Jump to content

Fighting Russians in Ukraine. A foreign volunteer view.


Ivanov

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Not Moderator now ;)

I've posted quite a bit on this subject and I read that 1st hand account when it came out.  I also take it with a pinch of salt because I take all first hand accounts that aren't verifiable with pinches of salt.  However, that doesn't mean there isn't truth in what was written.

What follows is my distillation of at least 1000 hours of my time spent following this war since February 2013:

There are basically 6 different types of forces fighting in Donbas against the Ukrainian government:

1.  True separatists.  These guys are born and raised in the area and really believe that they are doing something to better the land the grew up in.

2.  True volunteers.  These are Russian citizens (tiny number from other countries) who believe in enlarging Russia in order to protect Russian citizens' interests.

3.  Adventurers/Mercenaries.  Guys who are there more for money, glory, cure for boredom, etc.  While they might also be Russian nationalists, that is not their primary motivation.

4.  Organized crime.  Groups of men who entered from Russia as whole units or sprung from local pre-war organized crime groups within Ukraine.  They are there mostly to plunder for their own financial benefit.  Cossacks have been the highest profile of this group, but they aren't the only ones.

5.  Fake volunteers.  Regular, serving Russian military personnel who have either been bribed, forced, or tricked into fighting in Donbas outside of their normal units.  For most of the conflict they've entered with older military or private purchase items in order to maintain "plausible deniability".

6.  Regular military.  Standing Russian military units which enter Ukraine as intact military units with more/or less their standard equipment.  This ranges from highly specialized units (e.g. electronic warfare, special forces, etc,) to standard line units (e.g. tank, mech inf, artillery, etc.).  They generally look like Russian military units because they are using uniforms and equipment that is only in Russian service, though uniforms aren't a certain giveaway.

 

Depending on the time period and location you will find a different mix of these forces in different densities.  However, there is a general trend for the bulk of these forces.

Prior to the Ukrainian 2014 summer counter offensive the bulk of the fighters were Groups 1-4.  For sure specialized Russian units were inside from the start, but they really did stay in the shadows.  Group 5 started to come in once it was clear there was going to be a credible fight by the Ukrainian forces (which was not certain at first).

The big change came as the Ukrainian offensive picked up steam in June and July.  It was clear that if Russia did nothing that pretty soon Ukraine would have regained effective control over the entire Donbas and the border.  Russia initially tried to stall and reverse the offensive through heavy artillery strikes from both sides of the border, several modest sized Group 6 battle groups, and providing anti-air support in the form of various missile systems (including the infamous Buk launcher).  This tripped up the Ukrainian offensive in several places, but it wasn't enough and overall it was clear that Groups 1-4 were not competent enough to win against the semi-competent Ukrainian forces. 

In August decision time came.  It was clear that the minimal force approach wasn't going to work.  Either it had to insert a big force of Group 6 or it was going to have to admit defeat and watch Ukraine roll up the front for good.  Russia chose the path of more war and that's when large numbers of Group 6 units went in on the counter offensive.  They attacked from multiple points along the border behind Ukrainian lines where there were absolutely no "separatist" forces.  Ukraine, already stretched thin from several months of offensive action, couldn't handle the influx and had to retreat and suffer some significant losses.

Russian Group 6 fought to the point where it was clear that the Ukrainian forces weren't going to totally collapse and were, in fact, stiffening their resistance along new lines.  Russia either had to invest a lot more Group 6 forces or force Ukraine to the negotiating table.  It did this with Minsk 1.

Since the start of 2015 Russia spent a lot of time liquidating (either through direct action or negotiations) Group 4 because they were undermining Russian control of the area and stealing Russian military and civilian aid.  Putin even publicly warned these groups to cut it out.  Several high profile battles took place between Russian special and regular forces against these groups.  It took almost the entire year but it seems whatever groups are left in Donbas are mostly behaving themselves.

Russia also spent quite a bit of time dealing harshly with Groups 1 and 2.  They are zealots and that's a tricky thing to manage because they don't want to be managed.  They have continually picked fights which they weren't competent enough to win and then expected Russian forces to bail them out.  The big example is Debaltseve.  It got so bad that when Russia sent in Group 6 units it used Groups 1 and 2 as cannon fodder (they themselves stated this, BTW).  The objective was to humble the units through attrition (Soviet Union did this to the Ukrainian partisans in 1944 after Bagration broke the line, so there's precedent).

Since Debaltseve there's been several high profile battles and assassinations of Group 1 and 2 leadership that wanted to be too independent.  This has continued thorough this very day, including a report two days ago of a battalion commander's "suicide".  There was also the infamous "Troy" unit that was appealing on the Internet to have regular Russian forces (their words, not mine) stop besieging their compound.  Some reports said Troy was Group 1/2, others said it was Group 4.  They themselves said they were Group 1/2.

