The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Rolo Slavskiy Archive
The Military Analysts and the Negative Coverage of the War
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I’ve written about the military people in Russia before, but it’s worth bringing up again.

There are, or rather, there were nationalist political groups in Russian politics, but they were either assimilated, like Dmitri Rogozin’s “Rodina” party, which basically faded into irrelevance once Rogozin himself was offered a position in the government, or they folded like the internet journal Sputnik & Pogrom.

You’ve probably heard of Rogozin — he got into a spat with Elon Musk recently:

Leading to this cryptic tweet:

Anyway, there’s no real point in talking about nationalist groups in Russia unless it is to mention various weirdo Neo-Nazi groups who seem to only exist so that the FSB can roll up on them periodically, send them to penal colonies, and thereby justify their budget.

The only serious bloc of patriotic voices with right-wing views, organizations and any form of political activism in Russia are basically military organizations like veterans’ groups and the various other support communities built up around them like “Mothers of Soldiers” and the military people who run journals, host get-togethers, summer camps, choirs, rock concerts, parades or special remembrance days.

The people running the various military journals and blogs are serious and they are respected by civil society because the military as an institution is generally well-liked in any country by the masses. There was a poll floating around about two years ago that showed that in terms of respect, Putin came in second place in Russia when compared to the respect accorded to the military as an institution.

As a result, the FSB and the oligarchs and parts of the government are quite leery of them. This is a major fault-line running through Russian civil society that few people analyze or talk about. If it wasn’t clear before, then I’m going to spell it out now — I am unabashedly on team military/team patriot and hope that they gain a greater foothold in Russian politics as a result of the war.

That being said, it’s worth realizing that these people have a dog in the political fight and since they are the only ones providing serious in-depth analysis of the war from the Russian side, it’s going to factor into their coverage. You’ve probably seen a machine-translated article of theirs or two floating in the blogosphere by now.

Their official line is basically this: “the corrupt elements running many of the institutions in Russia now are fighting the war poorly and have proven that they need to be replaced.”

I largely agree with them, but I also generally take their analysis of the situation with a grain of salt. See, it’s in their interests to play up the mistakes of the Russian government in Ukraine (of which there are indeed many) because it fits with their political narrative. Again, I like their political narrative and am sympathetic to it. But, again, let’s acknowledge that they do have an incentive to take a pessimistic stance on the war and the way things are being run at home. So, that means that they spend a lot less time focusing on the victories and the successes on the military front and a lot more time talking about the mistakes. Like the Moskva sinking. Boy, oh boy did they have a field day with that.

Me, personally, I don’t really think it reflects poorly on the current war effort in Ukraine seeing as the Moskva was plagued with problems for years. It was supposed to be refitted in 2016 after its deployment to Syria, but it was clear that this wasn’t a priority as Russia was shifting to subs and lighter ships as part of its modernization efforts.

Bloggers like the Saker, were, at the time, praising the Moskva with its goofy ramp and rusted out hull and denouncing anyone who disagreed as being victims of Anglo-ZOG propaganda as I recall. But the boat was objectively old and clearly near obsolete. Sailors didn’t like serving on it and some military journals at the time had no problem calling it a “white elephant” that seemed to be kept around for its symbolic value instead of any real strategic importance.

The loss of the sailors was tragic, of course, but the loss of the boat itself? People who were calling for it to be sold to China or the North Koreans all of a sudden began using the Moskva debacle as a cudgel against the Kremlin.

Overall, I don’t really see any harm in their critical posturing as the situation stands now. Although, it has to be said, that people like Igor Strelkov, the hero rebel of Donbass, are routinely posted by Ukrainian propaganda channels because of his constant criticism of the Russian government and the war effort.

Doomer Strelkov
Doomer Strelkov

To be fair, the Russian government did Strelkov dirty. He wanted to take all of Novorussia back in 2016 and he was right to call for a fast blitzkrieg. The Ukrainian Army was not ready, the cities weren’t fortified and the speed and success of the Crimean operation had them demoralized. Instead, the Russian government, the political class and people like Lavrov decided to go the Minsk I and II route. They seemed to believe that they could keep all of Ukraine by participating in the electoral process and negotiating with their “most-esteemed Western partners.”

Well, they were dead wrong and they never apologized for losing the entirety of Ukraine through their unprofessionalism and stupidity. Say it with me: Igor was right and did nothing wrong.

Anyway, the army fighting in the Ukraine is basically Putin’s private army. It is a professional, paid force, which is only a fraction of Russia’s actual full militarized might and it is mixed with ethnic auxiliaries called up by local tribal chieftains of the various periphery republics. It is not a Russian draftee army and so, does not necessarily need to be motivated by an ideal or patriotic propaganda to do its fighting. They’re fighting because they’re getting paid to fight and because they’re good at it. Sure, they’re generally pro-Russia and there are volunteers there who are clearly Russian revanchists who believe in the ‘Greater Russia’ ideal for sure, but these people would be down for a good scrap in any case. After all, they fought in the Donbass in the early days when the situation was far more dire for the pro-Russia side simply because of their commitment to Russian nationalism restorationism.

Believe me, if a general or even partial mobilization is announced, the military people will change their tune quick. At that point, the nature of the war changes and it becomes one’s patriotic duty to rah-rah-rah and not demoralize the war effort. We’re not there yet though, and it’s worth understanding that these people are engaging in political point-scoring and also in making the case that they would do a better job protecting Russia’s interests than the mystery-meat politicians running the show now.

They want the Russian government to call them in to fix the problem. They want general mobilization and total war against NATO. They see an opportunity for themselves and for Russia as a whole to move in the right direction.

Ukraine, in contrast, does not allow a single peep of criticism of their war effort. Videos of units complaining about being abandoned by their officers, sent to fight without equipment, not being paid and so on are suppressed and the soldiers who record them are charged with sedition and desertion by the secret police.

That, plus the power of Western propaganda creates a highly skewed perception of the war. One side appears to be uniformly positive and never admits to making mistakes or even losing a single battle, while the other is analyzing, debating and talking openly about what’s happening on the front.

But the squeaky wheel often gets the grease, and you have to give them credit where credit is due — the military people and their talking points are starting to take hold in Russia. People are starting to ask questions about the war effort and demand that the government do more. ‘Mobilization’ is a buzz word that’s gaining ground in the public arena.

Again, I’m biased, but if I were the Russian government, I’d just deal these people in, if only to get them to stop criticizing the “special operation.” But, you see, because these people are so popular, they represent a potential threat. The way I see it, the real story isn’t to be found in the trenches of Donbass, but in the politicking happening behind the scenes on the home front in Russia.

(Republished from The Occidental Observer by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Russia, Ukraine, Vladimir Putin 
Hide 129 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. meamjojo says:

    “‘Mobilization’ is a buzz word that’s gaining ground in the public arena.”

    Be serious! NO ONE with a grain of intelligence ever WANTS to go to war and risk being killed or crippled for life. The only people favoring “mobilization” are those who won’t have to go fight.
    ———-
    Three months of war: Russia underachieves, Ukraine overachieves
    Updated May 24, 202210:36 AM ET

    KYIV, Ukraine — Ben Hodges is a retired U.S. lieutenant general who visited Ukraine just days before Russia’s invasion in February, when many expected a swift Russian victory.

    “We were like, ‘Hey, how come you guys aren’t scurrying around getting ready?’” Hodges says. “And they’re like, ‘Well, you know, it’s because we’ve been at war.’”

    Back in 2014, Ukraine’s military was no match for Russia’s army when it launched its first incursion. But Ukraine has improved dramatically since then, Hodges says.

    He witnessed this as commander of the U.S. Army Europe from 2014-17. The Americans sent troops to help train Ukraine’s military. Now, he believes Ukraine is gaining the upper hand in this war.
    ….
    https://www.npr.org/2022/05/24/1100898004/a-battlefield-assessment-three-months-after-russia-invaded-ukraine

  2. Wokechoke says:

    was thinking about the Horde and the idea of the Tumen, 10,000 men. also the concept of the Mingan, 1,000. It’s much like the BTG. did anything change from the olden days?

    There’s several films from Russia that cover the wars with the Mongols and other Turkic tribes. Russian identity to a great degree is the story of whitey on foot with a musket encountering the yellow peril on a pony with a compound bow, and over coming him. Russia is The Wild Wild East. Even the log cabins look like something out of a cowboy film. I’d guess that kind of Cabin came from Finns or Russ settlers. Perhaps from the Swedes but the French and British wouldn’t have used logs that way.

  3. In war propaganda obscures truth. Those engaged in war seek to control the narrative – that they are the narrator; or even greater – the creator. Having power gives the illusion of control: but power is an illusion; control is very limited. That is why every empire in history has eventually faced the war it sought to avoid: its own destruction.
    https://patternofhistory.wordpress.com/

  4. roonaldo says:

    And how ready was Russia in 2015 to wage war against a country the size of Texas with over 40 million people, withstand an onslaught of Western economic pressures, contend with the Atlanticists on the home front, and respond to NATO’s ISIS throngs?

    Perhaps a peaceful solution through the Minsk option was a reasonable decision at the time. All peaceful attempts to avoid war may have failed, but it laid bare the cynical, conniving nature of the West’s elites, which helps neuter the Atlanticists at home and persuade nations to ignore the Hegemon’s demands. It gave Russia time to practice war in Syria, put advanced weaponry into production, and strengthen ties to China. It also gave the West time to weaken itself economically through covid lockdown lunacy and social fragmentation.

    Of course, there are too many variables to know what might have happened in the past or to confidently predict world events five years from now. All I can say is that my country, the U.S., appears to be coming apart at the seams and wants the entire planet to follow it into the abyss.

  5. Your report reads to me like a wholesome description of family affairs, where everyone puts in to better and advance the family. Sounds Nazi to me. Russia is doing everything right. War has so many variables… (Is it true that Gerasimov got attacked and injured by Jewkraine/JewSA?)
    The current war against Russia started on the 8th of May 1945. The Third Jewish World War started at the finish of the Second Jewish World War.
    What can Russia do? It can do, what it does. Compared to the rest of Europe it is brilliant.
    The war effort is going according to plan, according to the military/gvt. – right now the victory in Azovstal coupled with victory over Jewmerican biological warfare crimes. Russia is winning back the natural Ukrainians and exposing the Satanism of Jewkraine. Russia is showing the world that it is the good one. Russia is showing the world how to treat people. It pays respect to its old people, to its young people, to everyone?! Wow!
    Russia waited all this time and would have liked to wait much longer, but got attacked with intensive satanic Jewkrainian shelling and imminent threats of satanic attacks on Crimea etc. Russia at least had to wait till the second generation of hypersonic weapons was installed sufficiently. Russia had to avoid running premature into the open knife. Had Russia responded in 2016 it might have risked too much? It gained another 6 years of betterment in all fields of its life, last but not least the military and the preparation of civil society. Today Russia is in a truly sovereign position and probably the only truly sovereign country. Russia depends on nobody. Russia needs nothing from anyone. Yet it appears sober and humble. The volunteer soldiers appear humble.
    Putin is Russia’s Bismarck in my eyes. Lavrov appears like a forever astute guardian of Russia’s best interests. Glory to Russia. Fucking great! Wow! I love it! Amazing. Amazing grace and the luck of the painstaking worker.

    • Replies: @animalogic
    , @nokangaroos
  6. artilery says:
    @meamjojo

    Not always, the leading advocates of mobilization in Russia, like Strelkov have fought every conflict they could even if not required. Your statement is based on the western europe mindset today . Mobilization in Russia is blocked by corrupt top government officials who are blackmailed with their foreign accounts

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  7. @animalogic

    Onward to Normandy!
    Onward to Hagia Sophia!

  8. Wokechoke says:
    @artilery

    Strelkov doesn’t own this conflict, he was just an early “noticer” of a trend in current affairs. His involvement just a footnote now. Very often the first people invested in such fighting get superceeded by bigger people.

  9. @Kurt Knispel

    Easy on the Pervitin, Kurt 😀

    • Replies: @Kurt Knispel
  10. @Kurt Knispel

    I think I know what you’re getting at. But, taken literally you’re suggesting a massive dispersal of forces ; ).

  11. Andrew Ho says:

    Framing the Ukraine conflict in entirety of military and ignoring the economic consequences is quite frankly, disingenuous and insulting.

    While the 1100+ Western sanctions didn’t collapse Russia’s economy today, in 2016 it’d been a certainty. Russia’s economy was still very much dependent on the West back then, plus her relationships with other non-Western countries weren’t as strong then. Asking Putin to save the Donbass in 2016 was akin to committing economic suicide for Russia.

    While I enjoyed the author’s previous entries, he’s starting to sound much like a defeatist 6th columnist now.

  12. @nokangaroos

    Pervitin?
    “German” priests & politicians get me rolling.
    Besides, I am just trying to qualify in advance as a recipient for when Russia starts sending back those weapons the FRG lackeys are right now sending to Jewkraine; truckloads of tank fists etc.

    • Agree: nokangaroos
  13. peterAUS says:

    Re Moskva, she was a FLAGSHIP. Enough said re the capability of RF Navy.

    Well, they were dead wrong and they never apologized for losing the entirety of Ukraine through their unprofessionalism and stupidity. Say it with me: Igor was right and did nothing wrong.

    “They” should also answer for the deaths of those war leaders. Strelkov was both better connected and prudent, so he left, and survived.

    ….They’re fighting because they’re getting paid to fight and because they’re good at it…..

    Good, a? They are definitely brave; they aren’t good because the system betrayed them.
    They have equipment and weaponry from 80s and tactics from 90s.
    They ARE good material, but their leadership fucked them over.

    They see an opportunity for themselves and for Russia as a whole to move in the right direction.

    Hopefully.

