The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

wittmanace

Active Member
Kherson Airbase attack & fake news from Reuters

1. Although unconfirmed, Ukrainian General Staff informed today that a naval infantry unit conducted a night operation that destroyed some 30 helicopters at Kherson Airbase. Russian forces were dumb enough to land 30 helicopters in the captured airport outside city of Kherson (south coast), without adequate security. It is possible the night raid could've destroyed many of the helos parked on the eastern side of the airbase. We will have to wait for release of images to confirm. In other news, the Russian Navy Project 22160 patrol ship Vasily Bykov was targeted in GRAD shelling in Black Sea.

2. This is the 4th Su-34 shot down. The way the Russian Su-30SMs and Su-34s are being used in the invasion of Ukraine is very different from the doctrine of other Strike Eagle Users (like Isreal, S. Korea or Singapore) — any of ours will come as a complex strike package, supported by jamming (with SEAD missions allocated for certain ingress routes). The Russian Air Force seems to be relying a lot on gravity bombs; in contrast F-15SGs (w sniper pods), supported by Heron 1 UAVs are going do single pass drops of multiple guided munitions (like SDB II, JDAMS, & Paveway II). It seems that the Russian air force been so ineffective despite Russia's supposedly substantial advantage over Ukraine in the air domain.

3. Kremlin's propaganda media Reuters, just deleted this tweet. It promoted a fake video claiming to show Russian armour in "Kyiv region." But no snow in Kyiv region.

4. Filming POWs has long been viewed as contrary to the Geneva Convention. Ukraine’s filming and sharing videos of Russian prisoners of war violates the laws of war. Why are people sharing these videos and photos? The rules apply even against the aggressors. Despite my support for Ukraine in this struggle against the Russian invasion, it is important to flag such potential violations when they occur.

5. Former Korean Navy UDT/SEAL turned YouTube star Ken Rhee says he's gone on a mission to Ukraine to support the country. South Korea has responded to reports that Ken Rhee is on his way to Ukraine by re-iterating its citizens could face up to 1 year in prison if they enter Ukraine without permission.
Regarding the reuters tweet, thats actual footage (not a picture, its a frozen screen from footage) that is also airing on the BBC at 18:14 London time, with the statement that its Kiev region and the footage is form the Russian ministry of defence. I think the statements about reuters are perhaps inappropriate.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Re 3 and 4:

It's laughable to suggest Reuters is affiliated with Russian news. Talk about over the top rhetoric.
1. I have provided evidence that Reuters Connect has an agreement with TASS — take back your point and apologise to me.

2. Reuters will delete tweets containing a video from Russia's defense ministry without additional context. So the news agency was caught ‘unintentionally’ spreading TASS and Russian propaganda.

3. The Geneva Convention applies to Ukraine. This is a fact and not a matter up for discussion.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Regarding the reuters tweet, thats actual footage (not a picture, its a frozen screen from footage) that is also airing on the BBC at 18:14 London time, with the statement that its Kiev region and the footage is form the Russian ministry of defence. I think the statements about reuters are perhaps inappropriate.
No, I disagree. The Ukrainian Army is bleeding and fighting to keep Russian tanks out of Kyiv. It has not fallen, when the video shared by Reuters (that is now deleted), implied that Russian tanks are in Kyiv.
 

wittmanace

Active Member
1. I have provided evidence that Reuters Connect has an agreement with TASS — take back your point and apologise to me.

2. Reuters will delete tweets containing a video from Russia's defense ministry without additional context. So the news agency was caught ‘unintentionally’ spreading TASS and Russian propaganda.

3. The Geneva Convention applies to Ukraine. This is a fact and not a matter up for discussion.

To be fair, from what I see "However, now video reports from our country will be available to thousands of Reuters’ clients around the world. " means that Reuters give their customers access to the videos TASS has. Im not sure, and it doesnt state, that TASS is now an actual reuters source like its a subsidiary or anything. I mean, they have Anadolu, a Turkish state press agency.......so it seems they just have affiliates like that, rather than disseminating their material verbatim, which is what I understand the implication to be?

