In another blow to transparency, Putin classifies peacetime Spetsnaz losses

[Sgt Joch]

I see Russians. I see guys named Steve.

 

 

 

time to get the popcorn out...

 

 

[Zemke]

This thread is out of control, so I am throwing more fuel on the fire, stirring the pot....oh yeah baby!

(1)  Russia does not have a free press, all the media outlets are now under the governments control, so nothing coming from them should be considered as creditable information.

(2)  Russian has created this problem by interfering in a country that is not their own.  Certain parts of eastern Ukraine with large Russian populations have declared their own country/territory/state/ whatever, and Russia has taken advantage of the situation by providing arms and clandestine troops to aid in this cause.  Which is like parts of Texas deciding to join Mexico or form their own country, not going to happen and is illegal by all standard of international agreements, standards and law. 

(3)  This war will last a long time.  Watching some of the videos from both "rebels" and Ukrainian "forces", neither looked very competent or professional, and reminded me of what I saw in the middle east, very poor infantry tactics, poor combat discipline and technique.  Which tells me, this "little war" will go on for a long time, as neither side seems to be very good at fighting, much like the Syrian war.  Not surprising, considering Russian performance in recent history, Afghanistan, Chechen War 1994-1996 and 1999-2000, Russo-Georgian War 2008, (the best Russian troops proved to not be Russian troops, but Russian mercenaries).  Also, both Russian and Ukrainian military tradition/doctrine IS Soviet Army doctrine, which has little NCO tradition of small unit leadership, tending to be "top down" lead, with conscripted soldiers.  I saw this first hand myself helping to train some former Soviet Republic forces in 2011. In other words they do not have a western tradition an NCO corps, a professional military and their forces suffer competency accordingly.

 

 

If Russian were to cause Article 5 of NATO to be invoked, (BTW article 4 HAS been invoked currently due to Russian actions in Ukraine), I suspect the exchange rate between NATO and Russia would look very much like WW II between Germany and Russia, quality verse quantity, and particular so against US forces, combat experienced after 14 years of war, (granted mostly doing light infantry counter-insurgency work and LOTs of MOUT).  It is not equipment and technology that decides the day, but leadership, training and doctrine.  Russia has some good equipment, but cannot match NATO man for man, NCO for NCO or Officer for Officer.

 

Last, this entire thread should never have been allowed to remain in the game section, and should be moved somewhere else, and it seems to have hijacked the Black Sea GAME forum to talk about Russian policy.  Also, it should be no big surprise that Russia is classifying casualties, the US would do the same if the US were adding a pro American separatist force in Mexico for example, which is crazy talk, but 10 years ago if someone had told me Russia would try to annex parts of Ukraine, I would have said that is crazy talk. 

 

Last, I think Battlefront has a secret crystal ball they can see the future, how did they know this war would take place?  What other secret information about the future are they not telling us?

Edited September 1, 2015 by Zemke

[sburke]

time to get the popcorn out...

Man I hate popcorn. It is like eating styrofoam peanuts. Can we do chips and salsa instead, with some beer of course

[Battlefront.com]

Last, this entire thread should never have been allowed to remain in the game section, and should be moved somewhere else, and it seems to have hijacked the Black Sea GAME forum to talk about Russian policy.

It's only natural that we have some discussion about the real events of the Black Sea setting since the game is based on reality more than not. Though I do try to keep this discussion limited to things which are relevant to the military aspects of the current war. We start to go down the rabbit hole because some question reality and that shouldn't go unchallenged. Personally, I'd prefer to talk about only the military aspects.

 

Last, I think Battlefront has a secret crystal ball they can see the future, how did they know this war would take place?

I pay attention to the history of nations and how they behave. Russia's behavior towards Ukraine is not difficult to understand nor predict. It is as simple and straight forward as that.

 

What other secret information about the future are they not telling us?

We'll all be living in caves again at some point. But I'm not saying when

 

Man I hate popcorn. It is like eating styrofoam peanuts.

You have discredited yourself. Either that or you've had some really lousy popcorn!

Steve

[sburke]

You have discredited yourself. Either that or you've had some really lousy popcorn!Steve

Well if you want something done right . . .