Now we're entering a new phase, it seems, with more Group 6 units moving into Donbas in the past few weeks.  It's unclear what the specific reasons for moving them in actually is, but for sure it is to at a minimum deal with the fact that Minsk 2 is not going in favor of Russian negotiators.

That summarizes things pretty well, even if generally.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, now back to discussing relative combat value:

Groups 1-3 fight together and therefore are, more-or-less, a single type of fighting force.  They have a mix of military training, but by-and-large are poorly suited for combined arms combat.  They can do some small unit stuff decently, but unevenly because they do not have cohesive reasons for fighting.  One guy in a unit might be willing to die because it's his home he's defending, the other one wants to return home to tell stories and spend his money.   In the face of an organized military opponent, even a fairly poor one by NATO standards, they simply don't hold up very well.

Group 4 is militarily ineffective.  These are no different than the Einsatzgruppen of WW2... they aren't there to fight battles, therefore they are more than likely to avoid a real fight than they are to engage in one.  They know that if they are dead they can't spend their money or brag about how tough they are.  They are generally careful to not run away from a fight as much as they are careful to not get into one to start with.

Group 5 is the backbone of the "separatist" fighting force.  These guys have current military experience and are mostly fighting with guys and equipment they are familiar with.  Usual practice is to create these units from as few parent units as possible, therefore minimizing disruption to cohesion.  Outsiders are definitely brought in to fill key positions, but it's not what they prefer.

Group 6 is the one that Ukraine has to watch out for.  These guys go into a fight with full cohesion and largely with their own equipment.  They are the ones that Ukraine has the biggest problems fighting, but Russia doesn't have enough of them in play at any one time (even August/Sept 2014) to be decisive when a battle starts.  Chances are Ukraine's forces outnumber them and that leaves their flanks vulnerable.  Be it at a larger or smaller scale.

Bottom line... Ukraine has never fought a fully "Russian Army" force in the entire war so far.  If it had happened in Aug/Sept 2014 I think things would be very different, but Russia would have lost even it's actual (and thin) ability to deny direct involvement.  If Russia went on an overt offensive now I don't think it would be pretty for either side.  Which is one reason I believe Russia refuses to get itself sucked into another Debaltseve situation.  The Kremlin has to be very, very careful about Cargo 200 and military reversals now more than ever before.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Word "incompetence" can often be used to describe the Ukrainian conflict,At higher levels Ukraine has certainly not impressed!

1.Incompetence by Ukrianian authorities when it comes to The faith of Malaysian Airliner Mh17.

2.Incompetence by Ukrainian Military HQ....look no further then The Debaltseve pocket.....that was just PAINFULL to Watch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Much has been written. well, I will try to answer.  Very good all painted Steve. I myself could not explain all of this due to poor language skills. There are things that are extremely controversial.
But 90-95% I agree with him. 
I'm in the subject almost from the beginning.   In April - May 2014 I was there. Almost all Russian families have relatives in Ukraine, near or far. And i am too.
In the Lugansk SBU  captured locals, maybe they were related to the Ukrainian oligarchs, I do not know.  About the Russian special services did not know- speech never went.
When capturing SBU Slavyansk they were local thugs, airsoft, black diggers, and about 70 peoples  come together with the I.Strelkov from the Krimea. 
 Perhaps among them were are number  of  people from the  special services. But  that was not army unit.
 Some of them had combat experience. All were  armed with civilians carbines. Rifles, machine guns, and grenade launchers  was taken in the armory  in the SBU Slavyansk and Kramatorsk.
vice-news often shows them and said that a Russian special forces. https://rufabula.com/media/upload/images/2014/04/14/0_10116e_ce95272f_XL.jpg  this is not true.
the first 5 BMP and  Nonna were captured with me, or rather hungry and do not smoke and eaten 3 days paratroopers themselves went to the rebels. Its true.
There were very few weapons. Many were armed only with pistols. In warehouses in Artemovsk from Ukraine military was bought SKS  and at-rifles.
First weapons delivery starting at the first number of  june....
  I wrote my first post because the theme quite seriously discussed  the low combat capability of the Russian Army ( group 6 in Steve therminology) -"the-russian-paper-tiger-" and HI combat capability Ukraine .   
 but as far as  known in the few cases when highly incomplete  numerically smaller then staff laid Russians tactical groups caused a rapid and crushing defeat Ukraine forces.
it seems to me (I do not know the secret information), more than 90% of time Ukraine forces was fought against group (1-2-3-4), 7% (5group), and 1-3? %group 6) and where is Russian Army ? and who is paper-tiger ? but its only my opinion, and I can only speak about what I saw.
because (it seems to me) over the last few years  Steve knows a lot of secret things :-), very much like to hear his opinion about the number of incoming troops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to panzersaurkrautwerfer

I did not understand your reference to video. Sorry.