    Again, I’m biased, but if I were the Russian government, I’d just deal these people in, if only to get them to stop criticizing the “special operation.” But, you see, because these people are so popular, they represent a potential threat. The way I see it, the real story isn’t to be found in the trenches of Donbass, but in the politicking happening behind the scenes on the home front in Russia.

    Hopefully.

    Where you ARE wrong is these people in/out, partial/full mobilization yes/no does not matter for the RF war effort here. The rot in the society, and consequently in the armed forces is so deep that to fix it will require so much that, well, feels pretty much impossible.

    If I were a Russian Government I’d resign for dereliction of duty, begging for leniency.
    The new Government should reorganize the society first, then the armed forces, and only then RF could become a serious player again. 5 years, at least, with the FULL commitment of the society.

    Odds for something like that happening are……oh boy. It’s not even science-fiction; it’s fantasy.

  14. Anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:

    Has anyone been able to find a source of information on this war that is neither pro-Russian nor pro-Ukrainian?

    It seems like it every source of news is one or the other, but it would be nice to be mistaken.

    • Replies: @Herald
    , @Abbybwood
  15. I don’t get the criticisms – Shoigu is on record as saying they want a professional army to a higher % than now, so the only way I see conscripts coming along is if NATO go full retard with WWIII.

    And I agree with Putin biting his tongue in 2014 – you can’t attack the western world (which is what this battle is) without backups for your financial system, or food security.

    On balance it was always, and still is, better to let NATO nations implode under debt etc, than go for a bite. I’m impressed the man managed to wait so long.

  16. Tom Welsh says:

    “But the boat was objectively old and clearly near obsolete”.

    People who call surface warships “boats” are advertising their unfamiliarity with the subject. Besides which, that sentence is simply untrue.

    • Replies: @Arthur MacBride
  17. Begemot says:
    @meamjojo

    Be serious! NO ONE with a grain of intelligence ever WANTS to go to war and risk being killed or crippled for life.

    Just one example contra your point: the massive public excitement for war in all the major powers when World War 1 broke out in Europe? Home before the leaves fall! Nach Paris! Yes, people do get excited enough to want to go to war, and do.

  18. The Russians aren’t doing too bad as it is. Outnumbered 3:1 they’re inflicting casualties on the enemy at a ratio 10:1 and still gaining territory. Has there ever been anything like this? I’d hate to think where they’d end up if they mobilised.

    • Replies: @j2
  19. Levtraro says:
    @roonaldo

    I agree roonaldo. Two of the most common logical errors are (1) confusing cause and effect and (2) not taking into account all relevant factors. You correctly point out that there were economic and political factors that impinged sharply on decisions taken in 2015 and in 2022 in Russia w/regards to the Ukraine.

    Slavskyi:

    He [Strelkov] wanted to take all of Novorussia back in 2016 and he was right to call for a fast blitzkrieg. The Ukrainian Army was not ready, the cities weren’t fortified and the speed and success of the Crimean operation had them demoralized.

    Logical error number (2) above. The strenghtening of Ukrainian forces during the 2015-2022 period was less important that the strenghtening of the Russian position during the same period because Russia was not just facing the Ukrainian Armed Forces but the whole of Anglo and their subordinate nations, as it became evident in 2022.

  20. j2 says:
    @Commentator Mike

    “The Russians aren’t doing too bad as it is. Outnumbered 3:1 they’re inflicting casualties on the enemy at a ratio 10:1 and still gaining territory. Has there ever been anything like this? I’d hate to think where they’d end up if they mobilised. ”

    Mike, you misunderstand the situation. Russians have concentrated forces on the Donbas area and they have local overpower. You can always get local overpower and with it manage to advance. Their overpower is as follows: they concentrated on the area 25 BTGs. A BTG typically has 10 tanks and 30 Infantry fighting vehicles. The manpower should be 600-800, but seems to be now 500 or less in a BTG. Additionally they have artillery, logistics and air support. Ukraine has some thousand men in this area. It is more remarkable that they resist so well in this area.

    However, this does not change the situation in the whole war. Indeed, Russians attacking in Donbas suits Ukraine well, because by attacking their losses are larger and their power decreases faster. This is like the Battle of Kursk, where Germans tried a same kind of thing: Russians were in a caudron. Germany actually was winning and would have won, but Hitler stopped the battle because German losses were too high. It was losing too many tanks. The same is here. Russians should not waste power in gaining land because an Ukrainian counter-offense will come in some time, when they get the reserves equipped. Yes, Russia, excluding Donbas separatists’ troops, is outnumbered and Ukraine is getting weapons. There is very little Russia can do to turn the war to its advantage. Mobilization will not help because as West has decided that Russia cannot win, they will use their fighter jets to take air supremacy and probably strategic bombers to destroy Russian forces in Ukraine with precision munition, and Russia cannot respond in any way except for going nuclear, which it will not do. So, this is just a matter of time when the turning point of the war comes. But yes, you can always get local overpower, if you see any sense in it.

    • Replies: @Aaron Hilel
    , @stitchintime
  21. Ukraine, in contrast, does not allow a single peep of criticism of their war effort.

    This is an asymmetric comparison. Criticizing a legitimate defensive war is different from criticizing an illegal war of aggression. It is commonly known, that people in Russia, including foreign journalists, risk up to 15 years imprisonment if they even publicly refer to this embarrassing military debacle as a “war“.

    After more than three months, continuing to use the strictly mandated euphemism is clearly ridiculous. In light of this officially imposed threshold for engaging in public criticism, one has to appreciate the recent chants of thousands of concert attendees in St. Petersburg, who loudly expressed their opinion.

    Video (48 seconds) – ‘F— the war!’
    Russians defiantly chant against war in St Petersburg concert

    • Troll: Humbert Humbert
    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  22. Those people are idiotic Soviet remnants. There is just no other way to do things other than how they are currently being done. Back in 2016, the West’s response would have been exactly the same as now and Russia simply wasn’t ready so with all due respect, Strelkov should s t f u b/c he obviously isn’t capable of strategic thinking.
    Pertaining to the tactics, Russians try to avoid destroying the cities in order to save them and in the process, kill the people that they want to liberate. If your retirees, among whom I suspect many proved their worth in Afghanistan and the first Chechnya war, have a better idea on how to proceed without slaughtering the people who need to be saved from the Ukronazis’ boots, I’m sure Putin would be willing to listen

  23. Anon[137] • Disclaimer says:
    @roonaldo

    Rough ground forces involved

    60,000 DPR
    40,000 LPR
    10,000 various Allies
    80,000 RF

    The DPR and LPR militaries are liberating themselves to a large degree

    • Replies: @j2
  24. Since 2015 Russia openly responds to ISIS (ISRAELI SECRET INTELLIGENCE SERVICE) and not “only” in Syria in order to stop the Jewnighted States of Israhell to reopen and repoison the Russian Caucasus; also to put some leverage to the Jewkrainian debacle. Parallel Russia contains the sickened Soros-Georgia. At the same time Japan in the East and Turkey in the West started to exploit and contribute to the encirclement of Russia; not to mention all Trump’s Jewmerican Northstream evilness. Furthermore Russia is dealing daily with Jew Erdogan, but has finally stopped the Japanese crap. Dog Erdogan drains the well till his smelly jar breaks. It will break sooner or later. It will break. The day will come when Russia puts the Turkey in his (stolen too) place on the other side of the Bosporus. It will be the end of the ungrateful westernized sluts in Bulgaria and Greece too. The orthodox world will rejoice.
    Russia must be so sick of dealing with this ugly, ugly, ugly, evil JewWestVatican.
    But(t) no, Russia seems to be getting healthier and better by the day.
    Man proposes and God disposes, obviously.
    Russia has turned towards the Go(o)d,
    while the West is violently twisted in Judah.

  25. Realist says:
    @meamjojo

    Be serious! NO ONE with a grain of intelligence ever WANTS to go to war and risk being killed or crippled for life.

    This particularly pertains to U. S. military. I’m sure you agree…those that join the U.S. military do not have a grain of intelligence.

    • Agree: JR Foley
  26. @meamjojo

    I remember the American propaganda in the early days of war: Russian weapons can last only one week, Russian supply lines are too stretched, Russian economy is collapsing, basically the war will be over in a week… And now suddenly the Russian army was expected to trample Ukraine within the first week?

  27. @Kurt Knispel

    Good slogan, KK.

    It may be that there are now and will be sympathetic partisan forces to assist the drive and sweep away the judeo-masonic-pedo dross.

  28. @Tom Welsh

    I come from a seagoing/Navy family, Tom.
    It is very common and usual in those circles (plus dockyards etc) to refer to seagoing vessels as “boats”. Your critique of writer’s estimation of Moskva lacks any reference and as such has no validity beyond your simple opinion.

    • Agree: Bro43rd
  29. gotmituns says:

    “Military Analysts ”
    ——————————————————-
    Definition – A turd who sits around and BS’s about war, something he never took part in.

  30. j2 says:
    @Anon

    “Rough ground forces involved

    60,000 DPR
    40,000 LPR
    10,000 various Allies
    80,000 RF

    The DPR and LPR militaries are liberating themselves to a large degree”

    Both Luhansk and Donesk People’s Republics have around 2 million people. This means that they should be able to raise 200,000 men conscript army (18-65 years men). But as in all of late Soviet Union the army was neglected since 1991, many of the men do not have conscript service. General mobilization, that Russians have done in DPR and LPR and also (strangely enough) in occupied areas, which is extended to 65 years old, it should be possible to get at least 200,000 men from DPR and LPR together. If so, the total man power in the Russian side would be c. 300,000 men.

    Compare this to Ukraine. The land forces before the war were 170,000 men. First and second echelon reserves (i.e., reserves that are called to war exercises and should be ready for a war) is 200,000, these are land forces. Thus, Ukraine could put 370,000 men in arms in land forces in one month. It tool two months as mobilization is slower during war time, but they are in arms. Ukraine probably lost c. 20,000 men, so it has 350,000 men. Additionally it had 50,000 men in volunteer batallions (territorial troops), which today is probably 150,000 men and women. Men here are a part of Ukraine reserves, which were 600,000 men. Thus, there remained 600,000-200,000-150,000=250,000 men reserves. Adding these 600,000 reserves to Ukraine peace time army of 240,000, we have 840,000 men and enough women to make the sum about 1 million, or 900,000. This is the army that Ukraine is mobilizing today. All men have got conscript service, but there are also women who have not, which is not a problem as there are supporting tasks. We conclude that Ukraine does have a quite realistic prospect of mobilizing a million army, it probably is around 880,000. This is the force that is used against the 300,000. The force is just about three times larger, which means it will win in whole front attack, provided of course that it has appropriate weapons.

    Ukraine inherited lots of Soviet weapons. The Soviet Union is the main arms supplier for Ukraine, the old storage. The West is adding in weapons what is needed, and those are new weapons. The million army can be equipped. Additionally, Russia is already running short (that is not out, but unwilling to use because the weapons are intended for home land defense by the war time army, cannot be used in Ukraine for Putin’s war) of many weapons. As tanks Russia is already sending T-62s. It still has 1,500 T-90s and it has T-14s, but these are for home land defense, so in Ukraine Russians (and separatists) have to manage with old junk. Russia has lots of old junk, like 2,500 T-62 tanks, but most are unprotected against modern weapons and many do not run at all. Fighter jets also are a problem. Ukraine has indeed sot down c. 200 fighter jets. I just made a calculation of it, Ukraine figures are about correct. Russia has about 100-150 fighter jets that it can and is willing to use in this war. Then there are the cruise missiles. Russia has not used all it has, but about all it is willing to use in this war. Probably only some 100-200 remain that can be used in this war. The same is with many things. Russia is large, but it is not infinite.

    The situation in Ukraine is about the same as when Germany attacked the Soviet Union and the Soviets mobilized a larger army and got lend lease from the USA. What Hitler could do? Try to make a decisive battle, like in Stalingrad or in Kursk. It might have worked, but when it did not, finally the numbers make the difference. At the moment Putin is making an attack in Donbas after having gathered local overpower to do it. Probably in early June Russia adds still more power. But it does not matter. Those battles are not decisive battles and Russia only loses more men and equipment. It is all bluff. Putin hopes that Jews like Kissinger and NYT journalists will convince the USA that Ukraine must give the Eastern areas to Russia. But this will not succeed. Pentagon is not so completely Ziomerica as some here think. They see that Russia has no good moves left. Just wait and see, I expect an Ukrainian counter-offensive. It has all capabilities for doing it.

    • Replies: @ariadna
  31. anon[286] • Disclaimer says:
    @meamjojo

    Once again @meamjojo saves the day. With razor-sharp wit and unparalleled insight, he pierces the veil of academic pretense that attempts to obfuscate the woeful lack of substance underpinning the author’s thesis. @meamjojo has again proven himself to be a commentator of the highest caliber, a giant among pygmies, a God among mortal men. We know that this monstrous reincarnation of a certain Austrian lance corporal known as Putin is destined to evaporate in a Dresden-like curtain of flames that is soon to envelope Moscow. Keep fighting the good fight @meamjojo! You are the leading voice for truth amid a chaotic din of lies

    • LOL: Lurker, Bro43rd
  32. Bill says:
    @meamjojo

    NO ONE with a grain of intelligence ever WANTS to go to war and risk being killed or crippled for life.

    You are astonishingly ignorant.

    • Replies: @gotmituns
  33. Anon[292] • Disclaimer says:

    The US always has worked and continue to work with the Fascists and Ziofacists, Zelensky, a member of the Jewish mafia, to push its criminal agenda around the world.

  34. Laughing.

    Incorporating Neo Nazis into the Russian campaign to remove the supposed ills of Neo Nazis.

    Laugh.

    Well, it’s nice that some has actually admitted that Neo-Nazis exist in Russia.