Should I take this to be a suggestion that the vehicle pack will include a sample of "Steve's Special BF Popcorn"?

[Battlefront.com]

Earlier I stated that Russia is also operating large amounts of support units in Ukraine, in particular signals, EW, and other such things. Here is one of many examples of how hard it is for Russia to hide its activities thanks to the Internet. Though for some reason logic + evidence ≠ fact for some people:

https://informnapalm.org/12200-kompleks-radyorazvedky-torn-dap

The power of open source information is really showing itself in Ukraine. No wonder that as of today new laws in Russia give the government more control over the Internet. It won't prevent the outside world from discovering the truth, but it can make it even more difficult for Russians to learn what is really going on.

This particular example is especially interesting because it combines video footage taken from a "crowd sourced" UAV from a volunteer unit (Dnipro 1), with pictures taken by separatists on the ground, finding it on Google Earth, and known pictures of the signals system in question. It's an impressive amount of data that is sitting right out in the open.

Steve

[Nidan1]

Or a least some more pics of Scarlet Johannsen, maybe riding in a BMP, or in the turret of an Abrams.

[Nidan1]

Earlier I stated that Russia is also operating large amounts of support units in Ukraine, in particular signals, EW, and other such things. Here is one of many examples of how hard it is for Russia to hide its activities thanks to the Internet. Though for some reason logic + evidence ≠ fact for some people:

https://informnapalm.org/12200-kompleks-radyorazvedky-torn-dap

The power of open source information is really showing itself in Ukraine. No wonder that as of today new laws in Russia give the government more control over the Internet. It won't prevent the outside world from discovering the truth, but it can make it even more difficult for Russians to learn what is really going on.

This particular example is especially interesting because it combines video footage taken from a "crowd sourced" UAV from a volunteer unit (Dnipro 1), with pictures taken by separatists on the ground, finding it on Google Earth, and known pictures of the signals system in question. It's an impressive amount of data that is sitting right out in the open.

Steve

I can't read Russian or Ukranian Steve, what does the white square on the vehicles signify? Why are they highlighted. Also those trucks are pictured several times, what is their significance. I am assuming the pictures are of Russian regular forces, and the "signals" units you mention. 

[Battlefront.com]

This is stan

I can't read Russian or Ukranian Steve, what does the white square on the vehicles signify? Why are they highlighted. Also those trucks are pictured several times, what is their significance. I am assuming the pictures are of Russian regular forces, and the "signals" units you mention.

You can always use Google Translate (translate.google.com) to get something better than just the pictures. The translations for such things is usually more than adequate. However, after seeing dozens of these "geolocating" investigations, many through this website, there is a fairly consistent logic used. Especially when identifying uniquely Russian equipment.

Remember, for a long time the Russia and separatist lie was that all their equipment came from stuff they captured from Ukraine. The lie continues to this day, even though it is so obviously untrue that it makes my head hurt to think that anybody still believes it. So one of the things focused on is equipment that is 100% unique to Russia and only Russia. Because if a Russian piece of equipment is shown in Ukraine, then the Russian lie is exposed very conclusively. In this case, the equipment is one of Russia's most advanced frontline signals systems for intercepting and jamming.

First is to establish what the equipment looks like. This is usually done by citing sources that are unquestionable and predate the Ukraine war (if possible). In this case the first couple of shots are from a BBC article where the Russians are showing off the capabilities of this system. With this established the investigation usually moves to showing pictures relevant to the Ukraine war.

If possible they show the equipment in Rostov. This establishes that it's been moved close to the border. If not, they jump right into pictures of it in Ukraine. Either way, they use supporting information to "geolocate" the equipment. Sometimes it is from metadata in the pictures, other times it is recognizing a unique landmark (or series of landmarks) that can be verified as a specific location.

The boxes are designed to draw your attention to areas to compare between a known source and the ones being investigated. Colored boxes are usually drawn to match (i.e. yellow box on Picture A matches yellow box on Picture . Sometimes more than one image is involved so that they can show a timeline or additional confirmation.