About my links -people have made a titanic work on the binding of all known published pictures and videos  had destroed armour units at this konflict.
and before condemning a good idea to familiarize yourself with the contents of. and I know that a lot of the internet lies and fakes, but this resource seems to me very significant. Moreover the site allows you to do analysis and clearly confirmed presence in the conflict zone for example modifications 72 b3. No one  does not hide this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Word "incompetence" can often be used to describe the Ukrainian conflict,At higher levels Ukraine has certainly not impressed!

1.Incompetence by Ukrianian authorities when it comes to The faith of Malaysian Airliner Mh17.

2.Incompetence by Ukrainian Military HQ....look no further then The Debaltseve pocket.....that was just PAINFULL to Watch!

Dear admins. I think that a two post user with a nick To.Droll.To.Troll use should be banned without further ado.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear admins. I think that a two post user with a nick To.Droll.To.Troll use should be banned without further ado.

Just report the post as a possible sock puppet. I agree that a user name like that is very suspicious. Every post has a report link for stuff like that.

In the meantime sock puppet or not they sure warrant being put on your ignore list...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just report the post as a possible sock puppet. I agree that a user name like that is very suspicious. Every post has a report link for stuff like that.

In the meantime sock puppet or not they sure warrant being put on your ignore list...

Sock Puppet?

Is it possible to get an explanation....why?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sock Puppet?

Is it possible to get an explanation....why?

Because it is too uncool.  Now 2Droll2Troll, that would have been cool.  It's all in the presentation.  Though one does have to wonder what your intent was about criticizing Ukraine over the Russian proxies shooting down that airliner.  What has the UKR gov't have to do with that.  Past that yeah the Higher UKR military leadership has been soundly criticized including by Ukrainians.  But what do you expect considering how much it had been dominated by the oligarchs and infiltrated by GRU.  It is getting better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Dances with nationalists

Pretty much.  It gets boring quick.  I like the duality though, Ukrainian forces are stupid dumby! But somehow they're still beating up Russian ubermen or whatever. 

Re: Paper Tigers

There's a lot of question in regards to Russian forces in the following areas:

a. Will Russian modernization  be able to undo the 20 or so years of military neglect?  The answer is mostly accepted as "no" but it's a question of where it might succeed and to what degree (Russian Naval ambitions, and much of the aviation might be out of reach...but a lot of the infantry stuff and some of the AFV measures might be within reason).

b.Will the move to contact soldiers result in a higher basic quality soldier?  The jury on this one is out, while there's been improvements in training quantity and quality, what outside observations have been made seem to indicate contract soldiers may be superior in the long run due to experience retained, but at the basic entry level there's no meaningful difference between them and conscripts.  This might see more dividends later as contract soldiers turn into longer serving soldiers.

c. Below Company level tactics in the Soviet-Russian model have always been fairly basic, often their independence and capabilities more closely mirror the next smallest western unit (or in so many words, a Russian Company has about the same level of support and mission independence as it relates to a battalion, as platoon relates to a company within the NATO realm).  This is largely a reflection of taking a lower education base for a shorter window of training and indoctrination.  The initial article seemed to indicate this is still the case, but other relevant information seems to indicate the infantry guys were not regular Russian military forces.  With that said the trend of Russian small unit leadership does not appear to have changed terribly much, which puts random lost soldiers or a level of disorganization on the objective (and a certain degree of "what next" in the absence of a larger mission) not outside the realm of reason.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I'm in the subject almost from the beginning.   In April - May 2014 I was there. Almost all Russian families have relatives in Ukraine, near or far. And i am too.
In the Lugansk SBU  captured locals, maybe they were related to the Ukrainian oligarchs, I do not know.  About the Russian special services did not know- speech never went.
When capturing SBU Slavyansk they were local thugs, airsoft, black diggers, and about 70 peoples  come together with the I.Strelkov from the Krimea. 
 Perhaps among them were are number  of  people from the  special services. But  that was not army unit.

For sure these were not regular Russian army in terms of fighting capabilities.  However, both Bezler and Girkin are GRU officers who had done similar things for the Russian government in several other places.  Their mission was to form armed groups within Ukraine using (as much as possible) local resources and personnel as well as Russian volunteers and supplies coming directly from Russia.