    There simply was no reason for Russia to invade Ukraine period.

  35. bert33 says:

    Journatardz are very much the problem today and not just on war coverage bust coverage of any significant event because they just cant help but tweak the information they’re producing and put their opinions in it and some are just half-assed plagiaristic hypey-hacks. It’s bad.

  36. @j2

    RU are in process of shattering and encircling UKR forces in Donbass, I think its pretty clear to everyone.
    They do it without mass mobilization, using only their relatively small (smaller than UKR) peacetime army.
    US oligarchy is desperately pushing various weapon systems to UKR frontlines, hoping to buttress the crumbling front, yet it does not seem to work until now – artillery batteries are fed piecemeal into the grinder, achieving nothing at operational level.

    Last counter-attack of UKR forces at Charkow took four brigades to push back three battalions of DNR irregulars, then lost the territorial gains inside a week.
    The counter-attack at Cherson was a disaster, the lead mechanized battalions remnants becoming encircled and destroyed in process.

    Nothing leads me to believe that the same situation wont repeat at Odessa and Charkow – RU achieving an overwhelming local superiority, encircling and destroying relatively immobile UKR forces.

    Now, there’s a possibility that UKR HQ is planning an operational surprise – massing 2-3 regular divisions in Vinnitsa-Zhytomir axis and waiting for RU to overextend during their assault on Odessa, meanwhile feeding fifty years old reservists into Donbass grinder.
    To what extent this can remain hidden from RU satellite recon is unknown.

    P.S. Please stop the delirium about “Western strategic bombers destroying Russian forces with precision munitions”. Neither the oligarchs nor Israel want to become radioactive snow just yet.

    • Replies: @j2
    , @j2
  37. @j2

    Winning in Ukraine is survival for Russia
    they will definitely go nuclear rather than lose

    • Replies: @j2
  38. j2 says:
    @Aaron Hilel

    “RU are in process of shattering and encircling UKR forces in Donbass, I think its pretty clear to everyone.”

    Yes, but it has no military importance. If you group your forces to a small part of the front, then you have local overpower and can win in that part of the front. But what does it help you if you are globally weaker? All you achieve with the attack is that you gain some land (which you will later lose) and have heavy losses because attacking implies higher losses.

    “P.S. Please stop the delirium about “Western strategic bombers destroying Russian forces with precision munitions”. Neither the oligarchs nor Israel want to become radioactive snow just yet.”

    I simply gave an argument why Russia cannot make a larger mobilization. If it starts to seriously look like Russia is going to win, then Western countries that have decided that Russian must not win will respond. The easiest response they can do (and they have the planes to do it) is to take air supreiority and to bomb Russian troops from an altitude that Russian air defense (S-400) cannot reach. This can be done with precision munition. Russian cannot do so, as it wasted its precision bombs in Syria. This is why general mobilization is not any option open for Russia. Hidden mobilization is does already, but that will not raise many men.

    • LOL: Spanky
  39. j2 says:
    @stitchintime

    “Winning in Ukraine is survival for Russia
    they will definitely go nuclear rather than lose”

    They go to negotiations rather than nuclear. There are three ways: conventional war, negotiations, nuclear war.

    • Replies: @Herald
  40. j2 says:
    @Aaron Hilel

    “Last counter-attack of UKR forces at Charkow took four brigades to push back three battalions of DNR irregulars, then lost the territorial gains inside a week.”

    Ukraine has not lost most of the area it gained. While gaining this area Ukraine used its regular army, then gave this front to territorial troops. These troops do not have artillery. They have so far kept the area sufficiently well so that Russia has not much bombarded Charkiv. Ukraine regular army can take this area when it wants, but now it is better to have Russians fight territorial troops there and be tied from being used elsewhere.

  41. Anonymous[634] • Disclaimer says:

    As a supporter of Russia’s war against the West, I find it difficult to care about places like Krasnyi Lyman, Severodonetsk, Lysychansk or Zmeiny Island – or become convinced they’re important in the grand of scheme of things. The focus of Russia on these places and the enormous amount of time and energy it’s spending conquering them is demoralizing and making me question why even have a dog in this fight. If Russia were “going for the jugular” by attacking Kharkiv, Odessa or Kyiv – I’d at least understand it’s heading for important milestones. I’d still wonder what they’ll do once it’s over – but at least it makes sense to go after such targets. Russia is pushing away fans by engaging in a military equivalent of navel-gazing.

    Of course, the US administration is also doing something similar by obssessing about Ukraine – but I’m not on their side so I don’t care. It’s a net positive for them to do something stupid.

  42. Herald says:
    @Anonymous

    Have a look at Military Summary on Rumble, it seems objective and is delivered in a low key but informative way. https://rumble.com/c/c-1613003

    • Thanks: Spanky
    • Replies: @RobinG
    , @Anonymous
  43. @j2

    (…)Yes, but it has no military importance. If you group your forces to a small part of the front, then you have local overpower and can win in that part of the front. But what does it help you if you are globally weaker? All you achieve with the attack is that you gain some land (which you will later lose) and have heavy losses because attacking implies higher losses.

    When you want to attack somewhere, you usually mass your units and attempt to defeat the enemy, who in this age of satellites and drones detected you and reinforced his own forces.
    An operational surprise is rare to non-existent.

    Consider the battle of Kursk – both sides concentrated their best forces, which during the course of battle fought each other and became depleted and/or destroyed.
    The rest of the enormous front was irrelevant – until it appeared that Russians achieved their objectives, albeit at enormous cost and took strategic initiative that led them straight to Berlin two years later.

    The rest of your diatribe reads like something an over-excited ukrainian adolescent would write, so I will not comment on it;

    (…)The easiest response they can do (and they have the planes to do it) is to take air supreiority and to bomb Russian troops from an altitude that Russian air defense (S-400) cannot reach. This can be done with precision munition. Russian cannot do so, as it wasted its precision bombs in Syria. This is why general mobilization is not any option open for RU (…)

    • Troll: mulga mumblebrain
    • Replies: @j2
    , @mulga mumblebrain
  44. WZC
    The Zionist Congress was established in 1897 by Theodor Herzl as the supreme organ of the Zionist Organization (ZO) and its legislative authority. In 1960 the names were changed to World Zionist Congress (Hebrew: הקונגרס הציוני העולמי HaKongres HaTsioni HaOlami) and World Zionist Organization (WZO), respectively.

  45. gotmituns says:
    @Bill

    NO ONE with a grain of intelligence ever WANTS to go to war
    ———————————————————————
    When we were young Marine recruits at 17-18 years of age, we did. But that’s a long time ago now.

    • Agree: Spanky
  46. Herald says:
    @j2

    You watch CNN it would seem.?

  47. … I am unabashedly on team military/team patriot and hope that they gain a greater foothold in Russian politics as a result of the war.

    Good for you, young Rolo.
    Russia is the hope for the world against the demonic powers.
    Which actually are not really powerful in open combat, but we can see what they have prepared for you in bio-labs and similar assaults, theft, lies, piracy, murder of innocents and perversion of anything that is wholesome or good.

    Why the children of satan continue to post fantasies of how Russia is failing.
    Walls of text that get less and less plausible as events unfold.
    As their defeat and destruction draws closer with each dawning day.
    And the world rejoices to see it.

    Slava Rossiya.

    • Agree: Fred777
    • Replies: @RobinG
  48. @Been_there_done_that

    Damn, is this what they are writing in the Lithuanian press?

    It is commonly known, that people in Russia, including foreign journalists, risk up to 15 years imprisonment if they even publicly refer to this embarrassing military debacle as a war.

    Here is a link son, and if you know a little bit of Russian you will here the word war in every Russian talk show on TV every day – https://all-make.net/.

    And this video that you post here, you cheating little bastard is a short sample spinning over and over again for 48 seconds, you little piece of troll’s shit.

    The band is a spin-off of now retired Pussy Riot. Their most popular song is called Sit On My Face.

    Yes two thousand faggots in the hall are chanting fuck the war for ten seconds – so what?

    • LOL: JimDandy
    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  49. RobinG says:
    @Herald

    Agreed. The one I saw was factual, impartial, and nice to see the names of places located.

  50. RobinG says:
    @Arthur MacBride

    Russia is the hope for the world against the demonic powers.
    Slava Rossiya.

    Just so.

    Chechen Troops Awarded Nato Advanced Weapons Abandoned by Ukrainian Soldiers

    • Thanks: Arthur MacBride
  51. @j2

    These Ukrainians 🙂

    The easiest response they can do (and they have the planes to do it) is to take air supreiority and to bomb Russian troops from an altitude that Russian air defense (S-400) cannot reach.

    The S-400 system kid is using five types of missiles. The altitudes that they can reach range from 20 to 60 km.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_missile_system#Missiles

    • Replies: @j2
  52. Abbybwood says:
    @Anonymous

    TheDuran.locals.com

    Alex in Greece, Alexander (a lawyer) in London, Gonzalo Lira and Robert Barnes from time to time.

    I feel like they are distilling the facts and delivering them every day.

    They have other guests like Jacob Drizen.

  53. ariadna says:
    @j2

    Don’t be discouraged by critics. They have no sense of humor.

  54. ariadna says:
    @j2

    ” I expect an Ukrainian counter-offensive. It has all capabilities for doing it.”
    OK, but do it in front of a mirror and if you see your face turning blue, stop holding your breath.

    • Replies: @j2
  55. Who’s the dummy that photo shopped Andrew Anglin’s face into that meme purportedly showing Strelkov??

  56. peterAUS says:

    Motorola, Giwi, Bezler, Mozgovoy, Dremov, Pavlov…etc…. …………………………………………Strelkov….

  57. Avery says:

    The video above [Paratroopers of the Ukrainian 79th Airborne Assault Brigade complaining and blame the command]:

    I don’t know what kind of motley crew in the Ukraine Army gets to be called “Paratrooper Airborne Assault Brigade”.

    #1 They don’t look very fit: paratroopers of any military are best of the best.
    #2 They don’t look very young: some appear to be in their late 30s or early 40s.
    #3 What kind of “Airborne Assault Brigade” is sent to some place and told to dig-in: I thought paratroopers are supposed to land behind enemy lines and fight there to achieve some objective, not dig in like regular troops and wait for the enemy.

    Are the Ukis playing some kind of a joke, or is this for real?

    Check out both American and Russian airborne: young, fit guys.

    Russian paratroopers.

    US Airborne

  58. peterAUS says:
    @Avery

    At the other hand:

    Are the Ukis playing some kind of a joke, or is this for real?

    Real.

    Check out both American and Russian airborne: young, fit guys.

    Americans there: not in war.
    Russians there: on some show exercise. I’d like to see how VDV, from Gostomel, look now.

    #1 They don’t look very fit: paratroopers of any military are best of the best.

    Not quite. That’s reserved for the top tier SF.

    #2 They don’t look very young: some appear to be in their late 30s or early 40s.

    Senior NCOs are of that age. Most attached specialists too.

    #3 What kind of “Airborne Assault Brigade” is sent to some place and told to dig-in: I thought paratroopers are supposed to land behind enemy lines and fight there to achieve some objective, not dig in like regular troops and wait for the enemy.

    In theory.
    Monte Cassino. Bastogne. Etc.
    As for “dig in and wait for the enemy” that’s what they are actually supposed to do most of the time even if dropped behind enemy lines. Market Garden, especially 2 Para at Arnhem.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  59. @meamjojo

    What up youisjewjew? Look, your best hope is that after 15K Ukie troops are routed around Lyschychansk, some new scamdemic will be announced and you can go back to being on the right side of something.

  60. Anonymous[144] • Disclaimer says:
    @peterAUS

    Shouldn’t you be getting ready to invade the Solomon Islands over their willingness to enter into a defense agreement with China? Why are you wasting time here, when nobody gives two shits about what you have to say?

    • LOL: Spanky
  61. His face smoking “trash-herbs” tells all the history details.

  62. @Here Be Dragon

    …the word war in every Russian talk show on TV every day

    If they use the term “war” then they are likely talking about a hypothetical future military escalation or are referring to Ukraine or NATO waging war. This implication would logically derive from the premises set by the law.

    Below is a report from early March that forms the basis of my assertion. Before RT was shut down they did not use the term “war” and resorted to the mandated euphemism. Has the law passed by the parliament been revoked? (If so, I haven’t read about it.)

    In light of your regularly spreading false information here at this web site, you are a hypocrite to be glorifying a country that may impose harsh penalties for those who would do what you habitually engage in, but who target a Russian audience instead.

    I understand it must be an important move, up the career ladder, further into the stink-hole, to switch from being a propagandist on behalf of that shitty-little-country to supporting the big-shithole-country.

    https://crd.org/2022/03/04/russian-law-gives-up-to-15-years-in-prison-for-fake-information-about-the-war/

    4 March 2022

    Russian law gives up to 15 years in prison for “fake information” about the war

    Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the crack-down on Russian independent media has intensified. The country’s media regulator Roskomnadzor forbids describing the war as an “invasion” or “war”, insisting it be called a “special military operation”.

    The new law imposes prison terms of up to three years for fabricating “false” information; 10 years for disseminating false information using an official position, the internet, or a group of people; and 15 years for disseminating “false” information with socially dangerous consequences, according to the press freedom watchdog Committee to Protect Journalists.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  63. j2 says:
    @Aaron Hilel

    “When you want to attack somewhere, you usually mass your units and attempt to defeat the enemy, who in this age of satellites and drones detected you and reinforced his own forces.
    An operational surprise is rare to non-existent.”

