefore, Russia is not in a very good position to clarify and challenge the case against its actions because it is inherently untrustworthy.

I might have some things wrong about Russia, but I've got far more right. More importantly, my basic position is factually sound:

Russia invaded Ukraine in Crimea, it has invaded it in eastern Ukraine, it is funding and facilitating acts of terrorism in other parts of Ukraine, and it has no interest in being a peaceful and responsible part of the global community.

 

Hence why I would prefer a rational, objective discussion, where every point is clearly referenced and sources, as memory alone could play dirty tricks on us.

From my experience it does no good. Show a picture of a BTR-82 and there's always some convoluted excuse, expression of doubt, or simply it is ignored.

Rational, objective discussions where one side is absolutely refusing to play by the same standards they expect of the other side does not work.

Steve

[Sgt Joch]

right, what Steve said. He can attest to the fact that I was willing to give Russia the benefit of the doubt for a lonnnnnnng time.

 

 

Now, as I said previously, trying to argue about the current conflict is pointless. No one is going to change their point of view and we just wind up having the same arguments.

 

I suggest we stick to the original topic, i.e.a theoretical invasion of Ukraine in 2017 and what that would involve.

[Stagler]

Whatever is happening now is irrelevant.

 

In CMBS, in 2017, there are Russian forces in Ukraine. That is what the topic is.

[Battlefront.com]

right, what Steve said. He can attest to the fact that I was willing to give Russia the benefit of the doubt for a lonnnnnnng time.

Yup! Sgt Joch did an excellent job playing devil's advocate. But it got to the point where his arguments required convoluted and highly selective reasoning to maintain that position. I definitely let him know that I was feeling a bit frustrated by it

BTW, when I saw you use the "quack like a duck" statement I think you might imagine the grin I had on my face That was something I said fairly early in our debates.

 

Now, as I said previously, trying to argue about the current conflict is pointless. No one is going to change their point of view and we just wind up having the same arguments.

Yup. Russia's problem is that it lost the battle to maintain plausible deniability, yet it continues to operate as if it still has it. It is one thing to lie when others are uncertain you're lying, it's an entirely different thing to lie when everybody knows your lying.

 

I suggest we stick to the original topic, i.e.a theoretical invasion of Ukraine in 2017 and what that would involve.

It would be nice, but unfortunately it's difficult because talking about the future without talking about the present isn't really possible. Talking about the present when there's two totally divergent views of reality makes that task harder.

For the record, I like people. Russians are people, so by extension I like Russians. Many of Battlefront's business partners over the years have been Russian, and some of those are the best people I've ever worked with. I want Russia to be a strong and just nation where Russians are given a good chance to improve their lives. I even supported Putin in many ways up until about 2010, but didn't fully reject him until 2014. Now, unfortunately, Putin is dragging Russia into the abyss. Even more unfortunately, the Russian people are making that possible.

Steve

[Schmoly War]

Latest from Givi.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGTygMhbf-0&list=PLY96rNvqGJm86-qhHan3CCjBVcX6XYeJm

Edited January 20, 2015 by Schmoly War

[VladimirTarasov]

I didn't think I would have to bring this up and im hoping CIA or other agencys dont arrest me if I go to their countries but I went to DNR at November and I will not lie I'm sure there is Russian special forces units there but not the size you people are claiming there is, I even been to Веселый which is right next to the airport. And I have not seen one BTR-82 or T-72B3 I talked to one of the lads over there and I asked him if there really was a Russian units here and he said there are lads from spetsnaz but nothing game changing just there to train, And provide recon or do sabotage. Im not gonna deny Russian troops there but what I will deny is the amount of Russian troops that America and its allies says to be there. Its not fair to Russia, If you compare the lists of things NATO bombed or went to war with you would understand this. Its not fair that the people who are there did not get to vote, Just right wings protesting and they got what they want with the support of America, Do you guys deny this? If so show me. Because I can show you evidence that America supported the protest in Ukraine. And here's to hoping a CIA death squad doesn't bust my house

Edited January 20, 2015 by VladimirTarasov

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

CIA has lobotomy squads these days, they retired the killsquads for budget reasons in 1999.

 

What offended me, and I am sure I am not alone is the total denial of Russian troops being in the Ukraine, because it's pretty obvious to all impartial observers that there is some sort of Russian presence, and some level of Russian supply of the separatists.  The actual number is somewhere more than a few spetznaz teams, and much less than several battalions of tanks, but they're there, and that's a pretty serious violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and honestly likely the only reason the separatists came into being, and still exist.  Also the fact that artillery is being fired from the Russian side of the border sort of sets up actually having committed no bones about it acts of war against the Ukrainian people.

 

They really shouldn't be there and the Ukraine should be left to sort itself out so long as they're not setting up death camps for Russians/flagrantly violating human rights.  Just as much as we all have to accept the Russian people keep choosing Putin, Russia needs to accept the Ukraine really does not want to be best friends anymore, and move on in life.  It'd likely be easier to keep Ukraine out of NATO anyway if you stopped invading or scaring the hell out of them.