 Some of them had combat experience. All were  armed with civilians carbines. Rifles, machine guns, and grenade launchers  was taken in the armory  in the SBU Slavyansk and Kramatorsk.

This is not accurate.  It is nearly certain that Strelkov (Girkin) and his group came over the border already armed.  They used those weapons to seize arms from SBU/police stations to increase the size of their forces.  Bezler did the same thing in Gorlivka. 

Soon after weapons and ammunition in large quantities came in from Russia.  However, initially these were mostly very old weapons (including SKS and PTRD) that were poorly stored in military warehouses.  The Russian government allowed these weapons into Ukraine because they were very difficult to trace to Russia (though there was some evidence from crates and paperwork recovered later).  At a famous meeting between "separatist" leaders and their primary source of aid from Russia (Durgin's Fascist organization Eurasian Youth Movement), at the meeting represented by Sergey Kurginyan, Bezler and others complained that 1 in 4 rifles received were not serviceable.  Chechen groups came in a little later and they entered Ukraine fully armed.

My point is that it's a lie that the early groups were armed only with rocks and sticks as is often stated.  They were very well armed with the guys holding SKS and hunting rifles being only at the very beginning stages.  The truckload of RPG-18s that the separatists "found" very early in the conflict is an example that in many ways the average "separatist" was better armed than the average Ukrainian soldier.  The number of brand new condition AT-4 systems Ukraine captured in Slavyansk also shows Girkin's group was well armed (and the SBU did not have those in its offices!)

vice-news often shows them and said that a Russian special forces. https://rufabula.com/media/upload/images/2014/04/14/0_10116e_ce95272f_XL.jpg  this is not true.
the first 5 BMP and  Nonna were captured with me, or rather hungry and do not smoke and eaten 3 days paratroopers themselves went to the rebels. Its true.

Yes, chaotic days.  The Nona is another way to laugh at Russia's denials of supply arms and munitions very early on.  At one point I counted roughly how many shells that Nona fired and it was easily many times the number of rounds carried by the vehicle even if it was fully loaded when captured.  I guess it was a magical Nona they captured :D

There were very few weapons. Many were armed only with pistols. In warehouses in Artemovsk from Ukraine military was bought SKS  and at-rifles.
First weapons delivery starting at the first number of  june....
  I wrote my first post because the theme quite seriously discussed  the low combat capability of the Russian Army ( group 6 in Steve therminology) -"the-russian-paper-tiger-" and HI combat capability Ukraine .   

Yes, this is why it is important to be specific about a timeframe.  The early battles were fought by disorganized Ukrainian conscript forces and volunteers with little training and often poor equipment.  Fortunately for the Ukainians,  the forces they fought against in May and June were worse.  Because they were comparatively better they made good progress.

Since then the quality of the average Ukrainian unit has increased dramatically but the quality of the "separatists" has remained fairly poor.  It is why Russia had to supply regular and special forces for both the Donetsk Airport and Debatlseve.  There have been several incidents since then of small separatist attacks that were crushed by Ukrainians because Russian Group 5 or 6 type forces didn't intervene to save them from disaster.

but as far as  known in the few cases when highly incomplete  numerically smaller then staff laid Russians tactical groups caused a rapid and crushing defeat Ukraine forces.

Yes, when smaller Russian Army units fought against Ukrainians they had good success in many cases.  But you are oversimplifying things because the largest use of Russian Army forces (Group 6) was against much weaker Ukrainian positions in terms of numbers and equipment.  Which is the correct way to launch an offensive, so it should not be surprising :D

In July the first Group 6 units started appearing in significant numbers.  They were deployed to protect the vital supply route to Donetsk which was becoming more and more threatened by Ukrainian advances.  IIRC there were three such battalion sized tactical groups operating at the time.  They caused many problems for the Ukrainian advance, which was already showing signs of slowing down after 2 months of offensive operations with poor logistic support.  However, there were no "crushing defeats" of the Ukrainians until August.  In fact, there was one documented case of one of the Russian tactical units suffering heavy casualties from a well placed artillery strike south of Donetsk and another on a column somewhere in Luhansk.  The latter was the first time Ukraine got a hold of significant documentation of Russian Army units operating in Ukraine.

The lack of success of Russia's proxy forces backed up by small tactical groups is why Russia launched a massive counter offensive in August.  To secure Donetsk they attacked from Russian territory into the extreme rear of the Ukrainian front and also attacked the furthest point of advance.  This led to the Ilovaisk disaster which was in part the result of Putin lying about safe passage (it has since been documented that Russian Army units were involved in destroying the retreating Ukrainians).  But enough of that :D

To the north the Russian counter offensives didn't have as much success.  They did push Ukraine back from Luhansk city and from around Horlivka, but not Debaltseve and some other places.  They tried to push north of Luhansk and were unable to make much progress.

