DreDay
-
Posts
477 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by DreDay
-
-
Since this is a topic I've studied in considerable detail, though not recently for sure, I can say "yes" to all your questions. Official records are only one source of information, therefore their availability is not necessarily required to come to a reasonable conclusion about a specific event or topic.
An example is the official Soviet position for decades was that Katyn was perpetrated by the Nazis, the Nazis said it was the Soviets. Turns out the Nazis weren't lying about that one, and eventually Soviet documents were released that confirmed it. However, long before those documents were released there was ample evidence that the Soviets were responsible for the crime. So much so that when the documents were released it simply complimented and filled in a few gaps of the scholarly studies which had been conducted without it.
Oh, and I am quite aware of the complicity of Ukrainians in the Holocaust as I am the Poles, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Hungarians, Romanians, Italians, Danes, Dutch, and French. I'm also studied the reasons for it at the individual and societal levels. I'm also aware the role the UK and US governments played in the delayed response to it and some of their actions after the war. And while I'm at it, the Vatican, various South American countries, etc.
Steve
I am sorry Steve, I just fail to see your point here. I am not a historian nor was I planning to start a debate about UNA/OUN or Khatyn or Kholodomor. I personally have no interest in debating those topics, and that is not what my post was about.... As for your larger post above, I would love to reply to it (nay I would like to finish reading it first) when I have a couple of hours to spare and a fresh pot of coffee
I personally feel that those kinds of debates are best left for PMs - but I know that you don't like that route; so I will have to respect your wishes and would be obliged to give you a thoughtful response. -
I just read a english translated interview to a twenty year old tank gunner recovering in a hospital after his tank got destroyed at Debaltseve.
It is long and full of details, about a lot of things that are being discussed in this thread.
Yep. It has already been discussed in this thread a few pages back. It should also be noted that the interview is a bit controversial and no audio transcript has been produced to back it up. Some Russian pro-Donbass sources had come out stating that the factual details in that account are wrong.... not denying Russian involvement per say, just pointing out incorrect information about the details of such involvement in the interview. I personally don't know what to make of it - it is certainly worth considering... but with a good bit of caution...
-
That's a pretty good suggestion. Although, I have yet to see any type of evidence of Russian Army actively using RPG-27/28; they can definitely produce them in massive quantities if needed. It would also be nice to see some of the "mini RPOs" (i.e. PShG) available to the Russian grunts as well. Although given how poorly RPO-A performs in game, this might have to wait
-
Well.. I guess you can't ever truly know if the holocaust really happened, then. Because I highly doubt you are from Germany and have a living German grandpa telling you it's all just a lie from those damn Tommies!.
I see where you're going with this and there is certainly some validity to your argument. The fact is though, the Germans have completely owned up to the Holocaust and the denial of Nazi crimes is more severely punished there than in any other country that I can think of.
Now to make this a little controversial – did the slaughter of Jews, Poles, and Russians in Western Ukraine during WW2 really hapen or is that just a Soviet (and now Russian) myth? Can anyone without access to both Russian and (West) Ukrainian side of this story make an educated decision on that? On a flip side - what about Gholodomor (sp?) – can that be accurately analyzed without having access to (Soviet) Russian and (anti-Soviet) Ukrainian reports?
-
A weaker nation being attacked by a stronger nation that is trying to retain its domination of it, yet refuses to admit it is even fighting, does tend to make me a little biased. Yeah, I'm really funny that way.
I don’t find it funny. I find it righteous, which I can certainly appreciate and identify with…if not for the selective nature of it. As I’ve said before; I am not defending or supporting the Russians in this conflict – what I am claiming though is that their actions are in line with what other regional and one global power do all the time to protect their national interests. Now I know that you are quite capable of critical thinking and you don’t just blindly go with what our (or Russian, or Ukrainian) media feeds you; so that’s why I find it so difficult to see why you don’t bother contemplating this point. Then again, I don’t understand how someone of such intellectual strength and knowledge base as yourself could claim that we (US) have not violated any state’s sovereignty in recent history (as you have stated last week)… Now that I do find funny, good sir!!
The one that is waging the war is the one most responsible. So I guess I'm kinda naive in trying to hold the one most accountable... uhm... accountable.
