And CNN is garbage. And I'm skeptical of claims of pro-Ukrainian OSINTers when it comes to casualty counts. For what it's worth, I'm skeptical of the Russian ones, too.
The point is that it's difficult to determine which vehicles belong to whom based on images like this one, pulled from post #6153. But the pro-Ukrainian OSINTers are implying these are all Russian.
AFV 1, 2 and 3 are BMP-1. Two of their turrets are seen at 4 and 5. AFV 6 is a BTR-D. So what? Well, the Russians do not use BMP-1. The UAF and Donbas militias use them. But the Russian army uses different variants (BMP-1AM and BRM-1K). Russian airborne units, Ukrainian ground and air forces and the Donbas militias use the BTR-D - the latter having captured them from UAF.
Basically, this picture tells us nothing except a battle took place and all sides likely took casualties, but there is nothing in this picture that one can conclude all casualties are Russian.
Oh. Yeah agreed, everyone lies. This should be just a known base shouldn’t it? Nobody tells the truth. It’s war…
Oh for feck's sake. Don't be so obtuse. Those are T-64s
you mean the same tank that both sides use? the T 64 being the major AFV for eastern militia, and lets be honest the Russians are combing their reserves now, we are seeing all kinds of crap turn up that no one has seen in decades
you mean the same tank that both sides use? the T 64 being the major AFV for eastern militia, and lets be honest the Russians are combing their reserves now, we are seeing all kinds of crap turn up that no one has seen in decades
Russians don't use T-64s, and especially not ones with digital camo.
__________________
"If you do not know what you are doing, neither does your enemy."
- - Joe Tzu
They were both trying to use it. Russians tried. Then the Ukrainians. Then the Russians again. The battle was ongoing since about 1 May 22.
Why would they cross a natural barrier when they're trying to stop a larger force from pushing south. I think its logical that both sides had losses, especially when RuAF got a lot of vehicles to the south bank, but why would they counter attack across with no means to escape?
Use of captured vehicles and Donbas fodder in the first wave of a crossing seems pretty on brand for RuAF from what we've seen. Who knows what the make up of these re-assembled BTGs are after getting smashed in Chernihiv and redeployed in the SE. O marked vehicles were originally part of the Chernihiv front in the initial invasion NE of Kyiv, see plenty of those in the wreckage I posted earlier.
Last edited by burn_this_city; 05-19-2022 at 05:16 PM.
Reason: Chernihiv not Sumy
Russians don't use T-64s, and especially not ones with digital camo.
Their militias do though and it seems to be Russian policy to send those poor saps in first to take the losses now that they have realised the Ukrainians are better than them at this
Russia also definitely uses the BMP-1 so I'm not sure where that assertion is coming from.
There's a ton of Russian cope emanating from this failure. If you want to see a deep dive on the available information scroll through this massive thread by @Danspiun.
And CNN is garbage. And I'm skeptical of claims of pro-Ukrainian OSINTers when it comes to casualty counts. For what it's worth, I'm skeptical of the Russian ones, too.
The point is that it's difficult to determine which vehicles belong to whom based on images like this one, pulled from post #6153. But the pro-Ukrainian OSINTers are implying these are all Russian.
AFV 1, 2 and 3 are BMP-1. Two of their turrets are seen at 4 and 5. AFV 6 is a BTR-D. So what? Well, the Russians do not use BMP-1. The UAF and Donbas militias use them. But the Russian army uses different variants (BMP-1AM and BRM-1K). Russian airborne units, Ukrainian ground and air forces and the Donbas militias use the BTR-D - the latter having captured them from UAF.
Basically, this picture tells us nothing except a battle took place and all sides likely took casualties, but there is nothing in this picture that one can conclude all casualties are Russian.
You can see video of that exact spot during the fight here:
I don't know, that doesn't seem too inconsistent with the narrative. And then there's this video from earlier which is also consistent with Russia getting equipment across before the bridge was destroyed. There are several tanks just sitting there with their turrets facing the Ukrainian controlled side. If those were Ukrainian tanks, presumably they'd be shooting at each other across the river: https://twitter.com/user/status/1524751543869661184
MOD and map updates. Both in the North near Kharkiv and in the South near Kherson, Russians appear to be digging in or fighting delaying actions in anticipation for Ukrainian counter-offensives. East of Izium and North of Popasana, Russians appear to have made some gains since the last update pushing back Ukrainian lines defending against the attempted encirclement of Sievierodonetsk. In Mariupol, MOD estimates roughly 1700 Ukrainian soldiers have surrendered at this point.
It would be interesting to know who is responsible for all the sabotage. It's likely a combination of different things, like disgruntled Russian civilians, Russian local authorities trying to cover up corruption, clandestine missions conducted by external sources, ethnic Ukrainians, etc... I can't help but wonder how much is coordinated though. With so many incidents, I wouldn't be surprised if some are.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
It would be interesting to know who is responsible for all the sabotage. It's likely a combination of different things, like disgruntled Russian civilians, Russian local authorities trying to cover up corruption, clandestine missions conducted by external sources, ethnic Ukrainians, etc... I can't help but wonder how much is coordinated though. With so many incidents, I wouldn't be surprised if some are.
Or it's the same model as with islamist terrorism; once you give people an idea, they can apply it to things around them quite on their own.
(Also; yes this is terrorism. That's good to remember the next time you think terrorism is only a weapon of the evil people.)
Or it's the same model as with islamist terrorism; once you give people an idea, they can apply it to things around them quite on their own.
(Also; yes this is terrorism. That's good to remember the next time you think terrorism is only a weapon of the evil people.)
Is it terrorism?
Ukraine is currently in a war with Russia.
So a typical definition of terrorism is illegal actions against civilian targets for political aims.
So some of the fires like the Ferris wheel would be acts of terrorism. But things like burning down of enlistment centers if done by Ukrainians /allies would in my opinion be legitimate targets of war.
So a typical definition of terrorism is illegal actions against civilian targets for political aims.
So some of the fires like the Ferris wheel would be acts of terrorism. But things like burning down of enlistment centers if done by Ukrainians /allies would in my opinion be legitimate targets of war.
It gets a little grey. Personally, I think military targets are fair game even if civilians are carrying it out. Some people would disagree. A few years back when militants rammed a boat into a U.S. warship in the Gulf, it was called terrorism by the U.S., but I always thought that was a fair target even if I don't agree with motives of either side. IEDs targeting soldiers or mercenary contractors are also legitimate IMO, but many people consider it terrorism.
I wonder it Russia ever regrets forcefully relocating so many Ukrainians into Russia's interior in the past. I would not at all be surprised if some of them are involved in some of these acts.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