To the south the invasion along the Sea of Azov towards Mariupol also quickly faltered and had to stop.

As with traditional Russian/Soviet military successes, the key was in very good strategic planning and moderately good execution on the ground.  Surprise and superior numbers in the places attacked were the primary reasons for success.


it seems to me (I do not know the secret information), more than 90% of time Ukraine forces was fought against group (1-2-3-4), 7% (5group), and 1-3? %group 6) and where is Russian Army ? and who is paper-tiger ? but its only my opinion, and I can only speak about what I saw.
because (it seems to me) over the last few years  Steve knows a lot of secret things :-), very much like to hear his opinion about the number of incoming troops.

It is difficult to say what the true state of Russian military units are, however I think the evidence indicates that they showed serious tactical and operational limitations while operating in Ukraine.  I think they have not shown themselves to be overly superior at the tactical level either.

to panzersaurkrautwerfer

I did not understand your reference to video. Sorry.

About my links -people have made a titanic work on the binding of all known published pictures and videos  had destroed armour units at this konflict.
and before condemning a good idea to familiarize yourself with the contents of. and I know that a lot of the internet lies and fakes, but this resource seems to me very significant. Moreover the site allows you to do analysis and clearly confirmed presence in the conflict zone for example modifications 72 b3. No one  does not hide this.

There's a lot of evidence of current Russian weaponry in Ukraine that it's not worth my time to dig through all of it.  Lots and lots and lots of it.  In one case even RT's own reporter, Graham Phillip, was shown riding on a T-72B3.  I normally do not find RT to be a credible source of truth, but in this case it certainly was ;)

Steve

Edited by Battlefront.com
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trolling is against the rules.  Promoting yourself as a troll is, therefore, pretty much asking for trouble.  It is offensive and offensive Forum names are against the rules.  If you wish to stay here please edit your name to something that is not offensive.

Steve

Thank you Steve. He obviously chose a provocative name on purpose. It's funny how new users, who normally have nothing interesting to say on the forum, get activated when some ****storm erupts. Democracy and freedom of speech are great but not for those who abuse them.

Edited by Ivanov
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  It is getting better.

I'm sure that claim would have brought great comfort to those Ukrainian Soldiers trapped in Debaltseve.....

Did you follow that battle?...i did, it was pretty obvious what those Russian "Tourists" and seperatists was aiming to do.

The Ukrainians was pouring in heavy military hardware in Debaltseve,So when the Tourists was starting to squeeze the lifeline to Debaltseve you would expect some kind of reaction some kind of plan B from the U.A. HQ but....No.

After watching how those young Ukrainian sailors in Crimea was treated by the Green men and EVEN WORSE those Ukrainian-Russian civilans i hoped that the Ukrainian Army would have made a Swift victory in the Eastern provinces.....but the Debaltseve debacle put a final nail into that coffin.At least for me.

 Though one does have to wonder what your intent was about criticizing Ukraine over the Russian proxies shooting down that airliner.  What has the UKR gov't have to do with that. 

 

Everyone who has the slightest knowledge about Mh17....except Russians and Western crackpot conspiracy nutters knows that Mh17 was brought down by mistake by half-assed trained Separatists or a russian military unit.

First....regardless of ANY flight organisations on this planet,those who have the ultimate responsibility for Ukrainian airspace is U-K-R-A-I-N-E.

It is Ukraine who is RESPONSIBLE for the safety of passengers on civilian Airliners in their own airspace!

The international flight route over Ukraine used by Mh17 passed over a CONFLICT ZONE with that in mind you would expect that that government RESPONSIBLE for flight security would be ON THEIR TOES....would be ON FULL ALERT and to REACT to all specific events in that CONFLICT ZONE to ensure SAFETY for civilian airliners!

For several months the Ukrainian Airforce had been a thorn in the side for the separatist.

June 29 2014: 18 Days before the demise of Mh17....D.P.R. uses twitter and show a picture of a captured BUK system, dismantled....but still.

July 14 2014: 3 Days before the demise of Mh17....Russian seperatists or a Russian Army unit successfully and for the FIRST time shots down an Ukrainian AN-26 at 6500 meters using a BUK missile system CLEARLY a game changer for flight security.

You would expect those RESPONSIBLE for flight security to BE ON THEIR TOES to be fully ALERT and to R-E-A-C-T to this game changing event in the CONFLICT ZONE....like.. we can no longer guarantee their safety let's bring those airliners out of HARMS WAY and re-route the airline highway R-E-A-C-T for gods sake!

But instead things gets even worse!