The same technique is used when establishing a unique piece of equipment is seen in two or more pictures. Since vehicles are often personalized by their crews, or suffer distinct damage, they focus on things such as paint jobs, markings, bent fenders, extra bits of equipment, etc. In this article there are actually two of the signals trucks in one video so they highlight this fact and the way to differentiate between the two trucks. This is important because they are only trying to establish the presence of one truck in one location, even though it is probable there is definitely more than one in Ukraine because the pictures from the road march show evidence of being in Ukraine and Donetsk city limits specifically.

The Dnipro-1 UAV footage is of Somali Battalion HQ and specifically Givi's house. Givi is the leader of Somali Battalion and HIGH up on the Ukrainian volunteer battalions' hit list. He's been seen on videos torturing captured volunteers and bragging about executing others (there is also some photographic evidence of the latter). So the Dnipro-1 UAV video was part of keeping an eye on their nemesis. In the process they got additional verification of the trucks' location and tied it to the HQ operations of one of the most important militia unit (Somali Battalion is transforming into a tank heavy unit).

Then there is the focus on the buildings. Buildings, and their surrounding junk, offers good opportunities for exact locations. In this case the buildings are photographed from the ground as well as the UAV. The yellow boxes in the various pictures focus on a unique utility building in front of the large apartment buildings. The yellow boxes show the viewer the common information between them.

The second to last section shows antennas which are used by this system and, again, compares them to known sources. When you view the translation they say that some of the locations of these pictures is unknown, so the important thing is getting a good comparison shot of the equipment vs. the shot that is in a known position.

The last section is about tactical markings and figuring out what unit the vehicle might be from. This is compared to social media information based on the square tactical symbol. The social media postings show the unit to be the 20th Motor Rifle Brigade (Separate), Unit 22220, Volgograd, Southern Military District. (in Russian - 20-й ОМСБр – это в/ч 22220, Волгоград Южный военный округ (ЮВО))

This is not too surprising since this unit has been spotted in Ukraine since last year:

https://en.informnapalm.org/donetsk-corps-of-the-russian-army-no-more-lies/

You can see from this second reference how damming the information is from the Russian soldiers themselves. You would think a nation that is going to overtly lie about its actions would pay more attention to good OPSEC practices Actually, recent reports from Russian service members say that they are forced to hand over their cellphones before crossing into Ukraine. It must not be very consistent because the selfies keep appearing!

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Keep in mind that the Russian government lies have one huge problem. For them to be believed EVERY SINGLE REPORT of Russian involvement in Ukraine must be proven false. ALL OF THEM. That is because Russia's lie is very absolute and leaves no room for exceptions. The rest of the world, on the other hand, only has to prove ONE instance to show that Russia is lying. As it happens, there's really no problem proving that Russia is directly involved. There is so much real evidence of Russia's direct involvement in Ukraine there is no reason to fake information.

Steve

[Nidan1]

Steve, thanks for the explanation. I first thought that the boxes were some sort of unit marking, but what you describe makes sense and I am familiar with that process. I'll Google up a decent translation and take another look.

[TheBog11]

On the subject of referendums to break away from a nation:

 

The problem with this is that the breakaway province/area, on some level, belongs to the rest of the country.

 

Modern economies are extremely intertwined. If one province breaks away, the rest of the country suffers as a result. It's the same with corporations. You can't take your share of the corporation and just leave, it hurts everyone else in the corporation.

 

I'm a Texan. If Texas took up a referendum to break away from the U.S. and join Mexico, it'd be a cold day in hell before the U.S. would let them leave. If Mexico invaded Texas (just like Russian invaded the Crimea) to "protect ethnic Mexicans", the U.S. would blow the sh#t out of them, and rightfully so. Texas' economy is too big for them to do anything else. (Although I bet they'd let Mexico annex the Rio Grande Valley, simply because it doesn't really produce anything.)

 

The only reason that the UK permitted Scotland to hold that vote was that they decided that the opportunity costs of forcing Scotland to remain in the UK were greater than the costs of having them leave.

[Aurelius]

On the subject of referendums to break away from a nation:

 

The problem with this is that the breakaway province/area, on some level, belongs to the rest of the country.

