Crisis in the Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.

solarz

Brigadier
For me it looks like a string of news from Russian MoD and RT because 'western media lie'... There's no point for discussing this matter here.

I guess you don't understand the difference between "claims" and "evidence".

The evidence presented by the Russian side may be circumstantial and debatable, but at least it's not just based on social media posts.
 

Janiz

Senior Member
The evidence presented by the Russian side may be circumstantial and debatable, but at least it's not just based on social media posts.
What evidence are you talking about? It's the same as Western side - word against word. It can't be helped when some stupid self-alleged 'separatist' girl posts pics of 'Mascara from Amsterdam' she used as the evidence of the airplane crush victims personal belongings were looted or some stupid Russian soldier writes about 'bombarding Ukraine all night long'... You can't justify cases when they score to their own goal. News about BBC deleted video is more important than stories like this here...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

solarz

Brigadier
What evidence are you talking about? It's the same as Western side - word against word. It can't be helped when some stupid self-alleged 'separatist' girl posts pics of 'Mascara from Amsterdam' she used as the evidence of the airplane crush victims personal belongings were looted or some stupid Russian soldier writes about 'bombarding Ukraine all night long'... You can't justify cases when they score to their own goal. News about BBC deleted video is more important than stories like this here...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I guess you don't count satellite photos, radar signatures, and eye witness accounts as evidence.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
I guess you don't count satellite photos, radar signatures, and eye witness accounts as evidence.

Eye Witness testimony can be wrong. It can be miss Remembered, It can be influenced by media exposure or political motivations not always lying mind you.
There was a Court case in here in the US where a Police officer was forced to gun down a suspect. The Officer was accused of executing the suspect. A "Eye Witness" was put on the stand where she testified to seeing the officer Point his weapon Cock the Hammer and gun the suspect down... Damning right. The Defence even had her reenact it for effect... right before they revealed that the officers weapon was a Glock semi auto. A striker fired handgun, No hammer to cock.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Satellite photos can be altered, Radar data Generated.
What a wonderful time we live in...
 
Last edited:

solarz

Brigadier
Eye Witness testimony can be wrong. It can be miss Remembered, It can be influenced by media exposure or political motivations not always lying mind you.
There was a Court case in here in the US where a Police officer was forced to gun down a suspect. The Officer was accused of executing the suspect. A "Eye Witness" was put on the stand where she testified to seeing the officer Point his weapon Cock the Hammer and gun the suspect down... Damning right. The Defence even had her reenact it for effect... right before they revealed that the officers weapon was a Glock semi auto. A striker fired handgun, No hammer to cock.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Satellite photos can be altered, Radar data Generated.
What a wonderful time we live in...

I'm not saying the Russian evidence is conclusive, just that it's a lot more substantial than what the Americans have presented so far.
 

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
I'm not saying the Russian evidence is conclusive, just that it's a lot more substantial than what the Americans have presented so far.

Precisely the point. The Russian side have presented real evidence in the form of Empirical Data from their Military Surveillance systems. Nobody else has done so, despite a number of nations making very strong claims but totally failing to back them up with anything.

This is precisely the point that the AP correspondent was making and made it clear that his patience was being tested by being fobbed off with unsubstantiated opinion. His lines "its not evidence just because you say so" and "details provided in lieu of evidence".

It seems that some members are getting agitated because there preferred side in this are not winning either the argument or the battle on the ground. Well is not the fault of members here that are determined to get a much rounder picture of the situation than the 2D version provided solely by Domestic media.
Many members here are here as it is a forum that does not accept media feed at face value. The fact of the matter is that the media feed from the Pro Kiev side; although loud and strident, is factually weak and the the narrative form the Pro Militia side is more detailed and more compelling.

For anyone looking for a NATO Fanboy site, there are no shortage on the web, but SDF is not one of them.
 