    Russian offensive in Donbas was no surprise, I did not suggest an offensive should be a surprise. I pointed out some other things:

    The area where Ukrainian forces are near Sieviorodenesk is too small for Ukraine to put there more men. Ukraine resists quite well there. Russia is in the outer side and can amass more men, which they did. Russians advance slowly and takes heavy losses weakening its side. It is already clear that Russian cannot encirculate JFO forces in Donbas, so this battle of Donbas is not a decisive battle for the war. A possible encirculation is small, like encirculating Sievierodonesk, and Ukraine has too alternatives to consider: withdraw the forces or leave them there and tie Russian forces for the time (1-2 months) when Ukraine makes a counter-offensive in this area. Both are quite reasonable alternatives. Therefore we can conclude that taking land in this area has no military significance. The only significance is that Russia takes heavier losses than Ukraine because it attacks.

    Ukraine now made a counter-offensive in Kherson area and too about similar amount of land than what Russia in its best can take in a day. This is because Russia cannot be strong everywhere, the country is too large and Russia has too few men. Small forces can only be distributed in a large area in two ways: either you are in many places and weak everywhere, or you are in few places and the other places can be occupied by the opponent easily as you are not there. This is the main problem Russians will face.

    “The rest of your diatribe reads like something an over-excited ukrainian adolescent would write..”

    But I am not adolescent, nor Ukrainian and not over-excited. You should read again what I wrote and this time try to understand it. NATO is clearly superior to Russia in aircraft, especially fighter jets, and also in smart bombs. It can any time take air superiority in Ukraine. Russian long range air defense is first eliminated. Short range air defense will not reach bombers and NATO does not need to put troops on the ground (as Ukrainians are there), it can simply bomb Russians out of Ukraine. NATO, if it wants, can defeat Russia in Ukraine, but NATO does not want escalation. However, if Russia makes full mobilization, it is escalation to which NATO must respond. Full mobilization is what is done for a full-scale war against some opponent. We never know who the intended opponent is as today it is not customary to declare war. Therefore NATO must conclude in that situation that the mobilization is for faring a war against NATO, because it may be so. So they would have to respond, and respond in an effective way that does not imply that NATO must fight ground war. That means air operations. The implication it that it is not possible for Russia to escalate this local war without heavy risks. This is why Russia cannot make full-scale mobilization in the war in Ukraine, and will not make it unless Putin got crazy.

  64. j2 says:
    @ariadna

    “” I expect an Ukrainian counter-offensive. It has all capabilities for doing it.”
    OK, but do it in front of a mirror and if you see your face turning blue, stop holding your breath. ”

    Ukraine just did a conter-offensive in Kherson region, gained about as much land in a day as Russian offensive in Donbas in its best days. The counter-offensive I expect is not a frontal attack in all all theaters. It is small attacks in many places and occupying by light infantry (with portable antitank and aircraft weapons) such places where Russians are not. That is, pushing Russians slowly out. Not a mass attack of infantry of Stalin’s type. And why I expect this is the numbers:

    Ukraine has advantage in: men, situational awareness, morale, Western support.
    Russia has so far advantage in weapons, has better trained soldiers, and supplies.

    Ukraine is getting more weapons (so weapons will be more equal when this war continues) and will not run out of men. Russia is losing men and weapons, especially if it attacks. Russia apparently cannot reach any operational goals that mean a defeat of Ukraine (like encirculating the JFO forces or taking Kiev). It cannot force Ukraine to stop the war. Russia is running out of ideas how to win this war, taking some area in Donbas changes nothing: Ukraine can take some area elsewhere. If Russia manages to occupy what it wanted to occupy, Ukraine still will not make a ceasefire or peace, but will continue for a year at least. What exactly Russia can gain? How long will Russians and Ukrainian separatists want to fare war? Ukraine is doing self-defense, it will continue as long as it can, and it can do it long.

    From these considerations it follows that the best alternative for Russia is to withdraw its forces to where they were in 24. Feb. 2022. It cannot win. It should try not to lose. That is best done in a negotiating table.

  65. j2 says:
    @Here Be Dragon

    “The S-400 system kid is using five types of missiles. The altitudes that they can reach range from 20 to 60 km. ”

    For you, kid. I may be wrong, but I think that a stealth bomber cannot be detected by the radar of S-400 if the altitude is sufficient (sure Russians claim that it can, but Russians claim many things).

  66. @Avery

    The physical fitness of Ukie conscripts and reservists is immaterial. The goal is not to win the war against the Russians, as I said, you have to have the IQ of flies to believe that can happen, the goal is to drag out things to weaken Russia. Therefore Ukrainian men quantity matters much more than their quality.
    Never underestimate how sinister Western political leadership can be but don’t make the mistake of surmising that b/c they’re sinister, they’re smart, because they aren’t. Not being able to predict entirely predictable consequences of one’s actions isn’t a trait of smart people, it’s a trait of idiots.

  67. @j2

    Yes you are wrong.

    First of all for any radar it’s harder to detect a target at low altitudes. And second the radar used with the S-400 an detect a stealth aircraft from 150 km.

    Why do you think the Yankees decided to not sell F-35 to the Turks – they don’t want the Turks to say that S-400 can detect these very expensive toys.

    “A Russian-made S-400 air-defense system could detect an F-35 at 20 miles, Air Force estimated. It could pick up an F-15EX 200 miles away.”

    Not So Stealthy: Russia’s S-400 Can Detect an F-15EX From 200 Miles Away
    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/not-so-stealthy-russias-s-400-can-detect-f-15ex-200-miles-away-197765

    “The S-400 is prized for its ability to engage up to 80 targets simultaneously, and its high situational awareness provided by multiple complementary radars which allow it to engage stealth targets reliably.”

    Russia’s S-400 Missile System Gains First Blood in Ukraine
    https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/russia-s-s-400-missile-system-gains-first-blood-in-ukraine-su-27-shot-down-150km-away-reports

    • Replies: @j2
    , @j2
  68. Apparently a third of Western weapons reach the front…and get pulverized the moment they show up.
    The Ukrainian army is exhausted. Jewtube had to wipe 9.000 vids to hide the fact that Jewkraine is on the way out. Israhell has pulled back with delivering and has yet another “gvt. crisis”. Ukis are almost everywhere retreating already. Azov vanished like hot air in Siberia and preferred to lift their skirts showing their inked tits with kind regards to Bergoglio & Berlin.
    A few exploits (often dangerously carried out just to have a little propaganda) do not change the overall picture. ZionLendski is rotating and trying to save his neck by selling Ukraine short to the Poolackeys; of course – off course – without asking the sovereign. Which sovereign? The Russians of Novorussia? Melnyk, the Jewbassador in Jewermany is abusively jumping up and down, because German companies have cold feet like after JWW2 and drag em without end in sight.
    The Russian Forces have their contracts, have their pay rises, have their families looked after, have their honor, have their laws (instead of Jewrules), are professional and concentrating “on the job”.
    And Russia has not even started a war…yet.
    That too is the research result of a famous Jewish anal-ist (in every sense of the word) and (former or still?) presidential advicer named Thierry Meyssan:
    “A new war is being prepared for after the defeat in the face of Russia”
    https://www.voltairenet.org/article217016.html

    Right now the Jewish regime over Kiew is burning all Russian books.
    When this is over Russia must abolish “Ukrainian” and abolish the Catholic priesthood and the Rabbis.

  69. @Been_there_done_that

    Nonsense.

    That’s because if it was called a war on the official level, people would start asking questions like why hasn’t the Ukrainian government been annihilated yet, or why at least the port in Odessa hasn’t been bombed yet, or at the very least, why haven’t the bridges been destroyed yet, etc.

    The country’s media regulator Roskomnadzor forbids describing the war as an “invasion” or “war”, insisting it be called a “special military operation”.

    For this reason all the official sources refer to the war as special military operation. Neither the media regulator nor the law forbids describing the war as war but the term military operation is used, for if that was a war the Russian forces would have hit Ukraine like the US did in Yugoslavia.

    There is no problem from the technical point of view to attack and demolish the Ukrainian power plants, government buildings, bridges and leave the entire country paralyzed, and as the Americans call it, in shock and awe. However the Russians are not doing this because it’s not really a war.

    If they use the term “war” then they are likely talking about a hypothetical future military escalation or are referring to Ukraine or NATO waging war.

    Of course not. Here is a couple of non-official Russian web sites registered on the Russian domain. A war in Ukraine in Russian looks like this — Война на Украине. See for yourself and translate the page if you want. No media regulator has banned these sites and no one has been arrested.

    Почему началась война на Украине: что там делает Россия?
    https://wsem.ru/publications/pochemu_nachalas_voina_1676/

    Here they even have a category called “war in Ukraine”.
    https://voenhronika.ru/publ/vojna_na_ukraine/60

    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  70. Anonymous[389] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    There is no reason to think the Americans are going to commit those kinds of resources, let alone active involvement (they’re not going to give the Ukraine stealth bombers, LOL). In fact they’re already backing off here (recent comments by Kissinger, NYT, etc calling for Ukrainian negotiations and concessions), which is a good indication that the Ukraine is not winning the war (and certainly isn’t going to).

    • Replies: @j2
  71. Spanky says:
    @j2

    I may be wrong, but I think… — j2

    I’ll bet on the former, but doubt the latter.

    The difference between what you think and Russian capabilities? Russians have experience with high, fast, and out-of-reach… frustratingly so, as a mater of fact. Might they have plans for that? Or is it still consensus opinion of ZATO analysts here, that Russians are just fat, dumb and stupid? And corrupt. Far more corrupt than Ukrainians or Americans. Fatally so. (And their weapons don’t work… no, really. And they don’t have enough of ’em anyway.)

    Still pushing the Kagans’ ISW as neutral and objective? Asked Kimberly for that raise yet?

  72. j2 says:
    @Here Be Dragon

    Hi Putin kid, are you aware that F-35 and F-15EX are multipurpose fighters, not strategic stealth bombers?

  73. j2 says:
    @Here Be Dragon

    Putin kid. There is no such thing as a stealth fighter because a fighter must have weapons outside and they must have corners that give radar reflection. But there are strategic stealth bombers. I give you, kind, an analogy. You see a professional carpenter with a hammer. You do not need to wonder whether this hammer works in the job it is designed to do, to hit a nail into a wall. If this particular hammer did not work, a professional man would have changed the tool to one that does. The same is with militaries. Military weapons work in the job they are meant for because otherwise militaries would replace them. So, the idea of a stealth bomber is that it cannot be seen in a radar when correctly used. You think is can, but why do you think a hammer does not do the job a hammer is meant to do, kid?

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  74. @Here Be Dragon

    However the Russians are not doing this because it’s not really a war.

    Even in light of such contrived reinterpretations, the heavy-handed Speech Police measures passed by the parliament should be unnecessary. The fact that they exist at all serves as a significant constraint on public thought and expression. People who do not conform to the narrow parameters of the official line on this issue are risking prosecution, including those who openly challenged the war at that concert. It is a clear manifestation of an unhealthy society and will remind older people of the restrictions that existed under the USSR.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  75. j2 says:
    @Anonymous

    “There is no reason to think the Americans are going to commit those kinds of resources, let alone active involvement (they’re not going to give the Ukraine stealth bombers, LOL). In fact they’re already backing off here (recent comments by Kissinger, NYT, etc calling for Ukrainian negotiations and concessions), which is a good indication that the Ukraine is not winning the war (and certainly isn’t going to). ”

    Of course the USA would not give Ukraine strategic stealth bombers. But in some occasion it might use them for its own purposes in any country, even in Ukraine. Good that you brought up this Kissinger and NYT journalists. I learned in this site (owned by a Jew, I think, yet so concerned of Jewish power) that there is a lot of Jewish power in the USA. Like that Kissinger is Jewish and NYT is Jewish and so on. So, Jewish power wants to tell that Ukraine has no chance of winning. But military people say that Russia has no chance of winning and Ukraine has a chance if it correctly uses its strengths. Whom should I believe? Jewish power, Main Stream Media and a grey Jewish eminence like Kissinger? Or military analysts, who say the same that my own military analysis of the situation shows? You think I should trust Kissinger and MSM rather than my own deductions based on my ten years work in the military?

    I think you must be a Jewish troll if you think I better trust Jewish sites than my own intelligence. It used to be in this site that there were very many hasbara trolls, they were pro-Jewish and anti-Nazi (and very rude and stupid). A bit later there were neo-Nazi trolls, they were anti-Jewish and pro-Nazi. To me they seemed to be the same trolls, only using a different name. Now they are Putin trolls, but they still look like the same trolls, only now they are anti-Nazi and anti-Jewish. But I guess they are the same trolls, or maybe I should say, propagandist, it is more elegant to use this longer name.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Sarah
  76. @Been_there_done_that

    You are surprising me being a committed pacifist, and not having heard about the difference between war and conflict.

    Even in light of such contrived reinterpretations, the heavy-handed Speech Police measures passed by the parliament should be unnecessary.

    The concept is used in modern politics. There are numerous works on that and a number of definitions. Here is one.

    “All war is conflict, yet not all conflict is termed war, with the spectrum extending from ‘no conflict’ situations – like humanitarian relief – up to and including ‘total war’ between states. This reaffirms that conflict, at any level, is a competition of political and human will that can use violent and non-violent means to influence a diverse group of actors to achieve the political objective.” – Australian Army Research Centre, Land Warfare Doctrine.

    Here is another.

    “War is the continuation of a group’s – be it a tribal element, community, nation-state or super-state – policy using violence as the primary means of coercion. Conflict is the continuation of a group’s policy where violence is one method that either complements another primary means of coercion, or rotates primacy with other non-violent means throughout the conflict.”

    As for the Speech Police measures it’s intended to stop the spreading of black propaganda, like the stories about the Russian troops raping children in Ukraine, etc. The punishment of imprisonment is reserved for cases when such information lead to a violent event – for example, one blogger had been calling to burn cars with state plates and to publish the names of soldiers and officers on the internet.