Mh17 is not just passing over the conflict zone they are also supposed to pass over an area with the most aerial activity in the entire conflict zone!

Ukrainian SU-25s has been buzzing around this area for more than a week.

July 15th 2014: The seperatists has gained Control over strategic important hill Saur-Mogila and has now full overview over the valley to the South-east monitoring Ukrainian forces attempt to re-capture Stepanivka ,Marinivka and Saurivka.

The hill Saur-Mogila is now a prime target for Ukrainian SU-25s.

The separatist brings in AA defences North of Saur-Mogila.

July 16th 2014: One Ukrainian SU-25 is shot down another SU-25  is damaged.

July 17th 2014 13:20 local time: Mh17 steams ahead...full frontal against seperatists AA defences North of Saur-Mogila and no one reacts!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure that claim would have brought great comfort to those Ukrainian Soldiers trapped in Debaltseve.....

Did you follow that battle?...i did, it was pretty obvious what those Russian "Tourists" and seperatists was aiming to do.

The Ukrainians was pouring in heavy military hardware in Debaltseve,So when the Tourists was starting to squeeze the lifeline to Debaltseve you would expect some kind of reaction some kind of plan B from the U.A. HQ but....No.

After watching how those young Ukrainian sailors in Crimea was treated by the Green men and EVEN WORSE those Ukrainian-Russian civilans i hoped that the Ukrainian Army would have made a Swift victory in the Eastern provinces.....but the Debaltseve debacle put a final nail into that coffin.At least for me.

 

My aunt as well as grandmother were Ukrainian citizens, Now they are Russian citizens, They aren't having any issues nor would they treated wrongly. And U.A. HQ them selves are corrupted they can try to beat highly motivated soldiers who are proudly defending their lands. (That's how a soldier in NovoRossiya sees it) Usually Ukrainian officers try to negotiate together with the Novorussian officers, To avoid conflicts altogether. Usually its the Right sector units who are front line and most determined to kill the Evil Russians who have invaded their lands.

"Green men" acted very professionally and were able to take control of the Ukrainian ranks without a single casualty from either side. (Quite a few of Ukrainian servicemen switched over to the Russian armed forces in Crimea) The others were allowed to head back into Ukraine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure that claim would have brought great comfort to those Ukrainian Soldiers trapped in Debaltseve.....

Did you follow that battle?...i did, it was pretty obvious what those Russian "Tourists" and seperatists was aiming to do.

The Ukrainians was pouring in heavy military hardware in Debaltseve,So when the Tourists was starting to squeeze the lifeline to Debaltseve you would expect some kind of reaction some kind of plan B from the U.A. HQ but....No.

After watching how those young Ukrainian sailors in Crimea was treated by the Green men and EVEN WORSE those Ukrainian-Russian civilans i hoped that the Ukrainian Army would have made a Swift victory in the Eastern provinces.....but the Debaltseve debacle put a final nail into that coffin.At least for me.

 

Everyone who has the slightest knowledge about Mh17....except Russians and Western crackpot conspiracy nutters knows that Mh17 was brought down by mistake by half-assed trained Separatists or a russian military unit.

First....regardless of ANY flight organisations on this planet,those who have the ultimate responsibility for Ukrainian airspace is U-K-R-A-I-N-E.

It is Ukraine who is RESPONSIBLE for the safety of passengers on civilian Airliners in their own airspace!

It is Russian responsibility to maintain the safety of passengers over areas it occupies and to which it has sent an AA unit capable of taking out an aircraft at 30,000 feet.  Until that day no one including the international airline agencies had any inkling Russia had gone that far. 

From the Dutch safety board:

The Dutch Safety Board issued its final report into the crash on 13 October 2015. There were 61 flight operators from 32 countries who flew over eastern Ukraine at the time, all who thought it was safe to fly there at cruising altitude.

I think we both agree who shot it down. Where we seem to disagree on is Ukrainian culpability.  No one in 32 countries disagreed with the UKR gov't and issued a warning.  Russia upped the ante recklessly with no warning and should be brought before an international court,  I see no reason to hold Ukraine responsible for an action it could not have foreseen.

As regarding the UKR higher leadership, well what can you say.  It seems to be the place of higher military headquarters to be out of step with events on the ground.  The US certainly has enough of that experience ourselves.  I can't really come down that hard on UKR leadership considering the circumstances.   A Ukrainian on the other hand is bound to give them less latitude - it is Ukrainian lives they are spending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Everyone who has the slightest knowledge about Mh17....except Russians and Western crackpot conspiracy nutters knows that Mh17 was brought down by mistake by half-assed trained Separatists or a russian military unit.