By the same token one can just as easily say that the Ukrainian government is waging war on its own people. Which is a line that we (US) have used over and over to remove the regimes that don’t fit our national interests… There is a flip side to this coin, and again I don’t see why you consciously choose to overlook it…
A contrived lie to justify and entice an entire population to kill each other, propagated by state controlled media, isn't even in the same ballpark as a government trying to dodge responsibility for a badly executed airstrike against the forces that are illegally in its country killing its citizens. Not even close.
With all due respect Steve, you are speaking purely with your emotions here. Whatever the reason was for that stupid baby story, which got retracted the next day btw, no one was telling the Ukrainians to kill each other (at least not any more than both sides had already dehumanized each other by that time). Please don’t take this the wrong way, but it’s not an argument you’re going to win with someone who had studied FSU foreign affairs for many years and monitors local media coverage in Russian and Ukrainian. Sorry, but I am going to play that card here: P
Damn straight I do. If there was no illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine by Russia, would the Ukrainian fighter pilot have made a poorly aimed shot at a ZSU set up in a civilian area? No.
Are you aware of a single iota of evidence that the Lugansk city hall was surrounded by anyone but local citizens? Same citizens perhaps that did not agree with the Kiev regime’s actions and stood up to it? Same citizens perhaps that were more than willing to negotiate and to compromise with the Kiev regime before they were declared lazy, drunken scum and were shelled and starved into submission?
I am not excusing Russian involvement into this nor denying their responsibility to what we are seeing now, however your complete inability to recognize the irresponsible actions of Kiev government (that were pretty much given a blank check by US and Europe) makes for a very one sided (and frankly dull) argument…
I don't understand how speaking Russian would change the facts. The facts are language independent.
Our exposure to facts is limited by the information that is presented to us. The ability to read the news reports in a native language (along with being aware of cultural and historical aspects that come along with those) allows one to filter out the facts from propaganda and to reduce our availability bias based on comparing both sides of the reporting on said “facts” . That’s sort of the most basic concept of international studies and foreign policy analysis…
-
Oh, I didn't take your first comment seriously at all. I just thought I'd put in my own
Well, way to ruin a party bro!! (j/k) This war (like most civil wars) is so awful that there is not much to joke about here; however the erroneous media coverage by all sides is something that we both seem to find outlandish….
For sure both sides lie, but more often the laws of imperfect information morphing into less perfect information is usually more of the case in such situations. You appeared to be chalking it up more as disinformation tactic, I chalk it up more to factual events getting twisted each set of hands it goes through. In the US as a kid there was a lesson in a game we called "operator" where one person whispers something to one person and that person whispers it to someone else. The lesson concluded when the last person "repeated" the message of the first person and everybody saw how absolutely wrong it was. It's a good lesson!
Yep, we used to call that game a “broken telephone” when I was a kid… The only difference here is that the lies are not just “lost in transmission”; but purposely doctored for propaganda purposes by all sides (unfortunately our own media is no exception to this dirty information war)
Anyway, if your point is that information like this should be treated as suspect until proven true or false, I totally agree. Though I think given the definite attempt on his life, I'd be surprised if there wasn't a second. BTW, his video appeal, to me, sounded like a guy trying to say things that might call off the assassins.
Yep, I agree. His “I forgive everyone” message was just that.
Indeed. Lots of fun and inventive "news" in this war. I hope nobody tries to top the crucified baby story though. And if someone does, I would hope that Russian media would actually make an effort to retract it after reporting it verbatim.
See, here is where you and I see things differently. You seem to have a strong association with the Kiev government’s cause (which is conveniently advocated by our own media most of the time); and a strong aversion for the Russian side. I on the other hand, see all sides (US government included) as guilty of this stupid and unnecessary war; but I can definitely see the Russian perspective on this and don’t find their actions to be any more cruel and despicable than those of any other major power. Is the crucified baby BS any more of BS than the AC-Seeking MANPAD (just to use one example of many)? To me they are both equally ridiculous; but not at all surprising. Yet, you seem to have a much stronger aversion to the former rather than the later. I wonder if you would have seen things differently if you were able to browse Russian sources in their native language... Either way though, you have certainly done your homework on this and are entitled to your view… as am I for that matter.