    He was detained, questioned, let go and immigrated. Now he is writing the same from Tel Aviv. But in case some of the soldiers’ mothers get a phone call with someone telling them their son has been killed, and then a mother has a heart attack or a bride commits suicide, then the person who exposed their personal information might be charged with being responsible for these repercussions.

    The fact that they exist at all serves as a significant constraint on public thought and expression. People who do not conform to the narrow parameters of the official line on this issue are risking prosecution, including those who openly challenged the war at that concert.

    None of the people who were at that concert were risking prosecution, nothing bad has happened to these punk rockers. No one has been charged or arrested. No one has paid a fine. You can chant “Fuck the war” – that’s not a crime. You can’t chant “The Russians kill children” because that’s a lie and such a lie is dangerous. You can’t spread war propaganda like the stories about killings in Bucha, etc.

    • Thanks: Sarah
    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  77. peterAUS says:
    @Avery

    Age wise:
    https://ground.news/article/vladimir-putin-signs-new-law-that-removes-the-age-limit-for-serving-in-the-russian-military_61574e
    One way to look at it:

    Russia is presenting it as a move to recruit more technical specialists.

    Another is to scrap the bottom of the barrel of the part of the underclass willing to risk getting maimed or killed to temporary escape it’s misery.
    Part of the plan. Interestingly enough, it IS, just not that one Putintards believe in. It’s good plan, actually, unless one is part of that strata of society.

  78. @j2

    Alright let me apologize for calling you a kid. You are not a kid. You are a grown man. But talking like a kid 🙂

    Look,

    There is no such thing as a stealth fighter because a fighter must have weapons outside and they must have corners that give radar reflection. But there are strategic stealth bombers.

    The F-35 has two internal weapons pockets and for that it’s called a stealth aircraft. All new 5th generation aircraft are stealth. The F-22 and the Russian Su-57 and the Chinese J-20 – all of them are stealth, all have the weapons concealed in internal bays.

    This is the F-35 with the bays open. The difference with the B-2 bomber is in size and the amount of weapons it an carry. The bomber is larger and therefore easier to detect. And these aircraft are not as stealth as some people think.

    Two of the first model, F-117 Nighthawk were shot down in Yugoslavia. And that was a long time ago. Now there are new generation radars, new missiles. There is no such an airraft that is undetectable. And the ceiling of both B-2 and F-35 is rather low – 15 km.

    Now there are 6th generation drones being developed, in the US and in Russia. Older design like that with weapons outside has been abandoned, from now on all new aircraft are going to be stealth. Here is the new Russian Sukhoi S-70 drone.

    • Replies: @j2
  79. Anonymous[422] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    Umm, no, I’m not a Jewish troll, to put it mildly. I really have no idea why you would put any trust in the US Military, whose commanders are all political appointees who are just as subservient to GloboHomo as the rest of the DC sewer, even if perhaps they serve one faction vs another.

    I’m not saying you should trust Kissinger per se, obviously. What I am saying is, he represents an older, more realistic faction of the oligarchy, who recognizes that blindly throwing resources at the Ukrainian war effort is a lost cause, and, to protect an already over-extended globalist oligarchy, a strategic withdrawal is necessary.

    You should believe him more than the Pentagon or the liberal American political class simply because their whole “Ukraine is winning” propaganda was never even slightly believable. (They are the only source of these laughable claims, eg, that the Russians intended to capture Kiev with a tiny strike force.) Hence it makes sense that more sober oligarchs are urging a pull-back, since that’s clearly what’s called for.

    • Replies: @j2
  80. @Here Be Dragon

    As for the Speech Police measures it’s intended to stop the spreading of black propaganda, like the stories about the Russian troops raping children in Ukraine, etc.

    Since it had the effect of many foreign journalists and news organizations withdrawing their operations from Moscow, with those remaining then engaging in self-censorship, that was surely also the intent. When Russian troops rape cute or sexy-looking teenage girls because they assume they can get away with it, then reporting about this is not “black propaganda“.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  81. @Been_there_done_that

    Let me remind you that all – literally all, Russian media outlets have been banned not only in Ukraine, but in Europe and the US. And they had been banned before the Western media were banned in Russia.

    And believe it or not but there are no fake stories about the Ukrainian atrocities in the Russian press, whereas the real stories with all the factual evidence, with videos of the Ukrainians torturing the Russian soldiers are not shown in the West.

    There is no evidence of these accusations of rape and therefore it’s propaganda. Had there been a factual evidence, these stories would have been allowed in the Russian press. The law prohibits only spreading of false information.

    With an evidence the information can’t be considered false.

  82. There is no evidence of these accusations of rape and therefore it’s propaganda. Had there been a factual evidence, these stories would have been allowed in the Russian press.

    Knowing that the reporting of rape is basically banned will encourage soldiers to engage in such activity. Evidence in such cases, under the circumstances of war, is hard to compile unless the perpetrators filmed themselves doing it and then put the evidence on the Internet, as some have done in India (another big-shithole-country). As in the case of the war atrocities committed in Bucha, including by Wagner mercenaries, even if the evidence is available, some will refuse to want to believe it, because it contradicts their mental expectations, and they will reflexively claim it was faked, therefore “false”.

    • Agree: peterAUS
  83. @Aaron Hilel

    S400 operational ceiling is from 30-60 km. I’d love to see you bombing anything from that altitude. Your combination of ignorance, arrogance and mendacity is just SO American.

    • Replies: @j2
  84. Anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @Herald

    Have a look at Military Summary on Rumble, it seems objective and is delivered in a low key but informative way.

    Yes, Military Summary does seem quite different compared to all the excitable types who have a point to prove.

    The commentator on MS plainly explains which bits of information are from Russian sources, which are from Ukrainian sources, and which are his personal opinion. The maps he uses are superb and he imparts the information in a straightforward way that suggests to the viewer that this war is serious business (which it is).

    Many thanks for mentioning this channel. It makes for a welcome contrast from some of the rubbish I have been subjected to elsewhere.

    (I am torn between wanting the earnest, well-spoken fellow at MS to pick up more subscribers and wanting an end to this ghastly slaughter, regardless of who prevails.)

  85. j2 says:
    @Here Be Dragon

    Fine, I will not call you Putin kid if you stop calling me names. I also do not write like a kid, only you do not understand this field, like seems to be the case with you in any field where you have commented something in this site.

    Whether a radar can or cannot see an aircraft depends on radar cross section that the aircraft has and on the distance. Planes that are designed to be stealth planes are intended to be invisible for a radar when used as intended, that is, when flying on a high enough altitude so that stealth properties suffice to make the plane practically invisible to a radar.

    Because multirole fighters make missions when they are too close to radars for any stealth properties to make them invisible, we should not all a fighter a stealth aircraft. It is an aircraft that may have some stealth properties, but the way it is intended to be used is in violation with the operating principle of a stealth plane, which is being invisible to (conventional) radars.

    Stealth properties are made by a design of the air craft that avoids giving an y surfaces from which radar signal can reflect to the same radar, even a stealth plane can be detected by coordinating two radars. The operating principle of a stealth plane is to fly the plane at such an altitude that stealth properties designed to it make it sufficiently invisible so that the plane is not shot down by air defense. This principle can be followed by strategic stealth bombers with precision munition. It cannot be followed by multirole fighters, which may be called e.g. to close air support. The same design principles for stealth properties can be used in both planes (though the multirole fighter has weapons outside and certainly gives radar cross section from them), yet one plane can be used as a stealth plane (fly high), another not (cannot always fly high).

    Is this now clear to you? Let us stop this useless splitting of hair. You know very well that NATO airforces are superior to those of Russia and Russia does not want a conventional war with NATO as it will lose it. NATO also does not want a conventional war with Russia as it does not want a war with a nuclear power. But as a result, Russia cannot make full mobilization for Ukraine, it has too high risks of escalating the war.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  86. j2 says:
    @Anonymous

    “I really have no idea why you would put any trust in the US Military, whose commanders are all political appointees who are just as subservient to GloboHomo as the rest of the DC sewer, even if perhaps they serve one faction vs another.”

    I do not put any trust in the US Military in military analysis of the war in Ukraine. I can make military analysis of this war all by myself using available open source information. Actually the defense method used by Ukraine is very close to what is called territorial defense.

    You can compare what Kissinger thinks of the war with what David H. Petraeus, retired 4star general, also in the board of the Institute for the Study of War, said of the war around 1. May
    https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3475424-david-h-petraeus-director-of-the-cia-20112012.html

    “And I think before this is all said and done, that the Russians will surrender much of what they have gained, not because they gave it up, but because the Ukrainians took it back. And I think again, the next week or two will be pivotal, both because of the approach of the World War 2 victory celebration in Moscow on 9 May again, at which Vladimir Putin would like to have significant victories to announce, but likely will not. And then as the Ukrainians introduce all this new capability into their forces, they will retake some of the territory that they had to grudgingly give up under the pressure of the Russian offensive in the East and in the southeast.”

    Territorial defense strategy is designed to be able to push the enemy back. It does not require that your forces are stronger than those of the opponent, the basic assumption is that they are inferior in many respect. The concept works by local overpower and so called home field advantage, which you have to realize from the few strengths you have. It is not at all easy to push back a stronger enemy, but it is possible. Territorial defense is defense in depth, but it is not classical defense in depth. It is defensive warfare combined with few units capable of offensive and local superiority.

    If we look at the military situation in Ukraine, then Russia now has occupied some parts of Ukraine. It is not going to leave these parts without being pushed out. Either Ukraine accepts that Russia took these parts, or it must push Russia back. Nothing indicates that Ukraine accepts that Russia took these parts, so Ukraine will try to push Russia back and it is only a matter of time when they (must) make operational level counter-offensives. Ukraine will not get so much weapon help that it would be in every respect stronger. Thus, pushing Russian back is not made with a similar way that some stronger country (like the USA or Russia) would do. Ukraine, if trying to push Russians back, has only few alternatives. One is irregular war, it pushes the enemy back in 10 years, not good. Or territorial defense, which they seem to have been using all the time. Thus, they will do it in the way it is done in territorial defense. By the principles and concepts, like the enemy is not where it is not, so you can move there. With small forces you control 10 km around yourself, not much more. Just think inventively, consider what strengths you have, it is possible.

    That is, I never “trust in the US Military” or trust any analysis of anything made by others. I always make my own analysis of everything. But you do not seem to have made your own analysis, or any analysis. You have to think creatively, make your own analysis. Do not trust either side, check yourself.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  87. Sarah says:
    @j2

    I think you must be a Jewish troll if you think I better trust Jewish sites than my own intelligence. It used to be in this site that there were very many hasbara trolls, they were pro-Jewish and anti-Nazi (and very rude and stupid). A bit later there were neo-Nazi trolls, they were anti-Jewish and pro-Nazi. To me they seemed to be the same trolls, only using a different name. Now they are Putin trolls, but they still look like the same trolls, only now they are anti-Nazi and anti-Jewish. But I guess they are the same trolls, or maybe I should say, propagandist, it is more elegant to use this longer name.

    Trolls are paid to make propaganda or diversion. They act as mercenaries. They don’t give their personal opinions; they write what the people who pay them want.

  88. The JewWest has the Great Resignation and therefore needs anal ice and
    salivates over THE RUSSIAN RESTORATION.
    https://www.rt.com/business/556078-great-resignation-here-to-stay/

  89. Vladimir Shamanov – Colonel General of the Russian Army, Hero of Russia. Deputy Chairman of the 8th State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation Committee on the Development of Civil Society, Public and Religious Associations seems an analyst worth listening to.
    In his interview to the project Power of One, General Vladimir Shamanov talks about special operations in Ukraine and combat operations in Chechnya. About the difficult fate of generals Troshev, Lebed, Lev Rokhlin and others. About what awaits Ukraine after the war. About the fate of Russia on soldiers’ mothers. About the traitors of the Motherland. What awaits the nationalists from Azovstal?

    And a transcript would be nice for friends of Russia who hardly understand Russian let alone subtleties of this important interview…

  90. j2 says:
    @mulga mumblebrain

    Mumblebrain:

    “S400 operational ceiling is from 30-60 km. I’d love to see you bombing anything from that altitude.”

    The altitude where a given air defense system can protect does not only depend on how high the missiles can fly but whether its radars can spot and home on targets in a sufficiently short time window. Airspace to scan gets bigger as the square of the altitude, so the ability to scan these targets fast enough is also an issue. Additionally trying to shoot B-2 with S-400 may well turn out that B-2 destroys S-400 with a HARM missile. Russians do claim that they can spot and shoot down US stealth aircraft. Americans say that Russians make many claims and they do not think Russians have this capability.

    As for bombing from 30-60 km. It is not done so. B-2 stealth bomber reaches the altitude 15 km and can do attack missions from that altitude. It probably lowers from the maximum altitude for bombing but returns fast to a high altitude. S-400 almost certainly cannot home its radar to B-2 if the stealth plane uses all its possibilities (it can jam the missile, spread chass, shoot a countermissile etc.)

    So, the issue whether S-400 can protect or not is not at all so clear. Do not trust Russian claims too much, and neither trust the Americans. We do not really know. Personally I think S-400 cannot do it in practice, but military technology evolves fast. There are measures and countermeasures and neither side knows what the other side actually can do because too much is secret.

  91. @j2

    You apparently haven’t seen the photos that were included in my comment.

    Because multirole fighters make missions when they are too close to radars for any stealth properties to make them invisible, we should not call a fighter a stealth aircraft. It is an aircraft that may have some stealth properties, but the way it is intended to be used is in violation with the operating principle of a stealth plane, which is being invisible to (conventional) radars.

    First, they are called multirole aircraft because they can be used is various roles, including performing a bomber’s task. Second, as you correctly mentioned they are only invisible to conventional radars. The S-400 uses several different anti-stealth radar stations at once.