 

Modern economies are extremely intertwined. If one province breaks away, the rest of the country suffers as a result. It's the same with corporations. You can't take your share of the corporation and just leave, it hurts everyone else in the corporation.

 

I'm a Texan. If Texas took up a referendum to break away from the U.S. and join Mexico, it'd be a cold day in hell before the U.S. would let them leave. If Mexico invaded Texas (just like Russian invaded the Crimea) to "protect ethnic Mexicans", the U.S. would blow the sh#t out of them, and rightfully so. Texas' economy is too big for them to do anything else. (Although I bet they'd let Mexico annex the Rio Grande Valley, simply because it doesn't really produce anything.)

 

The only reason that the UK permitted Scotland to hold that vote was that they decided that the opportunity costs of forcing Scotland to remain in the UK were greater than the costs of having them leave.

There is also an issue of legality of those referendums and the question whether an ethnic/national minority can have the right to self-determination.

Edited September 2, 2015 by Aurelius

[Battlefront.com]

The only reason that the UK permitted Scotland to hold that vote was that they decided that the opportunity costs of forcing Scotland to remain in the UK were greater than the costs of having them leave.

Yup, and a wise choice indeed. It's the same thing that Canada does with Quebec. It deprives the separatists their legitimacy (i.e. they are proven to be a minority) and that, in turn, makes for better cooperation because the minority would be viewed as such.

Crimea is a more complicated story. All we can say, for sure, is that Crimeans were not given a chance to determine their future for themselves. They were invaded by a foreign power and absolutely no form of democratic voice or monitoring was allowed. It was also rushed forward by the barrel of a gun. Because of that, there is no way it could be viewed as a legitimate process. Well, except by "Fascists". Because that's the way Fascists operate, therefore by definition they view it as legitimate since "might makes right".

Steve

[Aurelius]

Crimea is a more complicated story. All we can say, for sure, is that Crimeans were not given a chance to determine their future for themselves. They were invaded by a foreign power and absolutely no form of democratic voice or monitoring was allowed. It was also rushed forward by the barrel of a gun. Because of that, there is no way it could be viewed as a legitimate process. Well, except by "Fascists". Because that's the way Fascists operate, therefore by definition they view it as legitimate since "might makes right".

My point exactly. Timeline of the events proves that there was no real will to exercise the right to self-determination + the whole thing was conducted outside the constitutional boundaries.

[MikeyD]

For anyone who hasn't tried this, Google Earth Street View gives you a tour of downtown Donetsk circa 2012. Anyone wanting to can match-up specific locations with combat photos right down to individual residences. So if a report on the web claims a BUK launcher or Russian ECM van parked at a particular spot you can often go to that very spot to check. Yup, the same bank sign, same building, etc.

[Battlefront.com]

Now, if I recall a few of our Russian posters challenged, even ridiculed, my statements about direct Russian ground force involvement. I presented evidence that supports my position. Just like I've done the previous times the same people challenge my statements. And guess what? No response. So I guess we can conclude that the matter is settled on this Forum.

This is a place for intellectual discussions. Empty challenges and/or not taking responsibility for statements made undermines that mission. Such behavior is against forum rules. At some point my patience will run out, so that should be kept in mind.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

My point exactly. Timeline of the events proves that there was no real will to exercise the right to self-determination + the whole thing was conducted outside the constitutional boundaries.

It is more complicated than that. If a group of people are not treated correctly by the constitution or the state organizations responsible for enforcing the constitution, then the constitution itself can be called into question. The Human Right to be free of oppression, discrimination, and abuse holds more moral and legal weight.

Steve

[Aurelius]

It is more complicated than that. If a group of people are not treated correctly by the constitution or the state organizations responsible for enforcing the constitution, then the constitution itself can be called into question. The Human Right to be free of oppression, discrimination, and abuse holds more moral and legal weight.

Steve

That reminds so much of the Declaration of Independence... I guess we can all than decide to say screw the Constitution, we should not use our representatives in National Assembly, should not use our regional assemblies and the like, we should just jump to violence and foreign aid. We have a two different view on the subject and the cause of that is cultural difference (US fought for its independence, we had to wait for the Berlin Congress while using every legal and-not-so legal instrument present in the Ottoman Empire).