Im not sure now if we are talking across one another and Im missing something.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

wittmanace

Active Member
No, I disagree. The Ukrainian Army is bleeding and fighting to keep Russian tanks out of Kyiv. It has not fallen, when the video shared by Reuters (that is now deleted), implied that Russian tanks are in Kyiv.
but I am saying thats a small screenshot we cant link anymore. The same footage is in other media sources with the statement I put there. Specifically that its Kiev region, shared by russian ministry of defence. I cant see a) that they arent in Kiev region, or b) that the reuters now gone tweet's linked story doesnt make the distinction



EDIT:
even the British MOD has Russians within that area in the map released 6 or 7 hours ago:



as does the map BBC are sharing as yesterday's, citation under:

1646678973296.png
 
Last edited:

JGCAC

New Member
1. I have provided evidence that Reuters Connect has an agreement with TASS — take back your point and apologise to me.
I know that agencies will often just republish whatever they see coming on the "wire" because it's easy and they're understaffed. Let me rephrase in that it's highly unlikely Reuters is somehow caught up in a systemic way with Russian fake news.

3. The Geneva Convention applies to Ukraine. This is a fact and not a matter up for discussion.
I don't think anyone's questioning this. Doesn't address what I said, though.

Regarding the reuters tweet, thats actual footage (not a picture, its a frozen screen from footage) that is also airing on the BBC at 18:14 London time, with the statement that its Kiev region and the footage is form the Russian ministry of defence. I think the statements about reuters are perhaps inappropriate.
I'll second this; it seems like the argument is being overstated.
 
Last edited:

Blackshoe

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
3. The Geneva Convention applies to Ukraine. This is a fact and not a matter up for discussion.
It would interestingly not apply to forces from the LDNR, since that is viewed by Ukraine as an intra- (vice inter-) state conflict.

But the real answer is that Geneva is a set of norms for fighting developed by 19th Century Euros, hasn't been routinely followed by both belligerents in more than 100 years, and frankly has never been widely followed by non-Western nations; at some point we might as well be hammering the combatants for not following the Pax et Treuga Dei while we're complaining about their behavior.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Clearly NKorea and probably Iran are now seeing the consequences of giving up nuclear weapons. A nuclear armed Ukraine would be a different war scenario for Russia, one that could have seen serious internal opposition to Putin’s adventure by those around him.
 

wittmanace

Active Member
Clearly NKorea and probably Iran are now seeing the consequences of giving up nuclear weapons. A nuclear armed Ukraine would be a different war scenario for Russia, one that could have seen serious internal opposition to Putin’s adventure by those around him.
I suspect those countries already watched Libya, Iraq, and Syria when it comes to that. I also find it unlikely the Maidan would have gotten as far as it did, if Ukraine had nukes. An interesting qusiton would be the extent to whoch either the political west would interfere in a nuclear Ukraine (or encourage the opposition etc), and the difference in Russia's red line?
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I suspect those countries already watched Libya, Iraq, and Syria when it comes to that. I also find it unlikely the Maidan would have gotten as far as it did, if Ukraine had nukes. An interesting qusiton would be the extent to whoch either the political west would interfere in a nuclear Ukraine (or encourage the opposition etc), and the difference in Russia's red line?
Two interesting questions wrt a nuclear Ukraine. Left over Soviet nukes were a proliferation concern and the West apparently thought they were best sent back to Russia. Probably a few governments regret that decision not to mention many Ukrainian leaders. A nuclear Ukraine wouldn’t be a very attractive target for greedy Russian oligarchs so I suspect Putin would have faced some serious opposition to his direct military attack. Putin being Putin, he likely would still resort to other devious methods. Personally I think the MAD doctrine would apply just as much to a Russia-Ukraine confrontation as it would to a NATO-Ruuia confrontation.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
A nuclear Ukraine wouldn’t be a very attractive target for greedy Russian oligarchs so I suspect Putin would have faced some serious opposition to his direct military attack
Ukraine it self basically control by Oligarchs. Also Ukraine so far has not come out with effective administrations (that West actually agree upon, but not saying that anymore after Putin invade Ukraine). Ukraine give back ex USSR nuclear because they also have much less resources than Russia to maintain them.