    The operating principle of a stealth plane is to fly the plane at such an altitude that stealth properties designed to it make it sufficiently invisible so that the plane is not shot down by air defense.

    This principle can be followed by strategic stealth bombers with precision munition. It cannot be followed by multirole fighters, which may be called e.g. to close air support. The same design principles for stealth properties can be used in both planes (though the multirole fighter has weapons outside and certainly gives radar cross section from them), yet one plane can be used as a stealth plane (fly high), another not (cannot always fly high).

    The ceiling – i.e. the maximum altitude a plane can operate at, for the stealth B-2 bomber is 15 km. The F-35 has the same ceiling. As you can see on the photos, F-35 does not have weapons outside. And the anti-stealth radars of the S-400 have a range of 400 km. Three or four radars placed at different locations illuminate the target from angles where the radar cross-section (RCS) is sub-optimal.

    You know very well that NATO airforces are superior to those of Russia and Russia does not want a conventional war with NATO as it will lose it. NATO also does not want a conventional war with Russia as it does not want a war with a nuclear power. But as a result, Russia cannot make full mobilization for Ukraine, it has too high risks of escalating the war.

    The NATO air forces are superior to those of Russia due to a larger number of 5th generation aircraft, however the Russian air defense is superior to that of NATO and NATO anti-missile systems can’t intercept the Russian hypersonic weapons. A conventional war with NATO would result in destruction of the NATO command centers. Perhaps even the GPS satellites, without which no precision munitions work.

    Russia might not have enough of firepower to attack NATO and win on the NATO’s turf, but has enough to defend itself in the event of being attacked by NATO. And potential mobilization for Ukraine has nothing to do with it.

    Russia is currently using only a half of its contract forces.

    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  92. Anonymous[346] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    Petraeus is a text-book example of what I’m referring to, a bureaucrat who didn’t do much to distinguish himself in Iraq, I don’t really lend him much credence on any of this.

    Your main problem here is that you seem to think you have sufficient reliable information to carry out any “analysis” of the military situation on the ground. The only information coming out of Ukraine is American-controlled, ie they’re mainly fighting a propaganda war. It never made any sense that the Ukraine was “winning”, and of course their actions from day 1 (pressing untrained civilians into action, etc) never supported such fantasy. No war goes according to plan so it’s largely irrelevant if the Russians have encountered setbacks (which are inevitable). They’ve only committed a fraction of their forces and there has never been serious doubt that they will achieve their (stated) limited aims.

    The fact that western media have gone from ludicrous “Ukraine is winning” agit-prop to more sober “they need to make concessions” is classic narrative control, and we can reasonably conclude that they are prepping their western normie audiences for the inevitability of a Russian victory.

    • Replies: @j2
  93. @Here Be Dragon

    And the anti-stealth radars of the S-400 have a range of 400 km.

    Since this S-400 defense system has been installed in Syria for more than six years already, perhaps you could explain why it has not even been able to shoot down any of the Israeli military jets that have been attacking positions in that country during this time, even though some of those attacks may have effectively been executed by using civilian aircraft as shields.

    Doesn’t Russia still have a score to settle with Israel regarding the bombing of its Metrojet Flight 9268 passenger jet, which killed 224 people over the Sinai on its way to St Petersburg in October 31, 2015, the destruction of which was even filmed by drone during the period of the “Blue Flag” exercises, based in the Negev Desert? Or was the installation of the S-400 system in December 2015 supposed to have been the payback?

    The incident, possibly caused by a bomb placed inside the rear lavatory by operatives posing as “cleaning crew”, occurred less than 24 hours after the following story appeared:

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-hosts-its-largest-ever-international-air-force-exercise/

    October 30, 2015

    Israel hosts its largest-ever international air force exercise

    Israeli, American, Greek, and Polish air personnel square off against a fictional enemy state in two-week drill

  94. j2 says:
    @Anonymous

    “agit-prop”

    I am old and I know this word, there were those agit-props when I was yung. It meant Russian propaganda.

    “Your main problem here is that you seem to think you have sufficient reliable information to carry out any “analysis” of the military situation on the ground. The only information coming out of Ukraine is American-controlled, ie they’re mainly fighting a propaganda war.”

    No, it is not. There is so called research education that teaches you how to find and evaluate data. I am capable of making my own analysis. I strongly advice you and all others to use your own brain. You can both get enough information of this war and evaluate it yourself if you search for the information and do some calculations. These calculations are quite simple, just addition and subtraction to find out very clearly that Russia is lying and Ukraine information is not so much off. But do it yourself and convince yourself, I have done it, so I can give you a hint that this is the case, but I never try to convince anybody (the agit-prop is not me, it is Mr. Anonymous, I am not anonymous). Do the study yourself, use the best data you can find, make the best analysis you can do, and you will find the same as I did. That is, because that’s how it is.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  95. @Been_there_done_that

    Yes of course all of your questions will be answered, my dear Lithuanian Nazi opponent, as long as you are asking politely.

    Since this S-400 defense system has been installed in Syria for more than six years already, perhaps you could explain why it has not even been able to shoot down any of the Israeli military jets that have been attacking positions in that country during this time.

    The S-400 system in Syria is supposed to defend the Russian military base and not the other countries installations there. All of the attacks at the Russian base have been countered with absolute success, including the attacks with a number of kamikaze drones.

    Doesn’t Russia still have a score to settle with Israel regarding the bombing of its Metrojet Flight 9268 passenger jet, which killed 224 people over the Sinai on its way to St Petersburg?

    No, Russia has no score to settle, because the investigation showed traces of explosives that were found in the wreckage. Spectral analysis was used to examine the substance found and it was concluded that an explosive device was brought down the flight.

    At the same time, a terrorist group called Ansar Bait al-Maqdis claimed responsibility for the incident.

    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  96. Anonymous[188] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    Actually it was Soviet propaganda, but sure. I trust you’re old enough to recognize that the Americans basically now do the same things the Soviets did?

    Perhaps you’re familiar with the concept of garbage in, garbage out? Of course the Russian government lies, all governments do. But there’s a real asymmetry here, and the amount of lies told by the Americans (there is no notion of Ukrainian information, it’s all American-run, indeed their entire government is an American operation) dwarfs anything said by the Russians.

    • Replies: @j2
  97. @Been_there_done_that

    You two scumbags really like to talk every comment thread dead.
    You scumbags got to know that everything you do comes back to you in multiples.
    The weeds you are sowing here will poison your own backyard and usually when you have forgotten all about having sown it. Then you are going to wonder and – bingo – you are again poor innocent victims.

    Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

  98. j2 says:
    @Anonymous

    ” I trust you’re old enough to recognize that the Americans basically now do the same things the Soviets did?”

    You trust correctly, but for me a war where big Russia attacks small Russia is as emotionally loaded as if Uzbekistan had attacked Turkmenistan. You are far too emotional in your support of Russia, and always have to mention the big bad USA as anybody would care. Just focus on military issues, that’s all I am interested of, or find some other commenter to discuss with.

    But you are clearly wrong in this:

    “But there’s a real asymmetry here, and the amount of lies told by the Americans (there is no notion of Ukrainian information, it’s all American-run, indeed their entire government is an American operation) dwarfs anything said by the Russians. ”

    The opposite is the case. I did do some calculations. Ukrinform information is much closer to the truth than Russian information as far as losses are concerned. Make your own calculations (I mean honestly, not as an agit-prop), you will come to the same conclusion.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  99. Anonymous[262] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    Not sure how you infer “emotionalism” in what I say about Russia, indeed there’s really no kind of support as such for them, the war there should be of no great concern to America or Europe.

    It’s pretty clear this mess is entirely due to America’s interference and insistence on NATO membership for Ukraine, so this idea of unprovoked Russian aggression is simply false. Having lived through US government lies about Iraq, 9-11, etc I can assure you, the level of pro-Ukrainian propaganda by the American media (really an equivalent of Pravda at this stage) is without any kind of precedent, it’s truly mind-boggling in its hysteria. Hence when I see them start talking about the war suddenly going badly for Ukraine, I know we’re witnessing a 1984 Minitrue moment. You don’t need a garbage calculation to draw the necessary conclusion.

    • Replies: @j2
  100. @Here Be Dragon

    …my dear Lithuanian Nazi opponent…

    A few days ago I was supposed to be a lying Talmudic Jew, and now this, a completely different fantasy, gets expressed. The amateurism is simply amusing.

    The S-400 system in Syria is supposed to defend the Russian military base and not the other countries installations there.

    That seems very cynical. I thought Russia was supposed to provide assistance to Syria and those forces operating there with the government’s approval. Wasn’t the purpose of Russia’s presence there to help achieve the goal of ending the occupation of Syria by all foreign forces?

    …it was concluded that an explosive device was brought down the flight.

    Yes, we all knew that already, and I did not claim otherwise; the explosion was seen in the surveillance drone video released a few days later, captured from the rear, presumably as it was loitering high above the southern Negev desert along the border with Egypt, given the view angle and image reversal in that video.

    …a terrorist group called Ansar Bait al-Maqdis claimed responsibility…

    This is not unusual in a false-flag type of operation, that somebody will claim responsibility for a bombing incident. However, this organization you mentioned was active in the Sinai and had no conflict with Russia, hence no motive, whereas Israel, which continues to occupy Syrian territory, was very upset that Russia had just moved into Syria in September 2015 – only a few weeks prior to that incident. What matters is who actually did it.

    There had previously been an incident in which an explosive device aboard a civilian aircraft had exploded (Pan Am Flight 103). It was supposed to have happened over the ocean (probably as in the case of the Airbus operated by Russia), but the 747 crashed onto the ground in Scotland, on September 21, 1988 – only six days after the following diplomatic breakthrough was announced, which the Israeli leadership was extremely upset about (they were still in the process of trying to build a coalition government but then immediately convened to decide on an “appropriate” response):

    https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-12-15-mn-361-story.html

    Los Angeles Times

    U.S. to Talk With PLO as Arafat Meets Terms :
    Ambiguities Eliminated, Shultz Says

    December 15, 1988

    WASHINGTON — In a surprising reversal of the U.S. diplomatic boycott of the Palestine Liberation Organization, Secretary of State George P. Shultz said Wednesday that the United States is now ready for direct talks with the PLO because Chairman Yasser Arafat has eliminated earlier ambiguities and reservations from his renunciation of terrorism and his acknowledgement of Israel’s right to exist.

    In light of such basic behavioral pattern recognition, my question was justified, and you completely evaded or deflected it.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  101. @Been_there_done_that

    A few days ago I was supposed to be a lying Talmudic Jew, and now this, a completely different fantasy, gets expressed. The amateurism is simply amusing.

    Why is it amusing, if only you are not aware that the idea of Nazism was loaned from the Talmudic Judaism. Everything – including the blood purity laws.

    Wasn’t the purpose of Russia’s presence there to help achieve the goal of ending the occupation of Syria by all foreign forces?

    Of course not. What do you think Russia is – Santa Claus? The purpose of Russia’s presence in Syria is to keep its naval base operational.

    This organization you mentioned was active in the Sinai and had no conflict with Russia, hence no motive. What matters is who actually did it.

    That organization was associated with ISIS, therefore had a motive.

    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  102. @Here Be Dragon

    …Nazism was loaned from the Talmudic Judaism.

    German National Socialism derived from the Labor Zionism founded by Moses Hess, by way of a detour through Mussolini’s Fascism.

    The purpose of Russia’s presence in Syria is to keep its naval base operational.

    The initial purpose in September 2015 was supposed to be more than just maintaining its naval base. It seems that Russia has significantly revised its goals.

    That organization was associated with ISIS…

    The US and Israel were also associated with ISIS.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  103. j2 says:
    @Anonymous

    “It’s pretty clear this mess is entirely due to America’s interference and insistence on NATO membership for Ukraine, so this idea of unprovoked Russian aggression is simply false. ”

    Clearly there was a US hand in color revolutions and the situation in Ukraine is one result of these efforts, but what does it have to do with me? You can discuss the background of the war with someone who is interested in it. I simply observe the military situation in order to see how territorial defense works. So far it has worked as intended (including that cities get reduced to rubble if you defend by this strategy, that is unavoidable, but there is no better one against a much stronger opponent). I want to see if Ukraine can make the step of pushing Russians out. I think it will succeed also.

    “You don’t need a garbage calculation to draw the necessary conclusion. ”

    My calculations are not garbage. To show it, let us take again the Ukraine claim that they have downed 207 Russian fixed-wing planes. Though Russia used Tupolev bombers and had some transport planes, these downed planes are almost all multirole fighter jets. Russia originally had 300 fighter jets close to Ukraine. Many people, like Ron Unz, seem to think that downing 207 planes in 100 days is too much. (But they could look at the Finnish-Russian Winter War, Finns downed c. 260 planes, disabled 3,500 tanks, killed 160,000 Russian soldiers in 105 days, so Ukraine figures are not really impossible at all. Russians attack with great force, so they have large losses.) But I show you that 207 planes in 100 days is a quite reasonable estimate.

    The war has had three stages. In the first stage Russia made a strategic strike. It included many fixed-wing planes, the goal was to gain air superiority and to destroy Ukraine air defense. Ukraine had many S-300 units around Kiev and many BUKs. You for sure think S-300 is a good system. Ukraine had 89 fighter jets in the beginning, by 8. March 42 fighter jets had been destroyed. Ukraine fighter jets included Mig-29 air superiority fighters that have the goal of shooting down planes. So, Ukraine lost 42 planes, Ukraine claims to have downed 39 Russian planes in the time 24.Feb-8.March. Is that in your opinion too much? They had S-300, BUKs, Migs, Russia used many planes. I think it is quite reasonable. This incidentally was the “Ghost of Kiev”, the joint effort of Ukrainian air forces and air defense in the first stage of this war. The “Ghost of Kiev” was no myth, it taken from a youtube video posted by comrad_corp, who clearly wrote to the footer that his video was simulation made with DCS. The name “Ghost of Kiev” was they used by Ukraine to refer to all Ukrainian pilots and air defense. So, it is reasonable that “Ghost of Kiev” did indeed down 39 planes in the time 24.Feb-8.March. Then Russians changed their tactics. They started to fly low in order to avoid Ukrainian air defense that they had not managed to destroy.

