Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Now that would scare the crap out of them! They do need a little threatening though...
+43
kvs
As Sa'iqa
higurashihougi
Morpheus Eberhardt
Sujoy
cracker
dino00
EKS
Mindstorm
KomissarBojanchev
dionis
medo
nemrod
arpakola
flamming_python
mack8
Cyberspec
onwiththewar
ali.a.r
magnumcromagnon
etaepsilonk
TR1
GustavoHF
sepheronx
Firebird
fragmachine
Asf
Petro007
gregoire
Airbornewolf
Werewolf
Mike E
Stealthflanker
Viktor
Vann7
Big_Gazza
Regular
d_taddei2
AlfaT8
Flyingdutchman
TheGeorgian
Hannibal Barca
Feldmarszal
47 posters
The Situation in the Ukraine. #8
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4852
Points : 4842
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
AlfaT8 wrote:Russia should keep an eye on the Baltics, and by keeping an eye, i mean reinforce there nearby military bases.President Ilves: Estonia Wants Permanent NATO Bases
MOSCOW, September 2 (RIA Novosti) - Estonia would like permanent NATO bases to be set up on its territory, Estonian president Toomas Hendrik Ilves told reporters on Tuesday.
“NATO countries should not be divided into different levels, where some have permanent bases and some don’t,” Ilves said during a press conference in Oslo, Norway.
According to the president, NATO bases in Estonia would reduce the fear of potential threats from neighboring Russia.
NATO has been strengthening its military presence in Eastern Europe following the escalation of the Ukrainian crisis this spring. The alliance is expected to unveil further plans for the expansion of its military infrastructure during the summit in Wales on September 4 and 5.
Russia has repeatedly expressed concern over NATO’s increasing military presence in its neighboring states.
http://en.ria.ru/world/20140902/192569242/Estonia-Wants-Permanent-NATO-Bases--President-Ilves.html
How does the CFE affect these planned NATO "reinforcements"? Is NATO permitted to base forces on Russias border under the treaty provisions or is this another case of arrogant NATO simply doing whatever it feels like and international law be damned?
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
Large militia column filmed in Lugansk region (possibly Krasnodon)....looks like a whole Mech. Brigade
sepheronx- Posts : 8810
Points : 9070
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
That doesn't look like Militia. Picture even has Russian colors of the video.
Vann7- Posts : 5385
Points : 5485
Join date : 2012-05-16
That video was posted by Pro Kiev media as "Proof" Russian army is invading.. Why people assume that if the tittle
says the location is Ukraine.. it had to be that place ? Thats not proof that Russian armed forces are inside ukraine.
Only a video that claims is Russia invading. Time to wake up.. Remember the propaganda with the Buks missiles.. all debunked already.
Pro kiev media is even saying there are 100 Russian tanks inside ukraine and that they are firing Toscka-U missiles
at civilians areas. Some people simply never learn ..how media propaganda works.
says the location is Ukraine.. it had to be that place ? Thats not proof that Russian armed forces are inside ukraine.
Only a video that claims is Russia invading. Time to wake up.. Remember the propaganda with the Buks missiles.. all debunked already.
Pro kiev media is even saying there are 100 Russian tanks inside ukraine and that they are firing Toscka-U missiles
at civilians areas. Some people simply never learn ..how media propaganda works.
Last edited by Vann7 on Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:01 am; edited 1 time in total
AlfaT8
AlfaT8- Posts : 2488
Points : 2479
Join date : 2013-02-02
According to GarryBig_Gazza wrote:AlfaT8 wrote:Russia should keep an eye on the Baltics, and by keeping an eye, i mean reinforce there nearby military bases.President Ilves: Estonia Wants Permanent NATO Bases
MOSCOW, September 2 (RIA Novosti) - Estonia would like permanent NATO bases to be set up on its territory, Estonian president Toomas Hendrik Ilves told reporters on Tuesday.
“NATO countries should not be divided into different levels, where some have permanent bases and some don’t,” Ilves said during a press conference in Oslo, Norway.
According to the president, NATO bases in Estonia would reduce the fear of potential threats from neighboring Russia.
NATO has been strengthening its military presence in Eastern Europe following the escalation of the Ukrainian crisis this spring. The alliance is expected to unveil further plans for the expansion of its military infrastructure during the summit in Wales on September 4 and 5.
Russia has repeatedly expressed concern over NATO’s increasing military presence in its neighboring states.
http://en.ria.ru/world/20140902/192569242/Estonia-Wants-Permanent-NATO-Bases--President-Ilves.html
How does the CFE affect these planned NATO "reinforcements"? Is NATO permitted to base forces on Russias border under the treaty provisions or is this another case of arrogant NATO simply doing whatever it feels like and international law be damned?