There is a strong indication, that the infamous Buk was operated by Russians from the 53th AD Brigade from Kursk, not the separatists. 

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2014/11/08/origin-of-the-separatists-buk-a-bellingcat-investigation/

 

It is Ukraine who is RESPONSIBLE for the safety of passengers on civilian Airliners in their own airspace!

Unfortunately Ukraine is a pretty dysfunctional country. I couldn't understand the way they handled a lot of issues during the Donbas War. After the local administration buildings were occupied, I was expecting the special forces and some civil reconstruction teams to go in, to the areas where the separatists were active. I remember, watching interviews on the Polish TV with ex members of special forces, who were explaining how would they plan the action of recapturing the administration buildings. Instead there was a slow and reluctant response from the regular military units, which didn't really know what were they doing there. After few bloody provocations and ambushes, the situation escalated and got out of control as intended. Were the Ukrainian authorities incompetent in handling the insurgency in Donbas? Yes, but from the other hand, no normal government is really prepared for such a eventuality. Ultimately, the responsibility for the MH17 tragedy, is on those who were inciting the population of Eastern Ukraine to violence and those who brought weapons into a sovereign and peaceful country.

Edited by Ivanov
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Russian AA unit is trained to identify military units from observation, And before a BUK unit would launch in this scenario they would need to get authorization from higher ranks, Militarily speaking a Russian army unit would not shoot an aircraft of this type down. As for seperatists shooting it down, How in the name of God would they, It is insanely hard to use the BUK systems. This leaves 2 things that can be true,

1. The Russian army purposely shot it down (which I highly highly highly highly doubt)

2. Ukrainians shot it down for exactly what happened afterwards, To politically demonize Russia and maybe even get western intervention. I doubt this one too, But honestly this sounds more right to me then a 3 month plus trained crew on a BUK anti air defense system shooting down a high altitude flying air craft. 

Me personally, I am not blaming any side for this because it could be either of the two. But I do wonder which official allowed a flight of such airplanes over a conflict zone like this... I'm very sorry to the families of the victims but Ukrainian air control should be more sorry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure that claim would have brought great comfort to those Ukrainian Soldiers trapped in Debaltseve.....

Did you follow that battle?...i did, it was pretty obvious what those Russian "Tourists" and seperatists was aiming to do.

The Ukrainians was pouring in heavy military hardware in Debaltseve,So when the Tourists was starting to squeeze the lifeline to Debaltseve you would expect some kind of reaction some kind of plan B from the U.A. HQ but....No.

After watching how those young Ukrainian sailors in Crimea was treated by the Green men and EVEN WORSE those Ukrainian-Russian civilans i hoped that the Ukrainian Army would have made a Swift victory in the Eastern provinces.....but the Debaltseve debacle put a final nail into that coffin.At least for me.

If you have a poor understanding of the facts and unreasonable expectations about how quickly things can change, you're bound to be disappointed.

If Russia had not sent in regular forces to Debaltseve Ukraine would not have lost it.  Even with the Russian forces it was a difficult fight and taking the city was obviously behind the Russian military planner's schedule.  They were supposed to have taken the city BEFORE the Minsk 2 ceasefire went into place as this is the way Russia operates.  It takes something by force and then gets a ceasefire to help keep it.  In reality the Russian forces were fighting full force for 3 days after the fake ceasefire.  They also allowed a huge proportion of the Ukrainian forces to escape because they were not able to fully interdict their withdrawal. 

As someone who has a degree in history, studied warfare for almost 30 years, and made wargames for 20+ years... it is my opinion that the Ukrainians did pretty well in this operation with all factors considered.  Certainly it was a major improvement over the fighting only a few months before.  I am on record of saying that as the battle came to a close around this same time last year.  I have seen no new information since then to change my mind.

 

Everyone who has the slightest knowledge about Mh17....except Russians and Western crackpot conspiracy nutters knows that Mh17 was brought down by mistake by half-assed trained Separatists or a russian military unit.

First....regardless of ANY flight organisations on this planet,those who have the ultimate responsibility for Ukrainian airspace is U-K-R-A-I-N-E.

Factually incorrect.  I mean that in the most literal sense.  Others have already covered this.  Ukraine has absolutely no responsibility for what happened.  None, zero.  It is a fact, not an opinion.

I don't want to have a debate about MH-17, but it is pretty clear that Russia didn't hand this system over to a bunch of coal miners.  It is too complicated to operate and therefore the only reasonable conclusion is that it was crewed by a Russian military crew.  There is also ample 1st hand evidence that it was.

"Green men" acted very professionally and were able to take control of the Ukrainian ranks without a single casualty from either side. (Quite a few of Ukrainian servicemen switched over to the Russian armed forces in Crimea) The others were allowed to head back into Ukraine. 