-
Replacing a misogynist with a masochist... well... I guess in relative terms I'd agree with you.
Steve, I was being facetious. The concept of Mozgovoi being replaced by Givi is so random (even for this thread) that it does not require an intellectual debate. Luckily Kraft saw where I was going and was a good sport about it…
As Kraft pointed out, you fail to mention that most of the incorrect reports of death are often based on fact. Specifically that the person in question was detained, wounded, or nearly killed. Same for Gubarev, Girkin, and others. The premature reports of death fall into the usual patterns of gossip getting things wrong. Battlefront has been in it's last days of being in business a few times according to some
Again I was not being serious here, so there is no need to over-analyze it. Everyone lies at war. This one is no different. Some choose to believe one side, some choose another, and few try to be balanced – none of those options are absolute… enough said!
The fact is Mozgovoi NARROWLY escaped an assassination attempt that was very carefully, but imperfectly, carried out. He survived by mere inches. So it doesn't seem to me very surprising that whomever failed to kill him would try again. I won't presume him dead yet, but I do think it's likely that someone at least tried to make him that way.
That is not an unreasonable assumption; but for lack of better evidence it is not very relevant either… Most civil wars seem to follow the Game of Thrones (“Everyone Dies”) rules; I don’t see how this one any different…
Yup, Yarosh has been "killed" a number of times. I think even one time his own troops or Ukrainian Army killed him, but that could be a false memory. Though I would be surprised if I'm wrong
Steve
I am not sure either. Mr. Simchenko definitely holds multiple records for the shortest time at the front-lines prior being sidelined by some wounds. Besides that, the ubiquitous “polish PMCs” are the repetitive unconfirmed KIA leaders on the Ukrainian side
-
And Givi - he probably got reported as KIA every time he claimed to fully control the Airport
Lol! Touche!! Then again; Givi seems to have ended up on the upper hand of that equation - he did get the honors (deserved or not) for taking the airport and he is still around...
Forgot to mention that Putin's proxies and even an officer of the Russian military are apparently disguising their presence in some areas by operating in fake OSCE marked vehicles. That's also from Lost Ivan. No, I didn't suddenly learn to speak Russian. Someone sent me the link and told me what it was about. The on-page translator (covers dozens of languages) did the rest.
Haven't you heard the latest news? Putin is dead as well... or maybe he had a baby... tough to tell... but he is definitely up to no good. Let's wait for the "Lost Vladimir" site to come out so that we can have a definitive source of information!
-
Yeah, It would be a shame if Mozgovoi was replaced by Givi; because (as we all know) Givi is the undead wizard of level 5 as he has already been killed 4 times in the battles for the airport. Still better than Motorola, whose magic powers allow him to rise from the dead several times per week
Although wait, there is no proof that he has been alive for the past 12 hours "as far as we know..."I wonder who the most "killed" commander on the Ukrainian side is. I am guessing Mr. Yarosh, as I have seen at least 3 or 4 reports of his death... anyone else that I am missing out?
-
Kaburke61, this would be my last post to you until you care invest some time and brainpower to show me your basic understanding of the subject matter. I have already spent more than enough time on this board trying to show "the flip side of the coin" to those members that actually care to hear it and to process it as part of their analysis. I absolutely would not waste a spare second of my time trying to build out an argument to someone who does not care to show any knowledge nor appreciation of what is being discussed here. How about you show me some solid facts about "Putin-bots" spewing their propaganda on this board; and maybe then I will consider engaging you in a more meaningful conversation. Till then - "peaches and luv!" (as they say down here).
-
I thought the first post was pretty straightforward. Please enlighten us, (not U.S.), with your "thoughtful and well research analysis", on exactly how this is (as usual) America's fault? I already gave you
two points to reply on......
I have spent plenty of time on this board building out my arguments and points. I don't need to be thrown a bone to chance nor do I particularly care to convince you of anything, let alone something that I don't believe myself. If you have a thoughtful point to make - please do so and I will be obliged to respond. Otherwise, please refer to my post #169.
-
LOL....hit a nerve huh? Nice reply....Anyway 'said my piece, of course you have no real reply, back to enjoying the thread.
