Even get a nice shot of a Russian military van for ID.
No BS here. We get respected forum members like Vasily Fofanov, Weizdman, and others share the obvious opinion on this.
I know, it sucks ;( .
TR1 wrote:Not only- scroll down, there is a discussion about it, more photos and videos, particularly the vehicle traveling through the Rostov Oblast.
Even get a nice shot of a Russian military van for ID.
No BS here. We get respected forum members like Vasily Fofanov, Weizdman, and others share the obvious opinion on this.
I know, it sucks ;( .
I know, it sucks ;( . wrote:
Werewolf wrote:You mean photos taken of hardware in somewhere exact same way like the BUK that turned out to be shot inside Ukraine in a citiy controlled of Ukraine since months?
And you call that evidence?
That is funny, instead of looking at numbers writen on the vehicles you go for the gaps and ERA tiles that are identical on several vehicles, not really proof that those vehicle are the same, especially when the one vehicle presented to be in rebel hands coming from russia with number 6/7 and the one that was shot in russia no focusing on numbers.
Those tanks come from Crimea not from russian stock piles, no evidence that those are russian.
etaepsilonk wrote:TR1 wrote:Not only- scroll down, there is a discussion about it, more photos and videos, particularly the vehicle traveling through the Rostov Oblast.
Even get a nice shot of a Russian military van for ID.
No BS here. We get respected forum members like Vasily Fofanov, Weizdman, and others share the obvious opinion on this.
I know, it sucks ;( .
Well, maybe you could point out the relevant parts at least, because I don't speak russian.
-----------
Alright, "russian tanks" are here:
1. I don't see no identification of the place, could very well be Crimea.
2. What MP is doing here? From other videos of columns inside russia I haven't seen MP vans, correct me if I'm wrong.
Werewolf wrote:Vehicle numbers would be evidence, ERA are no evidence.
The only laughable evidence you presented is on worse level of unproven level you claim to be BS over some american terrorists in Georgian war.
Not only MP van, also a Russian police car in front. No denying it, is as obvious as day.
I have not seen a single T-64 from Crimea with that ERA pattern- both on sides, and in front. Different color as well.
Even if they were Crimean T-64s, that would change fairly little in the implication however.
TR1 wrote:
I said enough about trucks. An infant can put two and two together, but some prefer to shut their eyes and say "NO! they appeared there! All those Russian citizens and RPOs and Russian ex-mil trucks and T-64s!"
TR1 wrote:Werewolf wrote:Vehicle numbers would be evidence, ERA are no evidence.
The only laughable evidence you presented is on worse level of unproven level you claim to be BS over some american terrorists in Georgian war.
When in doubt, close your ears and eyes. Seems to have worked well for you so far.
etaepsilonk wrote:To TR1:
In your provided picture fourth top and second bottom photos are different tanks, the empty ERA space is in different places.
In the first top photo there doesn't appear to be ERA gap, in the first bottom there is.
The third tank may look similar, I agree. But that's only one, not three.
Not only MP van, also a Russian police car in front. No denying it, is as obvious as day.
I have not seen a single T-64 from Crimea with that ERA pattern- both on sides, and in front. Different color as well.
Even if they were Crimean T-64s, that would change fairly little in the implication however.
Have you seen all 200+ Crimean tanks? That's quite a memory of yours, I must say.
--------------------------------
And about your comment on trucks:TR1 wrote:
I said enough about trucks. An infant can put two and two together, but some prefer to shut their eyes and say "NO! they appeared there! All those Russian citizens and RPOs and Russian ex-mil trucks and T-64s!"
I see you continue to call those kamaz trucks military exclusive, despite me providing evidence of them being available to civilians as well.
Werewolf wrote:TR1 wrote:Werewolf wrote:Vehicle numbers would be evidence, ERA are no evidence.
The only laughable evidence you presented is on worse level of unproven level you claim to be BS over some american terrorists in Georgian war.
When in doubt, close your ears and eyes. Seems to have worked well for you so far.
You are a lunatic. That is exactly what you did over the entire Syrian and Ukrainian crisis threads.
Assad Bad but compelte silence over US terrorists and US direct involvement... asking stupid questions to me what US has to do with Ukraine or Syrian crisis.... i mean more obvious it does not get you are the one that is closing eyes and ears to facts and open support of terrorists admitted by US regime, but yes claim one victory and pretend that russia is doing something wrong when they clearly do something right.
Yes, supporting of rebels who are trying to counter US fascist puppets, but you maybe want to see those US fascists marching into russia.
Not only that Russia has every right to do whatever means necessary to restore and defeat of US backed scum and avoid getting those nazi scum into russia it also should be far more doing to prevent the indoctrination of slavic people of the same indoctrination the anglo sucksons of British Empire and US have done to Ukraine and Poland.
But go ahead be more anti russian and live in a bubble where no wrong doing is happening on one side but somehow supplying trucks is wrong doing and supporting own national security via helping to defeat the nazi scum that is on the doorstep.
TR1 wrote:
1.) Even on the first tank, where the difference is biggest, it is incredibly close. On the way an ERA block may have fallen off who knows. If it was one vehicle-I would be suspicious. But given the other 2? It is not some typical pattern either, making it all the more damning.
2.) Like I said, all them trucks that could only have originated in Russia, suddenly appearing in Ukraine, filled with Russian citizens with a whole bunch of weapons. What a world we live in.
TR1 wrote:Werewolf wrote:TR1 wrote:Werewolf wrote:Vehicle numbers would be evidence, ERA are no evidence.
The only laughable evidence you presented is on worse level of unproven level you claim to be BS over some american terrorists in Georgian war.