Last edited:

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Russia says Ukraine tried to kill officers in cross-border mortar bombing
12:31pm EDT
By Thomas Grove
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian authorities accused Ukraine of trying to kill investigators who were checking reports of cross-border shooting by firing a volley of mortar rounds over the frontier into Russia on Friday.
A Russian security official said up to 40 mortar bombs fired by Ukrainian forces fell in the Russian province of Rostov near the border where Ukrainian government forces are fighting pro-Russian separatists.
There were no reports of injuries.
Russia's Investigative Committee said: "Those who shot from Ukraine carried out the shooting purposefully with an intent to kill Russian law enforcement officials."
"It was only the poor preparation of the Ukrainian military and the timely evacuation of law enforcement officers under the cover of armored transport vehicles that did not allow the shooters to realize their intention," it said in a statement.
Accusations by pro-European authorities in Ukraine, its western backers and Russia over cross-border fire have boosted tensions in the worst crisis between Russia and the West since the end of the Cold War.
Russia's foreign ministry also criticized Washington one day after it said Russia was firing artillery across the border into Ukraine to target Ukrainian military positions.
"We deny the unfounded public insinuations that State Department spokeswoman (Marie) Harf repeats day after day," the ministry said in a statement. "In journalistic briefings in previous days she has produced anti-Russian clichés that Washington stubbornly tries to impose on international opinion," the statement said.
The Investigative Committee, which answers only to President Vladimir Putin, said its officers were indentifiable as law enforcement officials and were in Rostov province's Kuybyshevsky region to look into previous accounts of cross-border shelling.
The committee has thrust itself to the fore of the crisis between Russia and Ukraine, accusing Ukrainian Interior Minister Arsen Avakov and Ihor Kolomoisky, a provincial governor, of criminal acts in the government's military push against rebels.
Vasily Malayev, a regional representative of Russia's Federal Security Service branch devoted to border security, was quoted by Russian news agency Interfax as saying that 30 mortar rounds had landed in a village in the region. He earlier told state Ria Novosti news agency around 40 shells had come across the border.
Ukraine says missiles shot from Russia may have downed two of its fighter jets this week. Moscow denies the accusation.
Russia's Chief of General Staff was quoted as saying by Interfax that it had proof that Ukraine had used phosphorus bombs that can kill through burns or smoke inhalation.
Earlier allegations of the use of the weapon were never proved and Kiev quickly denied this accusation.
"It's complete nonsense. We don't use phosphorus bombs. We simply don't have them. We use flares, but they have no relation to phosphorus bombs," Kiev's military spokesman, Vladislav Seleznyov, said.
(Reporting by Thomas Grove; Editing by Alison Williams)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

For the Record White Phosphorus is not banned against military targets. It covered under The United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons protocols 1 and 3 Incendiary weapons.
However Russia counters that it's being used on civilians and that would be a War Crime
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

New Ukrainian President Chocolate.

25 July 2014 Last updated at 12:14 ET
Ukraine crisis: More Russians face EU sanctions
The EU has added 15 individuals and 18 entities to its sanctions list targeting Russians linked to the separatist uprising in eastern Ukraine.
The names are expected to be announced shortly in the EU Official Journal.
The number of Russians subject to EU asset freezes and travel bans now totals 87. Two energy firms in Crimea were already on the list, but 18 other entities have now been added.
Western leaders accuse Russia of arming the pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine.
The crash of a Malaysia Airlines jet in rebel-held eastern Ukraine a week ago - believed to have been caused by a rebel missile strike - fuelled calls for tougher EU action.
Russia has denied allegations by Ukraine and Western leaders that it has supplied heavy weapons to the rebels. And the rebels denied shooting down the airliner, instead blaming Ukrainian forces.
The EU says it is targeting those who "actively support or are benefiting from Russian decision makers responsible for the annexation of Crimea or the destabilisation of eastern Ukraine".
The EU is also considering a range of technologies that could be restricted, in further measures against Russia.
Reuters news agency says EU Council President Herman Van Rompuy has sent a letter to EU leaders specifying that such measures should only affect the Russian oil sector, not gas, because of Europe's need for energy security.
Many EU countries rely heavily on imports of Russian gas.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Buk Missile System Lethal, But Undiscriminating

AWIN First
Bill Sweetman
Wed, 2014-07-23 15:43
With mounting evidence that Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was shot down by Ukrainian separatist rebels who believed they were engaging a military aircraft, attention is focusing on the Russian-built Almaz-Antey Buk-M1 ground-based air defense system (GBADS) that destroyed the airliner.

The Buk-M1 (SA-11 Gadfly to NATO) can be used by minimally trained operators to deliver a lethal attack, without the safeguards built into other comparable GBADS, an Aviation Week analysis shows. It is also one of the two GBADS — both of Soviet origin — that are most widely distributed in conflict zones with the potential for large-scale, cross-border or civil violence.

The feature that makes the Buk-series weapons uniquely dangerous was introduced in the 1970s when Tikhomirov NIIP, now part of Almaz-Antey, designed the system to replace the 2K12 Kub low-altitude missile system, known to NATO as the SA-6 Gainful. (The similar names are coincidental: "Kub" means "cube" and "Buk" means "beech.")