The only thing that hits a nerve with me pal is a blissful ignorance, backed up by false sense of confidence. I would appreciate your thoughtful and well researched analysis; but if you chose to communicate in ambiguous one-liners, I hold my right to stand by my previous post.
-
Nope, I think it is plain enough....but thanks for asking.
Kiev government, puppeteered, by US...yes, who's fooling who?
Jeez
Not sure who is fooling who, but I am pretty posetive on who a fool is in this thread..."I think that it is plain enough" pal...
-
What is really tiresome from the Putin-bots, is the notion that this is somehow a US-caused problem.
Gee...whose tanks are in Ukraine right now? Funny, I don't see any M1A2s (or American troops), deployed currently, I certainly see a few Russian units.....
And, how was Ukraine wanting to pursue agreements with EUROPE, America's fault.
Typical "It's all America's fault" parroting from the propaganda-brainwashed Putin-bots. After all, NOTHING Russia ever does is it's fault, it's ALWAYS somebody else fault..the poor Russians, they just want peace so badly!
Just out of curiosity - would you care to point out a full list Putin-bots on this board?
-
It's either surrounded by the Ukraine, which in the event of Dosbassian Republic of Putin will be ill-inclined to lift a finger to help it, and Russia which it will be the puppet of.
And what else is new here? Are there not more than enough puppet states that the major powers take protectorate and control over? Are you concerned that there is now another one now, or just that this one happens to be Russian puppet and not ours?
That's not a lot to offer anyone. Further the greater crisis of the Ukraine in terms of East vs West revolved around either providing so-so industrial products to Russia or being the breadbasket of Western Europe. The stuff coming out of Donbass meant a lot to the Ukraine's ability to keep doing Ukrainian things, not so much to anyone who wasn't either the Ukraine, or Russia. Further the fact it has all those resources means that "reconquest of Donbass" will remain a Ukrainian national policy item until it occurs or we no longer have a Ukraine. If Russia has another bad spell, or we're looking at 1991 all over again, or even just the fact that post-Putin the Russian government is more interested in engaging with Ukraine than propping up Donbass, there's going to be some sad days to be in Donbass.
I am not sure that I follow you here. The notion of Ukraine being a breadbasket for Europe is not particularly embraced (to put it mildly) by Europe that already has more than enough bread… The saddest days imaginable are occurring in Donbass right now and it is not due to some economic factors, but rather indiscriminate fighting that is taking place there right now…
Where you're losing sight is the separatist elements you're all citing had:
1. Viability of being separate from the mother country. Either functionally, or the mother country was unable or unwilling to pursue them post breakup (and even then, Russian nationalists still covet the Baltics)
2. The mother country was killing the heck out of the separatist body from more or less the get-go. This is why Kosovo is so different, there was a distinct Albanian element that was violently suppressed. Fighting back or dying was the only option left. The difference is the Russians in Donbass simply decided that the Ukrainians in Kiev were going to become Nazis so they violently carved off an eastern part of the country and tried to invite Russia in. This is escalation well and beyond a reasonable reaction to what Kiev did, and indeed looking at the fair, and reasonably effective elections held later in the rest of the Ukraine rather an interesting contrast to the actions of the "People's Republics"
First of all, perhaps you would care to research the numbers of Kosovo Albanian civilians killed by Serbian forces vs. Donbas Civilians killed by the Ukrainian Army? Untill you try to come up with some independent and reliable source of those numbers; your argument holds no validity whatsoever. As for “fair and reasonable elections” held in the rest of Ukraine – give me a break! Are you aware of pro-Russian candidates being assaulted by armed mobs in Kiev and denied any voice in the TV debates? If that’s your version of free and fair, then by all means keep praising the Kiev regime; but don’t be surprised when the people in Donbass (and now more and more in Kharkov and Odessa) want nothing to do with this kind of “free and fair” government.
As I’ve said before, I am not particularly pro-Donbass or Pro-Russian by any means. I consider all sides involved in this conflict to have “f-ed” it up majorly. However, if you only want to focus on one side of this coin and to give a blank check to the Kiev government (that is fully backed, and dare I say – puppeteered by US) – you are simply fooling yourself and none else.