    We now entered to the second phase of the war. Russian planes flew low and made close air support. Ukraine got lots of MANPADs. According to Ukraine, Russia lost 125 planes in the time period 9.March-16.April. According to Ukraine, there were several days when Russia lost 10 planes. Is this reasonable? Shooting with MANPADs in very many fronts in total ten planes doing close air support? I think it is very reasonable. Russians did not have many smart bombs, so they had to use dumb bombs. This is why they had to fly low and use their modern multirole fighters/ bomber jets as WWII dive bombers. Yes, that way you would lose lots of planes to MANPADs. I find the figure 125 downed planes quite possible. After this Russia stopped using planes except for close to the areas that it had occupied. Most Russian planes did not fly to Ukraine airspace: they fired missiles to Ukraine from Russian airspace. When Russia did make close air support, it was close to Donbas and Kherson occupied areas. This was the third stage of war.

    In the third stage of war Russia did not have any more air control of most of Ukraine, and it used planes less than earlier. Ukraine claims to have downed 43 planes in the time 16.April-30. May. Is this in some sense too high? I find this figure quite reasonable.

    In short, the Ukraine figure of 207 downed Russian planes does not seem odd. It agrees well with Russian usage of planes and Ukrainian defensive weapons.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  104. Anonymous[358] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    “Ukraine claims” pretty much invalidates any of your “calculations”. It is irrelevant what I think of Russia or the S-300.

    • Replies: @j2
  105. j2 says:
    @Anonymous

    “It is irrelevant what I think of Russia or the S-300. ”

    I agree. It is irrelevant what you think. Military analysis is not your area. Leave it to those who know something about the topic.

    • Replies: @Passing By
    , @Anonymous
  106. @j2

    Speaking of bullsh*tters who know zilch about subjects on which they comment, you should lead by example and s t f u.

  107. Anonymous[688] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    That’s why I’m talking with you.

    • Replies: @j2
  108. @Been_there_done_that

    Let’s not digress.

    German National Socialism derived from the Labor Zionism.

    The ideas of the Nazis were occult and religious, beginning with the notion of the messianic purpose of the German people and importance of maintaining pure blood and finishing with building a world ruled by the chosen people of superior constitution and ancient origin related to a great half legendary people of distant past.

    Pure plagiarism here – the concept is loaned from the rabbinical literature.

    The initial purpose in September 2015 was supposed to be more than just maintaining its naval base. It seems that Russia has significantly revised its goals.

    Had Russia not interfere Bashar al-Assad would have been killed and a new government would have demanded removal of the Russian base which is of strategic importance for the Russian fleet. Furthermore without al-Assad Qatar would have begun building a gas pipeline through Syria to Turkey and from there to Europe.

    Don’t confuse diplomatic rhetoric with the real goals behind it.

    The US and Israel were also associated with ISIS.

    Perhaps, but on the level of intelligence agencies working in secret so the Russian response would be on that same level. Yet since all of this is a speculation it’s hard or impossible to determine who might have been related to that attack, apart from that terrorist group.

    Could have been the UK. Could have been Qatar.

    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  109. j2 says:
    @Anonymous

    “That’s why I’m talking with you.”

    If this is some kind of peace offer, so let us then continue. Let us continue from Russian fixed-wing airplanes that Ukraine now says that it has downed 208. MSM some days ago informed that some senior officer in Pentagon said that Ukraine has shot a bit less than three dozen Russian planes, i.e., less than 36.

    Now I ask you, considering what you think of the capabilities of S-300, Buk, and Mig-29 if you find this MSM estimate credible. Consider this: from 24.Feb to 8.March Ukraine still had fighter jets (originally 98 and still in 8. March 56 left), and around Kiev was a complete S-300 system with many launchers, and there were the Buks also. Russia did not managed to destroy them all by 8. March. Russia tried to get air superiority and used many planes and helicopters, planes were at this time flying high. Russians managed to destroy 98-56=42 Ukrianian planes during this time. How many planes did in your rough and simple estimate Ukrainian Migs, S-400 and Buks manage to destroy? I am sure you will not suggest that zero or one. It had to be more with those weapons. Ukraine gives the number 39. They give the figures:
    Date Cumulative number of Russian planes shot
    24. Feb 5
    26. Feb 14
    8. March 39
    Is this reasonable, considering the weapons, large number of Russian planes in the air flying high, not managing to destroy all fighters, S-300 and Buks? I would say, this is very much what one can expect. This number alone is over less than three dozen, so you can be sure that MSM is wrong.

    Then consider the second phase. Now Russians are flying low not to be seen by air-defense radars, which finally they did not destroy all;
    9. March 49
    14. March 77
    20. March 100
    28. March 123
    16. April 164
    Here the situation is that Russian planes run out of precision bombs and are doing close air support in many fronts, Russians are still around Kiev, Sumy, Chernihov. As they only have dumb bombs, they fly low in close air support missions and Ukraine has many thousand MANPADs (stingers, piorons, iglas etc.). So, what do you expect happens to these planes used as WWII dive bombers when the opponent uses MANPADs. They are shot down. Look at the figures and the number of fronts. These numbers make sense. This is what you can expect. And at this time the number of sorties Russian planes fly drops to 200 sorties per day. A sortie is one plane flying a mission. If Russians still have about 300 planes, why they fly so few sorties in a day? It makes better sense if they have originally used less than 300 planes, more like 200, and in the end they had some 130 planes left.

    In the third phase of the war Russia withdraw from Western Ukraine and Russian planes mostly did not go either at all to Ukraine airspace, or made short close air support sorties. Ukraine numbers are like this:
    16. May 200
    27. May 205
    31. May 208
    We see that Ukraine shoots only few planes, but after the intensive attack in Luhansk in recent days there again are dropped planes, but 0-1 a day. It all makes sense.

    So, MSM is lying, but Ukraine statistics of these planes need not be much off. Oryx page only has 29 downed Russian planes, but that cannot be the real number: most of the announcements are from early days and many are death announcements of pilots. If a plane is shot down, the pilot very often survives, so there is no death announcement.

    I have checked other Ukraine numbers and they seem to be quite as reasonable as these fixed-wing planes. I do not want to write this answer longer by going through the calculations, but my calculations are not any garbage.

    Let us now ponder what is the meaning of Russia’s recent attack in Donbas and South. Russia is running out of time. Ukraine is getting howizers, MLRS systems, and in mid July it is getting Flakpanzer gepards. Ukraine is getting stronger, so Russia tries now to get some victory. It only can get a victory in Donbas. It is a political one, not of military significance. Russia also tries to pressure through all its contacts that Western politicians (like Kissinger) will conclude that Ukraine is losing and must make a peace and giving more weapons to Ukraine is useless. This is not true and Ukraine is not losing. It will stand this Russian last attack and start a counter-offensive before mid August.

    This is all I tell you of the military situation. If it is garbage to you, then be it so. But it is not garbage. The Russian situation is not as good as it may seem if you only look at small victories they now are getting in Donbas. They are obtained with local overpower and by pressing the troops and commanders hard against the time.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  110. Anonymous[960] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    It was sarcasm, actually.

    • Replies: @j2
  111. j2 says:
    @Anonymous

    “It was sarcasm, actually. ”

    As you do not know military issues and cannot write a sarcastic comment in a proper way, I suggest we stop this discussion. You need to improve in many areas to be an interesting discussion partner.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  112. Anonymous[133] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    Your calculations are irrelevant because your argument is, essentially: since the Ukraine’s stated Russian losses make sense, they’re largely telling the truth (and thus winning the war). But this is just absurd. Has it ever occurred to you that the Americans (who are the ones running the Ukraine’s war) are simply feeding them semi-believable numbers to report, so as to maintain plausible deniability/smokescreen? You have to be truly naive to believe anything coming out of the Ukrainian side (which again, is really just American propaganda).

    • Replies: @j2
  113. @Here Be Dragon

    …it’s hard or impossible to determine who might have been related to that attack…

    It was purportedly caused by a small bomb inside a pineapple soda can. At an altitude of around thirty thousand feet that is sufficient in size to bring down an aircraft. It would have been placed inside the lavatory a few hours before, by somebody pretending to be part of the cleaning crew. But who would have been operating a surveillance drone above the Negev desert near Eilat, to focus on and film the plane exploding around 6 am?

    Based on the atmospheric light differential during the dawn hours, it is clear that the imagery in the released video was reversed, to make it appear as if though the plane had been filmed from the western side of its flight track, in Egyptian territory. This trick allowed flight experts to publicly claim it was a “hoax”. It is not difficult to also make the original drone video appear more grainy and shaky, perhaps filming the replay from a hand-held mobile phone, and to add some Arabic background music for effect.

    Part of the released video is available here; the beginning, focusing on the plane in flight, with greater visual accuracy, has been truncated.

    WATCH: Chilling video that could prove ISIS DID shoot down Russian jet, killing 224 people

    November 4, 2015

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/616132/ISIS-Russian-plane-crash-shoot-down-terror-explosion-video

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  114. j2 says:
    @Anonymous

    “Your calculations are irrelevant because your argument is, essentially: since the Ukraine’s stated Russian losses make sense, they’re largely telling the truth (and thus winning the war). But this is just absurd.”

    OK, let us analyze your argument.

    You write:
    1. “since the Ukraine’s stated Russian losses make sense, they’re largely telling the truth”

    Let us see if it is true that Russian losses make sense:
    Ukrainian army estimates of Russian losses are given in ukrinform
    https://www.ukrinform.net/
    The initial Russian strike was against rather good Soviet era air defense, so Russians lost 39 planes, Russians were able to destroy air defense, so they decided to fly low to avoid radars and had to fly low to do close air support with dumb bombs. This brought Russian planes within the reach of MANPADs and as Ukraine got several thousand MANPADs and Russia made c. 200 low flying sorties a day, Ukraine had many low flying targets every day, Russians lost 125 planes. Then Russia much reduced sorties by planes, did not mostly fly to Ukraine, lost control of most of Ukraine air space, and plane losses went down to 36 in a month. At this time Russia used many cruise missiles, now they used most that the want to use in this war and there are much fewer cruise missiles and they again try with planes, so losses have come up in recent days to 0-1 planes a day, adding 8 new plane losses. This all makes perfect sense: the losses reflect Russian tactics and weapons available to Ukraine, changes in that tactics.

    Does this imply that Ukrainians are telling the truth? It means that their estimates of Russian losses are not much off. As ukrinform tells, these numbers are estimates and they need not be quite correct, estimating opponent’s losses is not a precise art. My feeling of these Ukrainian numbers is that they are not much in error, but for sure they are not precisely correct. Ukrainians cannot know if a Russian died or got wounded or survived without a scratch, nor can they say if a plane was damaged slightly or beyond repair. All we can say is that Ukraine estimates for Russian losses are reasonable estimates, not intentionally trying to present a false picture of the war situation. This does not imply that all Ukraine information is of similar type. Indeed, Ukraine just fired a Human Rights umbundesman Denisova for spreading false rumors of Russian attrocities
    https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-polytics/3496579-denisova-dismissed-as-verkhovna-rada-commissioner-for-human-rights-source.html

    Then you conclude like this:
    2. “(and thus winning the war). But this is just absurd.”

    From the conclusion that Ukraine estimates for Russian losses are reasonably correct does not in any way follow that Ukraine is winning the war. Ukraine is likely to win the war for the following reasons: A) the West has clearly stated many times that Russia will not win this war, they will make it happen. B) Ukraine will not lose the war because it will not run out of anything essential, so Russia cannot force Ukraine to surrender or make a peace on unfavorable conditions. Ukraine will not run out of anything because it has enough men, the morale stays high, it gets enough weapons, and economic help. C) Russia will finally have to stop the military operation, just like Soviets finally had to withdraw from Afghanistan. It is not that absurd. Soviets had to withdraw from Afghanistan, the USA had to withdraw from Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. Actually, already Machiavelli in the Prince says clearly that in a war just change the government and get out, if you try to stay it gets too expensive. It is really a question of morale and Ukrainians have morale, they do not want Russians in their country.

    “Has it ever occurred to you that the Americans (who are the ones running the Ukraine’s war) are simply feeding them semi-believable numbers to report, so as to maintain plausible deniability/smokescreen?’

    Ukraine estimates of Russian losses differ from American estimates (Pentagon) and from UK estimates (UK defense ministry). I find Ukraine numbers as better estimates. They are not fed to Ukraine my Americans (as Pentagon has different estimates, much lower losses for Russia). I do not see these Ukraine estimates as any kind of smokescreen or anything. They are very similar to estimates I have derived from other sources (that is, not numbers from Pentagon, MSM or UK, but my guesses of probable losses estimated from tactics, weapons, maps).