West support Russia to get back all ex USSR nuclear from other ex USSR Republics (including Ukraine), because regardless their worries on Russia ability to safe guard ex USSR nuclear, it is much better then let other ex USSR Republics also keep Nuclear warheads.
 

denix56

Active Member
I wonder if the weather conditions (heavy clouds, snow, rain) could affect the altitude the Russian aircrafts fly to perform the tasks?
 
Last edited:

koxinga

Well-Known Member
Ukraine it self basically control by Oligarchs. Also Ukraine so far has not come out with effective administrations (that West actually agree upon, but not saying that anymore after Putin invade Ukraine). Ukraine give back ex USSR nuclear because they also have much less resources than Russia to maintain them.

West support Russia to get back all ex USSR nuclear from other ex USSR Republics (including Ukraine), because regardless their worries on Russia ability to safe guard ex USSR nuclear, it is much better then let other ex USSR Republics also keep Nuclear warheads.
Most people forget what Ukraine was like immediately after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Thousands of nukes in a country that had a barely functioning government and underpaid/no pay security forces.

Remember, they were selling stuff to anyone who had hard currency at the point. KH-55 ALCMs to Iran, ex-Russian carrier and plans to China, ex-Russian SU-33 prototype to China etc.

Even if they kept a handful of nukes, maintenance, command and control would be an issue because they were all keyed into Russian systems.
 

Steinmetz

Active Member
Most people forget what Ukraine was like immediately after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Thousands of nukes in a country that had a barely functioning government and underpaid/no pay security forces.

Remember, they were selling stuff to anyone who had hard currency at the point. KH-55 ALCMs to Iran, ex-Russian carrier and plans to China, ex-Russian SU-33 prototype to China etc.

Even if they kept a handful of nukes, maintenance, command and control would be an issue because they were all keyed into Russian systems.
Indeed, that was the main reason Ukraine gave up their nukes. They didn't have the funds or ability to maintain all those weapons. The U.S. actually helped in the process of returning the weapons.

Why did Ukraine give up its nuclear weapons?
 

hauritz

Well-Known Member
I always question the validity of any news published during a war but I find this interesting for several reasons. First of all, yes it does kind of match up with what we are seeing and what we have always suspected. Shortages of ammunition, the overall quality of the Russian fighting forces, lack of moral doesn't surprise me.


What I do wonder about is why the Russians are allowing their soldiers to carry mobile phones in the first place. Not only can they be easily hacked but they can also be tracked. This is how google maps does its road traffic reports. It literally just looks for the location of mobile phones. The mobile phones themselves, assuming they work, are probably using mobile towers owned and controlled by the Ukrainians. They could freely intercept any text messages or phone calls sent by the Russians.

The other thing is that the Ukraine is winning the social media war. The Russians are trying to block social media but trust me, that doesn't work. There is a reason VPN usage is spiking in Russia.

 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Looks like some more embarrassment for Russia coming up with a trial of a high ranking pilot accused of civilian bombings
Ukraine is the one putting him on trial. Just to be clear. Given the timing this is obviously a propaganda move.

I fully understand that generals must go to the front on the odd occasion, rally the troops etc.
But to lose I think it is 3 now in 12 days, that seems excessive
He was no doubt killed by the Ghost of Kiev. I'm going to hold off on some sort of evidence for this one.
 
Last edited:

weaponwh

Member
isn't the nuclear code are in russia hand after soviet breakup, ukraine only have the nuke in their territories without the means to launch it. and russia would invade ukraine back then, if ukraine decide to keep its nuke.
 
Top