-
Paging Dr. Godwin?
There's a really interesting essay from the late 90's reflecting on conflict, namely resulting from the Bosnian conflicts called "Give War a Chance" I believe, and the underlying assumption is in terms of stability and long term viability, the absolute victory on the part of one party is the best option strictly talking in terms of the mentioned two dynamics. If resistance is out and out crushed, then there's little chance of it violating ceasefires later to add rail junctions and somesuch.
The separatist parts of Ukraine lack any meaningful contribution to the world at large as the fictional people's republics they claim to be. They're going to be Russian satellites that will rely, much as the seized portions of Georgia do exclusively upon the stability and long term viability of a Russian foreign policy decision to be combative with the west. A weaker Russia would potentially either literally abandon those states, or perhaps just functionally abandon them in the future, meaning Ukraine will redress past grievances with a vengeance resulting in likely the same destruction that the idiots currently fighting in Donbass could have avoided in the first place instead of playing the "Ukrainians are all secretly Nazi" card.
As demonstrated by recent fighting, a marginal or incomplete victory against the separatist elements will simply result in them being rearmed and augmented by Russian forces for another go at making Putintopia or whatever the end state is. As further demonstrated the cease fire largely existed to further separatist ends vs a meaningful attempt at coexistence.
The Ukrainians are unlikely to accept the theft of part of their nation short of abject military defeat. This is also the case with the seperatists. However given the reality of the conflict, it is doubtful we would see the first, and the second is really the only reasonable way to ensure we're not revisiting this conflict again in ten years and shooting down more Malaysian Airliners.
Re: American Revolt
Of course, this is a stupid analogy if we're being frank. The lack of territorial integrity with the mother country, the several decades old sense of statehood, existing independent governmental functions, exhaustion of peaceful means of addressing grievances, and extreme viability of the American colonies as an independent country all make it historically a reasonable alternative to British rule. If it'd simply been Spain coming up from Florida or something, and more or less building a revolution to fit Spanish foreign policy ends to protect Spanish settlers elsewhere, and the 13 colonies were directly connected to the British Isles, then we'd be talking about a different set of circumstances.
All the same your lack of knowledge on American history is interesting and noted.
You are making a lot of false assumptions here. The notion that Donbass has nothing to contribute to the world is not any more grounded than saying that Ukraine has nothing to contribute either. You (nor I) don't get to be the judges of that. As far as Ukraine is concerned, they badly need the coal, metallurgy and other industrial goods that come out of Donbass; not to mention their strategic sea ports and rail lines.... I am sure that many people would have thought that Israel would have nothing to contribute to the world at the time of their independence struggle; or most of former Yugoslav states, or the Baltics; but that is not for you or I to decide. What ultimately determines the success or failure of a separatist movement is the strength of its supporters (and outside backers) vs. the strength of Federal (if that term can be applied to Ukraine) forces (and their backers).
The US Revolutionary war example was far-fetched, I'll give you that. It was simply used to illustrate a point that separatism does not need to get spurred up by genocidal policies of the "mother-country". In regards to Donbass, Kosovo is probably a much more relevant (and recent) example to follow. So are you proposing that we give back Kosovo back to Serbia? I would think not... so what makes Donbass so different?
-
I don't think the nazi-Ukrainian genocide of the Russian speaking population of Ukraine came to pass. I don't think the separatists have a legitimate claim, and they do not have a means to achieve a legitmate functioning country that could not simply be qualified as being a defacto Russian owned property. Given this assumption on my part, and the continued refusal of the separatists to even have talks that are simply not times for them to rearm and decide the cease fire doesn't apply in certain places because we crossed our fingers when we signed it, the only real reasonable end to the fighting in the Ukraine that does not result in a festering tumor in eastern europe is the catastrophic defeat of the separatists. This was going to happen until Russia intervened with significant aid because it's important that their pet tumor exist, regardless of how it affects the rest of Eastern Europe (or even Russia when you get down to it).
Thus the most peaceful, and lasting end to this crisis is the separatists lining the bottom of a ditch, unless you think you can kill your way through enough Ukrainians that this issue will not be revisited again in the future.