 

So if the Ukraine outlaws being Russians, and forms special camps to make Russians work to death making inferior vodka?  Yeah I can see getting involved.  But this all just stinks of being annoyed the Ukraine did not want to march lockstep with Putin's plans for it, and that's just beyond what I feel the world at large is willing to accept as legitimate cause for conflict.

 

 

 

Just right wings protesting and they got what they want with the support of America,

This is also incorrect.  The right wing made up part of the protesting group, but it was a percentage of it.  Really the more unifying factor was wanting to be closer to Europe, not wanting to be close to Russia, and the fact the president at the time was especially corrupt and ineffective even by Ukrainian standards.

 

Then he started shooting people and it all went rather downhill from there.

Edited January 20, 2015 by panzersaurkrautwerfer

[Kraft]

This has barely something to do with the points above but can anyone tell me what those tanks are, I've been told they are T-80Us but I cannot verify this with my not existing knowledge of post ww2 tanks (I'm sure CMBS will teach me a lot btw!) and I also do not trust that source and put my faith more into this forums knowledge, so, are those T-80Us and how can I tell? The info I found out was mostly about the equipment inside those things and how the road wheels looked, but I cannot really judge on that point 

Edited January 20, 2015 by Kraft

[sburke]

I didn't think I would have to bring this up and im hoping CIA or other agencys dont arrest me if I go to their countries but I went to DNR at November and I will not lie I'm sure there is Russian special forces units there but not the size you people are claiming there is, I even been to Веселый which is right next to the airport. And I have not seen one BTR-82 or T-72B3 I talked to one of the lads over there and I asked him if there really was a Russian units here and he said there are lads from spetsnaz but nothing game changing just there to train, And provide recon or do sabotage. Im not gonna deny Russian troops there but what I will deny is the amount of Russian troops that America and its allies says to be there. Its not fair to Russia, If you compare the lists of things NATO bombed or went to war with you would understand this. Its not fair that the people who are there did not get to vote, Just right wings protesting and they got what they want with the support of America, Do you guys deny this? If so show me. Because I can show you evidence that America supported the protest in Ukraine. And here's to hoping a CIA death squad doesn't bust my house

 

Are you kidding?  You do realize how inept our CIA can be right?  Odds are they would kick in the door with your address, but in the wrong country.  I think talking about what NATO did or didn't do is pointless.  Supposing I say I agree with you about everything you claim, that still leaves Russia in a state of war with Ukraine if Russian troops are there and which you claim to have actually seen on Ukrainian soil.  Again what it does is undermine what Putin states with absolute certainty thereby undermining any credibility of Russian sources.  If Spetsnatz is there, what else is there you did not see?  If you know for a fact your country's leadership is lying, how do you know none of the other accusations are not credible?  I know when it was pretty clear Bush was lying that the US had little to no credibility on Iraq.

 

[BTR]

This has barely something to do with the points above but can anyone tell me what those tanks are, I've been told they are T-80Us but I cannot verify this with my not existing knowledge of post ww2 tanks (I'm sure CMBS will teach me a lot btw!) and I also do not trust that source and put my faith more into this forums knowledge, so, are those T-80Us and how can I tell? The info I found out was mostly about the equipment inside those things and how the road wheels looked, but I cannot really judge on that point  

 

 

Those are T-80U's (or potentially UD's). The vehicle that looks like a BMP-1 is actually a BMP-1KSh (0:11). Then there is a logistical vehicle that appears to be BREM-1 (0:12). After that comes BTR-D (0:15) as far as I can tell followed by 1V119-1 Reostat (0:17). After that come BMD-2's (0:24), then 2S9 Nona's (0:30). More BMD-2's followed by BTR-D right after (0:36) with BTR-ZD (0:46) and potentially BTR-RD at (0:49) however I'm really not sure about the last one. More BTR-ZD's at 0:51 with more BTR-RD's right after. There is definitely one there at 0:54. Maybe a R-149BMRD at 0:57, but that's another one I'm not sure about.  

 

Aaand, that's it really. 

Edited January 20, 2015 by BTR

[VladimirTarasov]

 

 

I get what you are trying to say but there is no tanks coming from Russia you can trust me on that, I have a example for you.  If Obama supports rebels in Syria openly with US ATGMs and other training, But everyone says it is alright when they do it. But when Russia does it Russia the "big bad bear" and "putler" is bad man. So of course Putin will try to hide it, Not much people will be fond of it in the west because every media source that is in America shows Russia bad in anything it does. There is more to it then just Ukraine it goes back to the 1920s when the USSR came along, And America decided it wanted to get rid of it.

[Kraft]

Those are T-80U's (or potentially UD's). The vehicle that looks like a BMP-1 is actually a BMP-1KSh (0:11). Then there is a logistical vehicle that appears to be BREM-1 (0:12). After that comes BTR-D (0:15) as far as I can tell followed by 1V119-1 Reostat (0:17). After that come BMD-2's (0:24), then 2S9 Nona's (0:30). More BMD-2's followed by BTR-D right after (0:36) with BTR-ZD (0:46) and potentially BTR-RD at (0:49) however I'm really not sure about the last one. More BTR-ZD's at 0:51 with more BTR-RD's right after. There is definitely one there at 0:54. Maybe a R-149BMRD at 0:57, but that's another one I'm not sure about.  

 

Aaand, that's it really. 

Thank you!