[Red Rage]

Yup, and a wise choice indeed. It's the same thing that Canada does with Quebec. It deprives the separatists their legitimacy (i.e. they are proven to be a minority) and that, in turn, makes for better cooperation because the minority would be viewed as such.

Crimea is a more complicated story. All we can say, for sure, is that Crimeans were not given a chance to determine their future for themselves. They were invaded by a foreign power and absolutely no form of democratic voice or monitoring was allowed. It was also rushed forward by the barrel of a gun. Because of that, there is no way it could be viewed as a legitimate process. Well, except by "Fascists". Because that's the way Fascists operate, therefore by definition they view it as legitimate since "might makes right".

Steve

 

 

Forgetting the 1991 and 1994 referendums, followed by the 1995 Ukranian crackdown? 

 

In 2014, "barrel of the gun" was used simply to remove the Ukrainian power structures from the picture and prevent any radical elements from entering the same picture. The "invading" forces have been there longer than the state of Ukraine existed by several hundred years. Voting itself was fairly transparent and democratic with international bodies invited to observe. The fact that the same players who perpetrated Kosovo, Iraq, Libya and Syria decided that they are into following the international law to the "t" in the case of Crimea and refused is their own damn problem. Crimeans are overwhelmingly happy to be where they currently are, and that's the only thing that matters.

 

 

 

Now, if I recall a few of our Russian posters challenged, even ridiculed, my statements about direct Russian ground force involvement. I presented evidence that supports my position. Just like I've done the previous times the same people challenge my statements. And guess what? No response. So I guess we can conclude that the matter is settled on this Forum.

 

 

A bit of a waste of time going in circles, don't you think? Russian posters consider sites like Bellingcat  as con jobs and the social media based Ukrainian sources that you mostly rely on as bat**** crazy. You collectively dismiss all the Russian sources as propaganda. Nobody is going to change anyone's viewpoint here. All this crap was discussed and argued ad nauseum on mp.net's Ukrainian thread for thousands of pages (with hundreds of 2-week forced vacations and dozens of permabans), and not a single person changed their initial position. 

[Aurelius]

 

 

In 2014, "barrel of the gun" was used simply to remove the Ukrainian power structures from the picture and prevent any radical elements from entering the same picture. The "invading" forces have been there longer than the state of Ukraine existed by several hundred years. Voting itself was fairly transparent and democratic with international bodies invited to observe. The fact that the same players who perpetrated Kosovo, Iraq, Libya and Syria decided that they are into following the international law to the "t" in the case of Crimea and refused is their own damn problem. Crimeans are overwhelmingly happy to be where they currently are, and that's the only thing that matters.

So you basically admitted you're nothing better than "them" and de facto you acknowledged "Kosovo". And how can a referendum be legal when the State said No?

Edited September 3, 2015 by Aurelius

[Battlefront.com]

That reminds so much of the Declaration of Independence... I guess we can all than decide to say screw the Constitution, we should not use our representatives in National Assembly, should not use our regional assemblies and the like, we should just jump to violence and foreign aid.

Well, when you don't have any real or meaningful legal and governmental representation, it is kinda hard to go that route. Let's also not forget that it "takes two to tango". There would have been no bloody revolt by the American colonists if Britain had devolved reasonable powers. Which, to its credit, it did with other colonial possessions after it lost the US colonies. So it is a combination of one group seeking more say and another group denying it.

We have a two different view on the subject and the cause of that is cultural difference (US fought for its independence, we had to wait for the Berlin Congress while using every legal and-not-so legal instrument present in the Ottoman Empire).

Yes, we must have different history books. Apparently in yours World War One was started when a Serbian legal rights group sued Arch Duke Ferdinand in court to gain a modest increase in local control for the Serbian people. Because in my book a violent Serbian independent movement murdered the Arch Duke and his wife in public in the pursuit of total independence.

But we are straying waaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic. Suffice to say there are times when violence is the only means of achieving a reasonable settlement, but most of the time there are other means. Other means should be pursued first and only switch to violence when there is no other option.