I don't understand why a Nazi-like genocide of indigenous population is an only cause that calls for a separatist movement.... If that was the case, then our country (I am assuming that you are American) would still be a part of UK. The Donbass natives seem to have more than enough reasons to fight and to die for their cause, so your view of what they deserve is a bit irrelevant here. Your notion that the rebels are not willing to negotiate is also completely factually incorrect (and indicative of your poor knowledge of dynamics that drive this conflict). Moreover, I find your proposal that a complicated and age-long issue is best resolved with a slaughter of a weaker side to be Nazi-like on its own. I hope that I have misunderstood your point, but if not… well I just hope that you are in no position of power or authority...
-
This has been an age-old problem with diplomacy. It is why it is so difficult to work with nations like North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan, etc. The Western leaders want things to be logical according to their view of the world. A Western policy maker doesn't have to worry about coups, false imprisonment, murder, etc. A policy maker in a repressive regime has that very much on his mind every day. Self preservation is a strong motivator.
Yet that was never an issue when dealing when friendly despotic regimes (i.e. the ME Kingdoms, Central American dictatorships, former SE Asian “Tigers”; etc…). It’s interesting how only our enemies have to worry about that kind of stuff – isn’t it?
And it’s not like our policy makers have to worry about their own set of issues and to map out their foreign policy in 4 year terms (at best)... That presents no issues for our diplomatic friends and foes, right?
That was not my original point, though. We always tend to antagonize our foes (as does any other nation); that’s just the way it is and it’s not going to change. However, it is up to foreign affairs experts to be aware of that and not to fall into those fallacies… yet we have already antagonized Putin (who was never anti-Western as much as pro-Russian) into oblivion; which now drives our foreign policy more than any practical goals. Henry Kissinger has spoken (quite brilliantly, IMHO) about this recently…
The Western critics of Western policy towards Russia have been beating on this drum for MANY years now. It was, ironically, partly listened to when Obama's "Reset" strategy was implemented. It was an attempt to deal with Russia more on Russia's terms than the West's. The fact that it didn't work has more to do with the "Reset" required the West to formally sit back and let Russia violate the sovereignty of its neighbors, undermine European politics, and other things that run counter to the West's own interests. Which is why the West is still bungling through this mess.
Right… Now how exactly did the West (and by West we mainly mean USA – let’s be clear here) let Russia get away with murder during the Reset? Care to give any specific examples? What exactly were we doing during the reset? Were there no countries whose sovereignty we’ve violated at that same time? Do you think that the Russians did not take note of that?
Actually, I think this is a fundamental explanation for the West's treatment of Putin even through present times. The West has realized that there's forces within Russia that are even worse than Putin and those forces have VASTLY better chances of taking power from Putin than forces that are more benign than Putin. Which is why NOBODY in the West has been calling for "regime change". In fact, that is the last thing they want. Merkel and Hollande, in particular, want things to return to business as usual as quickly as possible. That means Putin staying right where he is.
However, the reasons for supporting Putin in the West was because he hadn't been doing the sorts of things he is now doing right now with Ukraine, Syria, Iran, and North Korea. Flying nuke bombers along the edges of sovereign airspace is also something the West never wanted to see happen again. Which means Putin is blurring the line between what the West is willing to accept and what it fears in a regime change. Which means the West is willing to do things against the Russian state and Putin's power base that one year ago were unthinkable.
Again, what you are presenting is a slanted view of Russian actions as portrayed in our media. Not surprisingly – Russians see things very differently… and guess what – they have at least as strong of a case to make for Western (again let’s be clear - we are mainly talking US when we use that term) actions posing a direct threat to them and forcing them to take a defensive stance. The truth, as always is somewhere in the middle; but I find your complete dismissal of Russian perspective and their national interests to be counterproductive to any fruitful debate or educated analysis.
-
Dunno. Seems like the seperatists would all be rightfully lining the bottom of a ditch and life would have moved on if Russia hadn't insisted on getting involved. There's nothing inherently unstable with a western aligned Ukraine except for Russian objections to same.
Yep, if only we could always have our way; and those that don't like it would be lining the bottom of the ditch. That's the kind of stuff that we want to stand for... riiiiight....
-
In retrospect my post does seem naive, got a bit carried away.