GarryB wrote:
The initial agreement was intended to reduce the huge amount of hardware in the Soviet Union without it being transfered to allies in Europe... by setting limits they were able to get rid of a lot of old stuff and ensure limits of hardware in Europe on both sides.
The main sticking points later on were deployments of Russian troops in disputed regions like Abkhazia and South Ossetia and of course in Nagarno Karabach.
Even as countries changed from the Warsaw Pact to NATO and took their CFE levels with them and the whole concept of balance became ridiculous there were plenty of sticking points including limits put early on in areas of the Soviet Union. The so called flank areas of the north and south meant that the Ukraine and Russia were the only countries in the entire agreement that were restricted as to where they could deploy their forces in their north and south regions.
the original intent was to prevent large amounts of material being moved from the west bases in former WP countries to the south or north of Russia or the Ukraine as it was seen as destabilising for those areas to now be confronted with large force numbers just on the other side of the border.
Obviously during the conflicts of the 90s and 00s the Russians would have preferred to have been free to deploy any forces particularly to the south where and when they were needed... no other country in the agreement had limitiations within their borders on where they could or could not deploy their forces.
Of course for a while when Russia had no money for its military having to scrap large amounts of material was a money saving measure and it also put limits on the production and deployment of NATO conventional forces so Russia found it useful if more and more absurd over time as the original concept of balance with 20K tanks each gradually changed as countries left the WP and joined NATO.
The final straw was when Russia finally signed a new CFE treaty but pretty much no one else did in protest at Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia and Abkhazia and also NK.
Russia was bound by the treaty and was getting criticism from the west which was not bound because it had not signed yet so Putin withdrew from the CFE treaty until everyone else had signed it... they didn't.
Just as well Russia stuck to their guns and did not withdraw their forces from SO... who knows what might have happened if those forces were not present... 8 8 8.
Once Russia has S-400 and S-500 and S-350 in full production then the INF treaty becomes less useful and more of a hinderance.
As US ABM systems pop up everywhere the new START treaty also becomes less useful too.
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
You must be reading my mind or something. Everyday I hear of some "proof" that Russia is invading, all while the original source doesn't have an accurate location! - Most of the time, I just hear a "region", even though it could be filmed within Russia.Vann7 wrote:
That video was posted by Pro Kiev media as "Proof" Russian army is invading.. Why people assume that if the tittle
says the location is Ukraine.. it had to be that place ? Thats not proof that Russian armed forces are inside ukraine.
Only a video that claims is Russia invading. Time to wake up.. Remember the propaganda with the Buks missiles.. all debunked already.
TR1- Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-06
NOT a T-72B3 NOT destroyed in Ukraine.
sepheronx- Posts : 8810
Points : 9070
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
Sure looks like one.
Too bad they are giving them T-72B3's as that is a waste of a good tank in this conflict. They should be giving them old Ukrainian stock and keep the T-72B3's for their own use as they are good tanks if under good use.
Too bad they are giving them T-72B3's as that is a waste of a good tank in this conflict. They should be giving them old Ukrainian stock and keep the T-72B3's for their own use as they are good tanks if under good use.
sepheronx- Posts : 8810
Points : 9070
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
Vann7 wrote:That video was posted by Pro Kiev media as "Proof" Russian army is invading.. Why people assume that if the tittle
says the location is Ukraine.. it had to be that place ? Thats not proof that Russian armed forces are inside ukraine.
Only a video that claims is Russia invading. Time to wake up.. Remember the propaganda with the Buks missiles.. all debunked already.
Pro kiev media is even saying there are 100 Russian tanks inside ukraine and that they are firing Toscka-U missiles
at civilians areas. Some people simply never learn ..how media propaganda works.
Problem with their claims, is that usually they are very hard to prove. Besides a tank here or there that may prove Russia is supplying arms, they seem to fail to prove Russia's engagement in Ukraine. The soldiers in the villages? No video or photo evidence. Would be pretty easy to provide proof for 15,000 troops in Ukraine.... Also, one would simply need to ask the question "what is the gain for Russia shooting Tochka U\s at civillians" while Ukraine military has more, and was proven to do so in the past.
Vann7- Posts : 5385
Points : 5485
Join date : 2012-05-16
TR1 wrote:
NOT a T-72B3 NOT destroyed in Ukraine.
Certainly you have to be now very disappointed with Russia Government.. violating the territorial
integrity of Ukraine.
about the photo ,im not convinced yet.. could be photoshopped or fake.. Not convinced yet. a staged scene..
with a mockup turret of T-72.. It could be but it also could be fake.. not conclusive evidence yet.. You have no idea
how NATO like to fabricate scenes to proof something.. Ie.. like the american journalist "killed by ISIS" in IRAQ was debunked already and the film was done in SPAIN.