Steve

[Aurelius]

Yes, we must have different history books. Apparently in yours World War One was started when a Serbian legal rights group sued Arch Duke Ferdinand in court to gain a modest increase in local control for the Serbian people. Because in my book a violent Serbian independent movement murdered the Arch Duke and his wife in public in the pursuit of total independence.

How Mlada Bosna and the events from 1914. connect to Berlin Congress that was in 1878. eludes me. But I'll say no more, lest we steer this way off topic.

[Sgt Joch]

I am usually reluctant to get involved in these topics, but here goes...

 

Focusing on the "legality" of a referendum is missing the point. I doubt you will find many Constitutions that allow a region to secede following a referendum.

 

Even the Quebec referendum(s), which everyone likes to cite as an example, were not "legal". The Canadian Constitution has no provision allowing a Province to secede based on a referendum. The referendums were organised by the Quebec provincial government when the separatist Parti Québécois was in power and it was never clear if the Federal Governement would respect the results if the independence side had won.

 

A referendum is a political tool. For example, if 75% had voted for Quebec independence, it would have been politically impossible for the Federal Governement to ignore the result, no matter what the Constitution said. You can only deny the political aspirations of a nation for so long, if they cannot express it democratically through the ballot box, they will turn to civil disobedience, civil unrest or even civil war which is no one's long term interest.

[Battlefront.com]

Forgetting the 1991 and 1994 referendums, followed by the 1995 Ukranian crackdown?

That is a gross over simplification, don't you think? No matter, though, because at best you are arguing that Russia has the right to behave even worse to the Crimean people because Ukraine didn't treat them as they should have. That's a really bad argument.

 

In 2014, "barrel of the gun" was used simply to remove the Ukrainian power structures from the picture and prevent any radical elements from entering the same picture. The "invading" forces have been there longer than the state of Ukraine existed by several hundred years. Voting itself was fairly transparent and democratic with international bodies invited to observe. The fact that the same players who perpetrated Kosovo, Iraq, Libya and Syria decided that they are into following the international law to the "t" in the case of Crimea and refused is their own damn problem. Crimeans are overwhelmingly happy to be where they currently are, and that's the only thing that matters.

Doesn't change the facts. Russia invaded, Russia imposed a faked referendum, it suppressed dissent, private enterprises (small and large) were seized by armed thugs, the Tatars are being actively repressed, and now there's the fun of watching the criminal elements in Moscow squabbling with the Crimean crime syndicates about who gets to rip off the Crimean people the most.

Yup, it's a Worker's Paradise in the Crimea.

 

A bit of a waste of time going in circles, don't you think? Russian posters consider sites like Bellingcat  as con jobs and the social media based Ukrainian sources that you mostly rely on as batshit crazy. You collectively dismiss all the Russian sources as propaganda.

Two statements that have absolutely no basis in fact. The 5th Tank Brigade was documented in Debaltseve by established Western media and by independent Russian media. There are photos to prove they were there. There's photos of all kinds of Russian forces and equipment in Ukraine, including stuff shown on Russia Today and separatist made videos. Unlike you, I utilize all sources of information and assess each one on its merits. You, on the other hand, reject anything that could possibly upset your world view without even attempting to say why.

You (and other Russians) have made a bold statement that Russia is not actively engaged in a war in Ukraine. When presented with direct evidence to refute this position you use evasive maneuvers and vague references to avoid having to defend your position. This is intellectual cowardice of the highest order.

Nobody is going to change anyone's viewpoint here. All this crap was discussed and argued ad nauseum on mp.net's Ukrainian thread for thousands of pages (with hundreds of 2-week forced vacations and dozens of permabans), and not a single person changed their initial position.

Finally you've said something that I agree with. At this point the mountain of evidence that Russia is actively engaged in a war against Ukraine, including ground troops, that someone who denies it is not likely to change his mind any more than a neo-Nazi can have his mind changed that the Holocaust happened. Therefore, I am going to apply the same standard I apply to that situation. Anybody who wishes to challenge specific evidence of Russia's involvement in Ukraine may do so, but denying that Russia is waging war in Ukraine is not going to be tolerated. It is an insult to the intelligence of this Forum and it is a major distraction. If someone wants to spin their own version of reality, they can do it elsewhere.

Steve