When in doubt, close your ears and eyes. Seems to have worked well for you so far.
You are a lunatic. That is exactly what you did over the entire Syrian and Ukrainian crisis threads.
Assad Bad but compelte silence over US terrorists and US direct involvement... asking stupid questions to me what US has to do with Ukraine or Syrian crisis.... i mean more obvious it does not get you are the one that is closing eyes and ears to facts and open support of terrorists admitted by US regime, but yes claim one victory and pretend that russia is doing something wrong when they clearly do something right.
Yes, supporting of rebels who are trying to counter US fascist puppets, but you maybe want to see those US fascists marching into russia.
Not only that Russia has every right to do whatever means necessary to restore and defeat of US backed scum and avoid getting those nazi scum into russia it also should be far more doing to prevent the indoctrination of slavic people of the same indoctrination the anglo sucksons of British Empire and US have done to Ukraine and Poland.
But go ahead be more anti russian and live in a bubble where no wrong doing is happening on one side but somehow supplying trucks is wrong doing and supporting own national security via helping to defeat the nazi scum that is on the doorstep.
Wow. That is quite a rant to turn attention from the fact that yes, Russia has indeed sent tanks into Ukraine.
I could care less about your typical US-blaming rant, and the Syrian thread is that way.
We got quite enough actual Nazis here in Russia, don't you worry about that . More than Ukraine has!
sepheronx wrote:If it was indeed, ot would be paraded around more than it is. As well, they should be sending more weapons instead of small here and there.
Would be nice to see Ukr forces get their asses kicked more.
etaepsilonk wrote:TR1 wrote:
1.) Even on the first tank, where the difference is biggest, it is incredibly close. On the way an ERA block may have fallen off who knows. If it was one vehicle-I would be suspicious. But given the other 2? It is not some typical pattern either, making it all the more damning.
Yes, it may have fallen-off.
But many people were saying that these tanks are not similar, but identical, wrongly.
Actually, there is, in fact, a probability that some of the vehicles may have been the same tanks.
They were returned from crimea, and then captured (or bought) by rebels.
Large time-span could perfectly explain small differences in ERA patterns.
TR1 wrote:
When in doubt, close your ears and eyes. Seems to have worked well for you so far.
Wow. That is quite a rant to turn attention from the fact that yes, Russia has indeed sent tanks into Ukraine.
I could care less about your typical US-blaming rant, and the Syrian thread is that way.
We got quite enough actual Nazis here in Russia, don't you worry about that . More than Ukraine has!
TR1 wrote:sepheronx wrote:If it was indeed, ot would be paraded around more than it is. As well, they should be sending more weapons instead of small here and there.
Would be nice to see Ukr forces get their asses kicked more.
That is a quick turnaround.
First its "US keeps making claims, how dare they, Russia does not lie, there is no proof, give the proof, where is the proof!"
Now that it is obvious "Well, they should send more, fuck Ukraine!"
Oh you guys. This thread truly is a pit.
What is funny now though, is Ukraine actually has the most reason of any country near Russia of joining NATO. Russia actually, repeatedly, violated its sovereignty, and not just in Crimea.
TR1 wrote:
Sure, or maybe we can stop trying to win Olympic medals in mental gymanstics and face the most obvious conclusion.
TR1 wrote:Christ your thick. I wasn't even condemning the move, but pointing out that it is undeniable Russia has indeed done what it has been accused of in regards to heavy weapons and other supplies.
I never claimed I saw "all" Crimean T-64s. But if you can show some that have that ERA pattern or any other identifiable pattern, go ahead. Oh wait...you...can't . And then there is the small matter of it obviously being a Russian tank-transport column, so in the end...RUSSIA GAVE TANKS TO SEPS. It's obvious. And actually totally irrelevant where they came from, Crimea, or Rostov, which Otvaga (an authoritative source) seems content with.
Your responses are like me screaming "HITLER DID WORSE HITLER DID WORSE" to any implication of someone doing something unpleasant.
TR1 wrote:sepheronx wrote:If it was indeed, ot would be paraded around more than it is. As well, they should be sending more weapons instead of small here and there.
Would be nice to see Ukr forces get their asses kicked more.
That is a quick turnaround.
First its "US keeps making claims, how dare they, Russia does not lie, there is no proof, give the proof, where is the proof!"
Now that it is obvious "Well, they should send more, fuck Ukraine!"
Oh you guys. This thread truly is a pit.
What is funny now though, is Ukraine actually has the most reason of any country near Russia of joining NATO. Russia actually, repeatedly, violated its sovereignty, and not just in Crimea.
etaepsilonk wrote:TR1 wrote:
Sure, or maybe we can stop trying to win Olympic medals in mental gymanstics and face the most obvious conclusion.
Alright, the most obvious conclusion is, if you want to supply foreign insurgency, tanks are rarely your first choice.
etaepsilonk wrote:TR1 wrote:Christ your thick. I wasn't even condemning the move, but pointing out that it is undeniable Russia has indeed done what it has been accused of in regards to heavy weapons and other supplies.
I never claimed I saw "all" Crimean T-64s. But if you can show some that have that ERA pattern or any other identifiable pattern, go ahead. Oh wait...you...can't . And then there is the small matter of it obviously being a Russian tank-transport column, so in the end...RUSSIA GAVE TANKS TO SEPS. It's obvious. And actually totally irrelevant where they came from, Crimea, or Rostov, which Otvaga (an authoritative source) seems content with.
Your responses are like me screaming "HITLER DID WORSE HITLER DID WORSE" to any implication of someone doing something unpleasant.
You know what, you're right. Seps indeed received T-64 from Russia.