I cannot even find the video.. can you link the video from youtube? of thats a Bullshit photosshoped image with Ruptly logo to make it more realistic?
Last edited by Vann7 on Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:40 am; edited 1 time in total
sepheronx- Posts : 8810
Points : 9070
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
Vann7 wrote:TR1 wrote:
NOT a T-72B3 NOT destroyed in Ukraine.
Certainly you have to be now very disappointed with Russia Government.. violating the territorial
integrity of Ukraine.
about the photo ,im not convinced yet.. could be photoshopped or fake.. Not convinced yet. a staged scene..
with a mockup turret of T-72.. It could be but it also could be fake.. not conclusive evidence yet.. You have no idea
how NATO like to fabricate scenes to proof something.. Ie.. like the american journalist "killed by ISIS" in IRAQ was debunked already and the film was done in SPAIN.
Well, US has provided weapons to syrian rebels whom are ISIS now and I recall seeing a photo with one carrying a US MANPAD. Point is, this could be the evidence that shows Russia is supplying the troops. That said though, it doesn't make a difference in the end, as it would just mean that Russia is doing what the US does and has done in the past while still being hailed as a democracy maker.
TR1- Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-06
Vann7 wrote:TR1 wrote:
NOT a T-72B3 NOT destroyed in Ukraine.
Certainly you have to be now very disappointed with Russia Government.. violating the territorial
integrity of Ukraine.
about the photo ,im not convinced yet.. could be photoshopped or fake.. Not convinced yet. a staged scene..
with a mockup turret of T-72.. It could be but it also could be fake.. not conclusive evidence yet.. You have no idea
how NATO like to fabricate scenes to proof something.. Ie.. like the american journalist "killed by ISIS" in IRAQ was debunked already and the film was done in SPAIN.
I am convinced however.
That you are a complete idiot. Photoshoped, rofl.
Go watch the video.
Faked beheadings? Let me guess, you believe moon landings are faked too.
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
sepheronx wrote:That doesn't look like Militia. Picture even has Russian colors of the video.
Yes it does look like the militia. The road sign has been identified as the Kiev-Lugansk-Izvarino road
The photo is from Crimea but has nothing to do with the video footage
Vann7- Posts : 5385
Points : 5485
Join date : 2012-05-16
TR1 wrote:Vann7 wrote:TR1 wrote:
NOT a T-72B3 NOT destroyed in Ukraine.
Certainly you have to be now very disappointed with Russia Government.. violating the territorial
integrity of Ukraine.
about the photo ,im not convinced yet.. could be photoshopped or fake.. Not convinced yet. a staged scene..
with a mockup turret of T-72.. It could be but it also could be fake.. not conclusive evidence yet.. You have no idea
how NATO like to fabricate scenes to proof something.. Ie.. like the american journalist "killed by ISIS" in IRAQ was debunked already and the film was done in SPAIN.
I am convinced however.
That you are a complete idiot. Photoshoped, rofl.
Go watch the video.
Faked beheadings? Let me guess, you believe moon landings are faked too.
Where is the Video?
You only posted a picture.. i cannot find that video on youtube..
Neither can find that video in Ruptly.. perhaps you got it from Euromaidan Press or MP heaven.
Edit...
Ok found it..
https://ruptly.tv/vod/list/1/keywords/Ukraine
However the RUptly video description says it was a convoy of Government forces that was destroyed.. So if what they claim is true.. then what looks like a T-72b3 tank was driven by the Kiev junta.. and not the Novo fighters.
Last edited by Vann7 on Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:50 am; edited 1 time in total
TR1- Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-06
Yeah yeah keep the denial:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dmHlG6IZNo&list=PLeIzHhBSrVIavlB7fc5R0UMWdLRAV8cvG
35 seconds in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dmHlG6IZNo&list=PLeIzHhBSrVIavlB7fc5R0UMWdLRAV8cvG
35 seconds in.
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
- He actually does believe the "Moon Hoax", but to each his own. Those beheadings look like what a 12yo could make on iMovie!TR1 wrote:Vann7 wrote:TR1 wrote:
NOT a T-72B3 NOT destroyed in Ukraine.
Certainly you have to be now very disappointed with Russia Government.. violating the territorial
integrity of Ukraine.
about the photo ,im not convinced yet.. could be photoshopped or fake.. Not convinced yet. a staged scene..
with a mockup turret of T-72.. It could be but it also could be fake.. not conclusive evidence yet.. You have no idea
how NATO like to fabricate scenes to proof something.. Ie.. like the american journalist "killed by ISIS" in IRAQ was debunked already and the film was done in SPAIN.