Kub was exported to Egypt after the destruction of that nation’s air force in a low-level air strike in 1967, and proved lethal in the 1973 Yom Kippur war. But it had a serious weakness in that it could engage only one target at a time. A Kub battery included one radar vehicle and four launch vehicles and used semi-active radar homing (SARH) guidance. The radar vehicle carried two antennas, a search radar and a continuous-wave tracker-illuminator, and the missile homed on to energy from the illuminator beam that was reflected from the target. With one illuminator per battery, the system could not start a second engagement until the previous missile had hit the target.

In the 1982 Lebanon war, the Israel Defense Force – Air Force launched a wave of decoys against Kubs and other GBADS. Once the Kubs locked onto the decoys they were unable to respond to the IDF-AF fighters that appeared next, and were destroyed.

Related
Read all of Aviation Week's MH17 coverage

The designers of the replacement Buk system had anticipated this problem. In addition to a new radar vehicle – the Phazotron 9S18M, Snow Drift to NATO – they fitted each launch vehicle with its own X-band multi-mode radar, under a radome on the front of the rotating launch platform. The vehicle is defined as a transporter/erector/launcher and radar (Telar). Similar to a fighter radar, the Telar radar (known to NATO as Fire Dome) has search, track and illuminator functions and can scan through a 120-deg. arc, independent of the movement of the platform.

This feature may have been a crucial factor in the destruction of MH17. The Fire Dome radar’s main job was to permit simultaneous engagement of more targets – one per Telar – under control of the battery’s 9S18M Snow Drift. But the Soviet military and the designers installed a set of backup modes that would permit the Telars to detect and attack targets autonomously, in the event the Snow Drift was shut down or destroyed by NATO’s rapidly improving anti-radar missiles.

The autonomous modes are intended for last-ditch use by the Telar operators, not the more highly trained crews in the battery command vehicle. According to an experienced analyst of Russian-developed radar, the automatic radar modes display targets within range. The operator can then command the system to lock up the target, illuminate and shoot.

Critically, these backup modes also bypass two safety features built into the 9S18M Snow Drift radar: a full-function identification friend-or-foe (IFF) system and non-cooperative target recognition (NCTR) modes. The IFF system uses a separate interrogator located above the main radar antenna and most likely will have been upgraded to current civilian standards.

The 9S18M introduced new NCTR processing technology, according to a 1998 interview with Buk designer Ardalion Rastov. NCTR techniques are closely held, but one of the most basic – jet engine modulation, or the analysis of beats and harmonics in the radar return that are caused by engine fan or compressor blades – should easily discriminate among a 777 with high-bypass turbofans, a turboprop transport or an Su-25 attack fighter.

There is no sign of an IFF interrogator on the Buk Telar’s Fire Dome radar or elsewhere on the vehicle. In normal operation, it would not be necessary since the target’s identity would be verified (according to the prevailing rules of engagement) before target data was passed to the Telar. Other GBADS also leave identification to the main search radar and the command-and-control center; however, the launch units cannot engage and fire without central guidance. The Buk’s combination of lethality and lack of IFF/NCTR is unique.

The Buk-M1 and later derivatives, the M2 and M2E, have been deployed in 14 nations, and are operational in other areas subject to internal conflict. In January 2013, Israel launched an air strike that was apparently intended to destroy a number of Buk-M2E vehicles – the more advanced version – that were being transferred from Syria to Hezbollah forces in Lebanon. In all, Syria is reported to have possessed eight Buk-M2E batteries. Syria also operates as many as 40 S-125 (SA-3 Goa) batteries, which are reportedly being upgraded. These also are medium-range, mobile weapons, but the launch units do not have radar. The same goes for the nation’s aging Kub batteries.

Egypt has 50-plus batteries of S-125, some of which have been modernized, and has been reportedly negotiating orders for Buk-M2E systems. Yemen also has some S-125 systems. Most pre-2003 Iraqi and Libyan GBADS have been destroyed, analysts suggest.

Source URL:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

texx1

Junior Member
Reuters news agency says EU Council President Herman Van Rompuy has sent a letter to EU leaders specifying that such measures should only affect the Russian oil sector, not gas, because of Europe's need for energy security.

That tells you all you need to know about EU's position on Russian sanctions. Hope Moscow doesn't consider oil and gas as one industry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top