No worries bud... I certainly wish that your vision was a reality!
-
Shouldn't it be up to every country to decide for themselves what they want though? The Ukrainian people have clearly demonstrated what THEY want for their country at the Maidan and afterwards. What gives Russia the right to bar them from it? Spheres of influence be damned, Russian agression in Ukraine is completely unjustifiable.
Hehe... No offense Kuri; but if you really believe what you have written here and not just trolling... you might be "a little late to the party". As I've said several times on this board - Geopolitics are not about doing what's right; but rather "what's right for you". The Russians play that game well, but they are still "small fish" compared to how we (US) embrace this notion.
-
The problem with SOF is that the game is not focused on...let`s say...finesse
They would end up there just for flavor, going along with regular troops...how do you simulate a complex assault on a compound? there are no "no-combatant" units to avoid, no taking of prisoners/hostages, no hold fire or silenced weapons only orders, etc
The only thing I can think of, is putting them behind enemy lines as target designators or deep recon forces, but I don't think it`s worth the effort, you could do that with regular sniper teams or recon units, even if it`s not their primary function
This has already been debated on several occasions. The proponents of SOF in CMBS (myself included) are not expecting to see some SWAT-like ninjas who free hostages and clear buildings "Kill-house style". We are proposing higher trained and better concealed sniper, recon, and assault teams whose standards of training and morale go beyond what is simulated (for regular infantry units) in CM; and who use suppressed and silenced weapons making them so much more difficult to spot and to track down. I personally feel that those types of units can fit into CMBS quite organically...
-
Back to our topic, I am afraid that you have it backward about Putin.
If he hasn't ditched the separatists it is because he would lose face. And this is precisely when his popularity would plummet dramatically, not by standing up against the West as Moscow is portraying the whole affair. The internal risk for him is greater if he folds. The man has built his reputation on strength, machismo and restoring Russia's pride. Russia has felt humiliated by the West and the USA in particular since the fall of the Berlin wall and the lost of her superpower status. That this perception is justified or not is irrelevant, it is the mainstream view. He doesn't fear sanctions or internal trouble now with the majority of the population backing him, as strange as it may sound to people in the West, as much as he fears losing face. His veneer of strength would vanish and that would be the beginning of his downfall.
That's actually a very profound observation. We (here in the West) are always told that our geo-political opponents are despotic, violent, and irrational (at best). That is something that is pretty much expected by any decent researcher of foreign affairs; and our treatment or Russia and Putin (in particular) is no different in that respect. What I fear however, is that few Westerners realize that an alternative to Putin is not some pro-Western liberal government (a-la 1990s); but much rather a more nationalistic and militant force (a-la Strelkov/Dugin/Prokhanov) that would make Putin look like a pro-Western liberal democrat. We are playing with fire when it comes to Russian political landscape, yet I don't see any visionaries in the US or EU governments to calculate the consequences of our actions.
-
Agreed on the last point too. People who think Russian troops are doing most of the fighting are as misinformed as people who deny Russian involvement.
Yep, that pretty much sums it up for me. Without a popular anti-Maidan movement in Donbass there would have been no resistance to Kiev forces; no matter how much the Russians would have wanted it (as was the case in other "supposedly" pro-Russian regions like Odessa and Kharkov). Almost everything that I've read from Donbass local observers points me to the fact that they feel absolutely no alligance and a strong degree of resentment towards Kiev governement's actions with or without Russian influence. Which again (of course) does not cancel out Russian military and political involvement into DNR and LNR affairts; nor their military support for the rebels... However let's be clear here - none of it would have been relevant if not for the local popular resistance to Kiev regime.
I personally feel that those kinds of debates are best left for PMs - but I know that you don't like that route; so I will have to respect your wishes and would be obliged to give you a thoughtful response.
Although wait, there is no proof that he has been alive for the past 12 hours "as far as we know..."
Uh so has Debaltseve fallen?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
I personally tend to agree with your assessment... but it's a matter of faith and nothing more; I just wanted to point out that it is a bit controversial and should not be automatically assumed to be 100% truthful... Then again, that's about the most first-hand information about Russian Ops in Donbas that we have seen in the printed media; so what choice do we have but to take it seriously?