I am convinced however.
That you are a complete idiot. Photoshoped, rofl.
Go watch the video.
Faked beheadings? Let me guess, you believe moon landings are faked too.
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
That's a T-72B3 in Ukraine. It's from an incident in the Ilovajsk pocket when one was destroyed and another abandoned, although it looks like the Ukrainians didn't hold on to it for long...Gur Khan has a post about it on his blog
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
Doesn't matter, Russia supplying a few tanks here and there is better than having Kiev taking control of the region!TR1 wrote:Yeah yeah keep the denial:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dmHlG6IZNo&list=PLeIzHhBSrVIavlB7fc5R0UMWdLRAV8cvG
35 seconds in.
Vann7- Posts : 5385
Points : 5485
Join date : 2012-05-16
TR1 wrote:Yeah yeah keep the denial:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dmHlG6IZNo&list=PLeIzHhBSrVIavlB7fc5R0UMWdLRAV8cvG
35 seconds in.
Saw it.. Read the description of the video.. the burned military hardware was from Kiev junta..
It the scene was not staged .. and is a real turret it looks like Kiev junta have T-72 tanks with Mods that looks
like the RUssian version.. After the MF-17 incident false flag will not surprise me anything.
Here is the description of the video..
The remains of Donbas Battalion trucks littered roads near the village of Mnogopolie, Donetsk region on Monday.
The battalion was caught when trying to slip through the lines of anti-Kiev forces.
At least 60 members of the battalion were also killed during fighting in the region last Thursday.
Donbass Batalion = Nazi army..
It appears the kiev junta managed to modify Tanks that have a turret that looks like T72-b3.
Since the turret is near of the other burned trucks.. is not possible that it was a Novorossiya tank.. Because you cannot get close to a tank with trucks.. In short it looks Kiev have tanks with mods similar to T-72b3.. they do have the capability to do it.. or is a really weird scene .. not convinced yet.
Simply use you logic and common sense.. Russian Army will never send their best T-72 tanks to Ukraine.. since they sell those tanks.. IT looks to me.. that ukraine modified a few t-72 tanks they got from other european
nations to look like Russian version T-72B3.. to discredit their tanks.. when it get distroyed. Russia will never send
hardware to Ukraine that they need to sell. If Russia wanted to help they will send Old T-72b that looks more like the Georgia ones..
or T-80s with reinforced armor.. that they should have. and that looks like the ones Ukraine have.
Last edited by Vann7 on Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:06 am; edited 1 time in total
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
Look photoshoping does occur but that T-72 isn't photoshoped.
I came across a pic of a T-80BV with the slogan "on to Kiev" painted on the front....most likely a photoshop since we haven't seen any militia T-80BV's and it looks like a pic from a Russian Army exercise
I came across a pic of a T-80BV with the slogan "on to Kiev" painted on the front....most likely a photoshop since we haven't seen any militia T-80BV's and it looks like a pic from a Russian Army exercise
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
Could it be a stopgap that just happens to look like the B3 turret?
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
Those letters are definitely photoshopped on there.Cyberspec wrote:Look photoshoping does occur but that T-72 isn't photoshoped.
I came across a pic of a T-80BV with the slogan "on to Kiev" painted on the front....most likely a photoshop since we haven't seen any militia T-80BV's and it looks like a pic from a Russian Army exercise
sepheronx- Posts : 8810
Points : 9070
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
Well, rather than saying photoshop, the question is the video in question. It is an RT video based upon the picture. So if someone can post the video, that would be able to help solve this issue.
Vann7- Posts : 5385
Points : 5485
Join date : 2012-05-16
Cyberspec wrote:Look photoshoping does occur but that T-72 isn't photoshoped.
I came across a pic of a T-80BV with the slogan "on to Kiev" painted on the front....most likely a photoshop since we haven't seen any militia T-80BV's and it looks like a pic from a Russian Army exercise
Thats why im saying..
People need to be very careful with information in wars.. is part of the game.
I can't imagine a single reason why will Russia send the latest T-72B3 tank with all bells and cool things..
When all the tanks that Ukraine use are T-80s and T-62 .. any cheap tank can do the job.. Russia sells military hardware , and they need to avoid at all cost to used their best hardware.. because is not good for sales that the entire world knows your tanks failed in X or Y war.. So it makes more sense if Russia wanted to help.. is to Mod T-80tanks to the same level of T-72b3.. So if they destroyed it will be ukraine hardware the one with the bad image. or simply Russia can send the older T-72b1 like the ones they used in georgia war.. those can do that job.