Incorrect.  Several Ukrainian soldiers were badly beaten and one was shot dead inside a Ukrainian compound while being raided by Russian and Russian backed forces.  Another soldier, IIRC, was wounded.  Several other Ukrainian soldiers were released after a period of captivity.

Though I do agree that overall the Green Men politely smashed down gates and skillfully stood by and allowed foreign mercenaries and local thugs to beat people up and make sure there was no pro-Ukrainian organization.

A Russian AA unit is trained to identify military units from observation, And before a BUK unit would launch in this scenario they would need to get authorization from higher ranks, Militarily speaking a Russian army unit would not shoot an aircraft of this type down.

Bad logic.  No system is perfect and that means mistakes can happen.  The Soviet Union deliberately shot down Korean Airlines Flight 007, killing all 269 people, in 1983 complete with all sorts of higher level authorizations.  However, it was a mistake and the checks-and-balances failed.  The United States shot down its own Special Forces helicopter over Iraq, the US shot down an Iranian airliner, etc., etc. etc.

So you can not rule out the possibility that Russia deliberately shot down MH-17 thinking it was a Ukrainian military flight.  That means there are three possibilities, only one of which fits the facts.  And that is Russia shot down MH-17, not separatists and not Ukrainians.

BTW, do not forget that the BUK was operating without it's full radar and control systems.  I think this is probably where the problems happened.  Acting on bad information often produces bad results.

As for seperatists shooting it down, How in the name of God would they, It is insanely hard to use the BUK systems.

It is possible that they handed it off to people with previous BUK experience, but not currently in Russian armed service.  But I agree this is highly unlikely.

1. The Russian army purposely shot it down (which I highly highly highly highly doubt)

2. Ukrainians shot it down for exactly what happened afterwards, To politically demonize Russia and maybe even get western intervention. I doubt this one too, But honestly this sounds more right to me then a 3 month plus trained crew on a BUK anti air defense system shooting down a high altitude flying air craft. 

Me personally, I am not blaming any side for this because it could be either of the two.

The facts only fit one possibility.  If you want to accuse Ukraine of a possible False Flag attack then you also have to admit that Russia might have done it to frame Ukraine.  In fact, there is a theory that Russia sent the BUK into Ukraine to shoot down an Aeroflot flight which ABSOLUTELY was in the same airspace at the same time (that is for sure a fact, which is where I think the conspiracy theory started).  So if you like there are four possibilities in order of likelyhood:

1.  Russia sent in the BUK and deliberately, but accidentally, shot down MH-17.

2.  Russia gave the BUK to the separatists who accidentally shot down MH-17.

3.  Russia shot down MH-17 on purpose or by accident thinking it was shooting down an Aeroflot plane.  Either way it intended to pin the murders on Ukraine.

4.  Ukraine cunningly devised a way to shoot down MH-17 with launchers it didn't have over terrain it didn't control and blame it on Russia.

But I do wonder which official allowed a flight of such airplanes over a conflict zone like this... I'm very sorry to the families of the victims but Ukrainian air control should be more sorry. 

The history of the world's tragedies is more often than not caused by someone taking a safety shortcut to save money.  That was the case with the hundreds of flights that operated over Donbas, including Russian planes going to Turkish summer resorts.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately Ukraine is a pretty dysfunctional country. I couldn't understand the way they handled a lot of issues during the Donbas War. After the local administration buildings were occupied, I was expecting the special forces and some civil reconstruction teams to go in, to the areas where the separatists were active. I remember,

What many people don't understand is that Russia's actions in Crimea and Donbas (as well as actions in Odessa, Kharkiv, Mariupol, etc.) were part of a long established Russian strategic plan in the event of another "color revolution".  The plan dates back to 2004 and it involved spending considerable resources to head off an other "color revolution" or corrupt it once it had happened.  Part of this plan was for direct military action in the event that it couldn't control the political situation any more.  In order to ensure an easy military victory it invested considerable resources into making sure the Ukrainian military was fundamentally incapable of resisting a Russian attack.  Knowledge of these plans is, after all, what we based the plot of Black Sea on. 

For people who knew anything about what Russia was doing in Ukraine prior to 2014 the way Russia responded in February 2014 was not a surprise.  What is most surprising to me is not how poorly Ukraine did, but how well it did under the circumstances.  Outside observers over estimated Russia's success in undermining the Ukrainian state and citizens' loyalty to it.  For sure Russia over estimated it, which is why it finds itself with a huge mess it can't fix to its satisfaction.

Steve

Edited by Battlefront.com
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...