    American deep state and Jews are also not giving Ukraine these estimates. Kissinger, a real deep-state American, has another view of this war and he would like Ukraine to give out some area. It is more like so that Zelensky cannot make a peace, not because of UkriNazis, but because the people still believe that they will win. Public opinion is very powerful. You may be able to create this opinion and partially even direct it, but when it gets wind, there is not much you can do. If Ukraine army does not have a major defeat, Ukrainians will not accept losing land, and Ukraine leaders or Americans cannot change this. In the beginning of this war every single Western analysts (also me, though I am not a military analyst, yet know something of this topic) predicted that Russia will win in a short time. This Western opinion was only changed after Ukrainians fought the enemy. Then I concluded that what they do is very similar to territorial defense. Americans do not do territorial defense, they do not know it, they do not believe in it, Americans believe in power. Therritorial defense is a small country idea for stopping Soviets and Russians. In the territorial defense concept the result is that the enemy is pushed out. In war games the strategy works, albeit in another country, different terrain, different population. But so far Ukraine has made a very similar defense. If Ukraine manages to realize its variant of the territorial defense strategy in a real war, the result can well be what it is in a war game: Russia is pushed out. This is why I think Ukraine may win, but so far only, may, not will. It is always extremely difficult to push out a stronger opponent.

    “You have to be truly naive to believe anything coming out of the Ukrainian side (which again, is really just American propaganda).”

    Let me make this clear: I am not naive. I know something of military things. You are ignorant of military matters and very naive thinking that the USA is running Ukraine and Ukraine propaganda is coming from America. In a war it is the army that runs the propaganda, so Ukraine propaganda is mostly coming from Ukrainian army. When there are individuals, like ombundesman Denisova, who made her own anti-Russian propaganda, it was found harmful to Ukraine and she was fired. This is because propaganda must be carefully selected. A case of Ukraine army propaganda was the border guards in the Snake Island having been killed. It raised the spirit, this propaganda worked. But you do not take propaganda ready from Americans. You have to carefully prepare it so that it has effect. Russian propaganda efforts have been very poor. They have used troll farms, maybe like you, to spread false information. As a result Russian communication channels have been banned. That is, Russia naively used too crude propaganda. Propaganda must be carefully made, else it fails. As Goebbels said, the best propaganda is the truth. Ukraine can give reasonable estimates of Russian losses because their very well support the Ukrainian war effort. So, they can use white propaganda (giving correct information, though not giving some other information) in the estimates of Russian losses.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  115. @Been_there_done_that

    Your argument is understood but the footage does look like it was shot at high altitude, and it couldn’t be a drone nor could it be a plane, because the video is shaky – the camera is not stable, as if it was held in hands. And if it was held in hands, than there is no way to get that high angle, since the plane was flying at high altitude.

    Also the black smoke doesn’t look convincing.

    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  116. @Here Be Dragon

    …because the video is shaky – the camera is not stable, as if it was held in hands.

    I clearly stated the plausible possibility that the publicly released video was a hand-held video taken from a replay, on a screen. The released video had Jihadi music and was longer than the one at the Express. I recall at the time there was initial doubt online about whether it even showed a civilian aircraft – because people didn’t want to believe it. Somebody then re-posted the video after having subjected it to image stabilization software, yet kept the faked reversal. From the enhanced video, which I could not readily find, years later, it was obvious that it had been filmed from the air; one could even tell it was an Airbus, from the perpendicular projection. The details were better at the beginning of the video because the plane was flying away from the drone, but that portion was removed from the short version at the Express. The side blast corresponded to the damage pictures on the ground after taking the reversal into account. At least the shorter lower-quality version at the Express is sufficient for verifying the view angle and the image reversal, because the sun always rises in the east, so it proves the main point. Ideally one would find the full-length enhanced video and look at it from the side using a mirror, or reversing it if one has the software for that. The final operational flight track runs nearly parallel and close to the border line, so it then becomes rather obvious that the imagery was captured from Israeli air space, near Eilat. I doubt anybody would ever claim that Jihadis “stole” the drone and then hacked both the operational and camera pointing features.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  117. Anonymous[286] • Disclaimer says:
    @j2

    Yawn.

  118. @Been_there_done_that

    Before replying to you I took a screenshot of the video, flipped the image left to right, opened the map and compared the angles. As you say it really looks like being shot from the Eilat area.

    However I find far fetched that someone would, as you suggest, shoot that video from a replay on a screen.

    What it looks like to me is that it was initially a video of a plane taking off, shot with a hand held camera from the ground, and the explosion with black smoke was added later.

    The only source of that video appears to be that British web site.

    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  119. @Here Be Dragon

    The only source of that video appears to be that British web site.

    You mean the source that it is easiest to find now. A video of the explosion can also be found at the Daily Mail, which usually provides many photos and videos of sensational events. It is almost seven years since the incident, so the enhanced video I referred to may have been taken down in the meantime, or the search engines have censored it. In any case, it is far easier to take a video of a screen with a shaky hand than to fake a video taken from the ground. Most importantly, you have no explanation for the image reversal.

    The article I linked to in message #94 above, about the joint air force drill that lasted a few days, mentions that the base was Ovda airfield, north of Eilat, over which area the drone was likely operating from. It is not clear from the report whether the US, Poland, and Greece brought their own surveillance drones for monitoring the exercises.

    The exercises likely were not in progress at 6am. It would not have been too unusual for a drone to have been loitering in the area at that time, but already suspicious that it still focused on that civilian aircraft after it had turned north. What is unusual, however, is that such a drone video would have then been exploited by attributing it to an Arab organization, as if though somebody intended to send Russia a message.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  120. @Been_there_done_that

    That somebody intended to send Russia a message is obvious. But who did that is not.

    Apparently the message was that Mossad might have done it. Assuming that it’s true why would Mossad want the Russians to think that it was implicated? Makes no sense.

    Again, if the video was released by Mossad then what for would they shoot it with a hand held camera from the screen? Doesn’t make any sense at all.

    Let’s assume they wanted the Russians to know that they could control some terrorist group and therefore cause a lot of troubles. Then why make it look like someone was trying to raise suspicions against them?

    Because this is what it looks like and that explains the flipping of the image.

    Most likely in my opinion it was done by the Arabs, who were trying to set up Mossad and the entire narrative was scripted. “Look, the Jews did it, they reversed the video, they had a drone in the sky.”

    And again, what that black smoke was coming from?

    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  121. @Here Be Dragon

    Assuming that it’s true why would Mossad want the Russians to think that it was implicated?

    Because they thought they can get away with it. Your conjectures are based on the presumption that the video was not shot by a drone, which are likely derived from your belief that Israel would not do something like that. Therefore you postulated that the video must have been shot from the ground, of another plane, and the black smoke after the explosion was faked.

    Just eight seconds before the internal explosion, which caused a mother with her 10-month old daughter to be ejected so that their bodies were found more than 21 miles from the wreckage, the following image was captured – note the unambiguous double engine configuration and stark color differential between dark at bottom right (west, after image reversal) and top left:

    At that time the jet was traveling at roughly 750 km/h (12.5 km/h per minute). Yet the original video was continuously tracking the plane from the rear for a while beforehand. It is not plausible that such detailed imagery could have been captured from a hand-held ground camera in part also because the view angle after the explosion changes too much, indicating that the camera itself was in motion. Therefore, any speculation about the implications should derive from an understanding that this video initially came from drone footage – with the view angle roughly corresponding to the location near the air base, based on the publicly available tracking information of the airliner.

    Here is a video on YouTube:

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  122. @Been_there_done_that

    No, my logic is that it must have been shot from the ground, because even cheap civilian drones never shake like that. A military drone, capable of flying at that altitude must have a camera stabilizer, otherwise it’s worthless.

    Not plausible that such detailed imagery could have been captured from a hand-held ground camera in part also because the view angle after the explosion changes too much, indicating that the camera itself was in motion.

    The angle after the explosion changes because the person holding the camera reacted, and since he was filming it from afar, even the slightest movement of his hand should have caused that effect. Had it been a drone that would not have happened.

    Note the unambiguous double engine configuration and stark color differential between dark at bottom right (west, after image reversal) and top left.

    The plane was going to the north-west from the Red Sea cost towards Nekhel. That’s not bottom right or bottom left, that’s plain bottom – it’s darker below because there is sunrise. Flipping the image doesn’t change that.

    However it looks like the real footage shot from the ground. The clip on Youtube is made of two videos, one is in color the other black and white. The camera movement is not the same. You should have noticed that.

    That terrorist group made this video.

    [MORE]
    Here is the image reversed.

    • Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  123. @Here Be Dragon

    …because even cheap civilian drones never shake like that.

    The shaking motion did not come in the original video taken from the drone but was superficially introduced later to simulate the effect of a hand-held mobile phone, hence my suggestion that it was somebody filming the image presented on a screen with a phone camera.

    …even the slightest movement of his hand should have caused that effect.

    According to the published data, the aircraft’s ground track remained the same after the explosion, but the view angle changes over time in the video, from oblique rear (as in the image) to nearly being in the same vertical plane directly in the rear. This effect cannot be achieved from a stationary ground position but indicates that the drone veered off into Egyptian airspace after the explosion, indicating real-time monitoring and operation.

    it’s darker below because there is sunrise.

    It was roughly seven weeks after the equinox, so by that time at sunrise the sun was already shining from the southeast and the northwest would have still been darker. Therefore the bottom left in the correct image, farther west, toward the horizon, is slightly darker than the bottom right.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  124. @Been_there_done_that

    Doesn’t make sense to simulate the effect of a hand-held mobile phone. Neither for the purpose implied nor for the real purpose. Not possible to shoot it with a mobile phone.

    On the image the plane appears about 300 m away; if the footage is real than it was 9,000 m away so a camera with at least 30 x magnification was used. This also explains why the image is blurred.

    You are correct though that the angle changes abruptly from about 20 degrees to the left to 0 in seconds which is impossible whether shooting from the ground or from a drone, and this is why the video is fake.

    You are also probably right that somebody was filming the image presented on a screen with a phone camera but the image isn’t a real footage – in fact, might even have been made with a computer game.

    The plane exploded five minutes after the sunrise, so it looks dark in the north west like it should. There is no difference “in the correct image” – see the image in the previous comment.

    But it doesn’t matter, it’s a crude fake.

    [MORE]
    06:08
    Saturday, 31 October 2015 (EET)
    Sunrise in Cairo, Egypt

  125. Anonymous[240] • Disclaimer says:
    @Here Be Dragon

    You two need to get a room.

  126. @Here Be Dragon

    …in fact, might even have been made with a computer game.

    …it’s a crude fake.

    Since it is already apparent from the short video still available, that it could not have been filmed from a stationary position on the ground, even with a heavy lens on a tripod, like the ones that professional photographers use at sports competitions, you have revised your prior supposition and resorted to an even more obscure attempt to explain away the imagery through such conjecture. Though there are Airbus flight simulators as games, I am not aware of computer games that simulate shooting down civilian aircraft. Yet pertaining to this case, how could one even fake an unusual event (an explosive flash extending outward from an aircraft not hit by a missile) that had not previously been captured on video?

    An important question is that of motive, for instance expressing displeasure that Russia had just moved troops to Syria, purportedly to counteract uninvited occupying forces. An Egyptian group placing a bomb on any aircraft at a popular tourist airport in that country could have predicted that this would inevitably lead to adverse consequences for their own group and the local economy, as turned out to be the case, since multiple airlines subsequently stopped flying there. Nor would they have had much to gain by purportedly bragging about their culpability and methodology. The narrative presented after the incident has the stench of “false flag operation”.

    I concur that the video, as presented, was “faked” in the sense that original imagery was intentionally manipulated (artificially introducing jittery movements, presenting a phony mobile phone camera viewing framework, flipping to a mirror image, and adding celebratory Arabic music) to mislead the vast majority of the millions of viewers, while still conveying interesting information to more critical observers. From the longer period of time prior to the explosion shown in the earlier video, it would have been possible, after image stabilization corrections, to calculate the approximate camera positions over time. This would explain why those versions have been censored from Internet searches and most hosting domains.

    As I pointed out initially, the video imagery, including background lighting, is consistent with that coming from a drone operating in that area. One cannot preclude that more than one drone provided the video material, and the resulting footage could represent a composite. If the bomb was triggered by a barometric pressure sensor coupled to a timer then the precise location for its activation would not be known in advance. Therefore, a desire to “document the event”, out of curiosity, could have entailed at least an additional drone loitering as a backup along the presumed flight path of the airliner.

    At that time the Super Heron, with a reported top speed of 280 km/h was already operational. Of course surveillance drones have swiveling cameras that can maintain focus on a selected visual target, even while flying in a direction perpendicular to it. Running on FIAT diesel engines, these specific models would have mechanical vibration damping (spring and rubber suspension), likely also electronic stabilization coupled to sensor input, to ensure good image details. It would have been more interesting and incriminating if somebody had managed to hack those videos and then provided them for public viewing, though I never read of any public demands for this to be done back then.

    As you had done with me in a different thread, you have approached an issue by first determining a desired outcome, based on your bias, thereby precluding or negating reasonable assumptions from which certain conclusion would be in conflict with that result. Such an attitude is not investigative analysis but shaping a propaganda narrative, to deflect from rational inferences that may be inconvenient for some. In this case you have exposed your sympathy toward Israel rather than Russia, which conforms with the common accusation that many commenters here are merely pretending to be pro-Russian while actually being Israeli.

    • Replies: @Here Be Dragon
  127. @Been_there_done_that

    My point is that if your theory is true then Mossad would have published a clean footage and then said that it was filmed during a scheduled flight of a border patrol drone.

  128. …if your theory is true then Mossad would have published…

    This is just conjecture, years after the fact. Probably you meant “should have” instead of “would have“. Mossad has made plenty of mistakes, by their own standards, over the years, for instance the well publicized assassination operation of a Palestinian official in his Dubai hotel room in January 2010, that featured those comical characters with olive green caps in the elevator, caught on surveillance camera following their target. You can read about that and other stories in Ronen Bergman’s book Rise and Kill First, which was even featured at this site a few years ago. Maybe the guy who headed the agency just a few months later, beginning in 2016, Yossi Cohen, who had previously posed as a technology venture capitalist in Silicon Valley, might have handled the situation differently from his predecessor.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Rolo Slavskiy Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Becker update V1.3.2