Russia and Ukraine Current Events

Article:
Ukrainian forces successfully sank another Russian Black Sea Fleet (BSF) landing ship in the Black Sea off the southern coast of occupied Crimea on the night of February 13 to 14. The Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) published footage on February 14 showing Ukrainian maritime drones striking the Caesar Kunikov Ropucha-class landing ship off the coast of occupied Alupka, Crimea.[1] The GUR reported that maritime drone strikes caused the ship to sink and stated that Russian search and rescue operations were not successful. The GUR stated that the Caesar Kunikov was the largest amphibious landing ship of its project 775 type. Ukrainian forces have destroyed or damaged at least five BSF landing ships since the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.[2] Ukrainian Navy Spokesperson Captain Third Rank Dmytro Pletenchuk stated that only five of 13 BSF landing ships that Russia had at the start of the full-scale invasion remain "in service" and that "four ships are under repair, four are destroyed, and five are still in the ranks."[3]

Article:
Ukrainian forces have begun to withdraw from Avdiivka, and Russian forces appear to be focused on complicating or preventing a complete Ukrainian withdrawal. Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Colonel General Oleksandr Syrskyi stated early in the morning Ukrainian time on February 17 that he ordered Ukrainian forces within Avdiivka to withdraw to more favorable defensive positions in order to avoid encirclement and save the lives of Ukrainian personnel.[1] Syrskyi's announcement comes after several confirmed Russian advances on the outskirts of Avdiivka in the past 24 hours.

Russian sources claimed that Ukrainian forces are withdrawing en masse and that Ukrainian withdrawals are becoming increasingly chaotic and costly.[5] ISW has not observed any visual evidence of large or chaotic Ukrainian withdrawals, however, and the continued marginal rate of Russian advance in and around Avdiivka suggests that Ukrainian forces are currently conducting a relatively controlled withdrawal from Avdiivka.

Germany and France both signed bilateral security agreements with Ukraine on February 16. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a long-term bilateral security agreement with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on February 16 providing for bilateral cooperation in the military, political, financial, and humanitarian spheres until 2034.[13] The agreement also states that Germany will provide over €7 billion ($7.5 billion) in military aid to Ukraine in 2024, including a €1.1 billion ($1 billion) aid package that is currently being prepared and will include 36 howitzers, 120 thousand artillery shells (including 50,000 155mm artillery rounds), two Skynex air defense systems, missiles for the IRIS-T air-to-air missile system, 66 armored personnel carriers (APCs), several mine-clearing vehicles, and various reconnaissance drone models.[14] Zelensky also met with German Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier to discuss the launch of joint weapons production.[15] Zelensky later met with French President Emmanuel Macron to sign a bilateral security agreement and reported that France will provide Ukraine €3 billion ($3.2 billion) in military assistance over the course of 2024.[16]

The Avdiivka withdrawal is the most significant change of the frontline since Bakhmut.
 
External Quote:
"According to Austrian aviation war expert Tom Cooper, a probable but as-yet unproven and unconfirmed explanation for the recent string of Sukhoi shoot-downs is the compromise of confidential defensive electronic systems aboard the Russian jets to Ukrainian and US technicians, and tweaks made to Ukrainian-operated anti-aircraft systems taking advantage of the knowledge."

Source: https://twitter.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1764625599539089603


Tom Cooper is a well respected military aviation writer and analyst. If he is correct, appears the Ukrainians (and friends) have found a way to render Russian threat warning receivers ineffective, and/or defeat Russian anti-missile countermeasures like jamming, flares, and chaff.
 
Duke said:
Tom Cooper is a well respected military aviation writer and analyst. If he is correct, appears the Ukrainians (and friends) have found a way to render Russian threat warning receivers ineffective, and/or defeat Russian anti-missile countermeasures like jamming, flares, and chaff.
Click to expand...
It's very much speculation, though. The tweet references a Kyiv Post article, which references a February 29th blog post by Tom Cooper; this:
Article:
Then mind that sometimes the last year, there was a report about Ukrainians finding a near-intact Su-34 that crashed somewhere in the eastern Kharkiv Oblast, already sometimes back in 2022 (was a 'typical Ukrainian claim' for which 'there was no confirmation', and then for months).

That ('famous') itch in my small toe is telling me that before soon, there was a group of 'men in black' (MiB) inspecting that wreckage, carefully recovering every bit and piece of avionics, tidily packing and then taking that away… very, very, far away: all the way across the Atlantic Ocean.

….and over there, across the 'Big Pond', there is an agency named National Air and Space Intelligence Center (PDF): it came into being through re-organisation of the Foreign Technology Division of the US Air Force – the branch famous for sending its 'MiBs' all over the world. For example to collect MiG- and Yak-fighters, Mil-helicopters, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and different Soviet air-to-air missiles, and other Soviet made weaponry, whenever these were captured – whether in Korea or Yugoslavia of the 1950s, then in Vietnam, in the Middle East, in Chad, or wherever else… and then study them closely, back during the (I) Cold War.

That would explain the rest of the story: essentially, Su-34's avionics has been compromised – to the Americans, and thus to Ukrainians.

Unless the Russians find a way to upgrade it, significantly, the type is near-defenceless to such SAMs like PAC-2 and PAC-3.

So, the speculation is that NASIC exploited Russian tech to come up with a countermeasure. It's a nice thing to publish, because whether true or not, it scares Russian pilots.

That said, a technique like avoiding chaff misdirection by attacking from above, as described by Tom Cooper in the same blog post, doesn't require NASIC to be involved.
 
From Tom Cooper's following blog post:
Article:
Bottom line: there are lots of 'arguments speaking in favour of many of Ukrainian 'claims'.

However, fact is that there is no visual evidence for more than 4 kills over the last two weeks. Fact is also that, for example: a 'jet that disappeared from radar while targeted by a SAM' is absolutely no 'confirmation' for a kill: it's at least 'likely' the targeted jet actually recognised the threat (i.e. the RHAW-gear 'worked'), and dove to evade – as that the jet was shot down.

Thus, we have to wait and see what information might eventually emerge out of Russia. In the case of shoot-downs with fatalities, that's usually 'easy', because – whether hours, days, weeks, or months later – there are related reports in the social media. Where the crew survived: not at all.
 
One more:
Article:
Integrated Air Defense Systems

Given the multiple air defense systems Ukraine received, it made sense to integrate the various western systems with each other and with Ukraine's existing systems. Part of that integration involved the ability of different missiles being used in different launchers. The Norwegian NASAMS systems was designed with that capability in mind but other systems have also been modified. The other part of the integration is the software that links various radar data with different command centers to different launchers. The integration has been called the FrankenSAM system after Mary Shelley's Frankenstein monster that was created from various body parts.

[...]

An integrated network of system components is significantly more effective than isolated air defense systems. This is the probable reason why Ukrainian air defenses are claiming more aerial shootdowns, many of which have been verified. It is also likely to impact future air defense development and production where advanced components can be created and plugged into an integrated network of existing components rather than needing to create new advanced isolated air defense systems.

Details there. This (but not the NASIC theory) was repeated in Cooper's March 4 weekly report.
It has the advantage of some facts supporting it, unlike the "secret countermeasures" idea.
 
Mendel said:
It's very much speculation, though. The tweet references a Kyiv Post article, which references a February 29th blog post by Tom Cooper; this:
Article:
Then mind that sometimes the last year, there was a report about Ukrainians finding a near-intact Su-34 that crashed somewhere in the eastern Kharkiv Oblast, already sometimes back in 2022 (was a 'typical Ukrainian claim' for which 'there was no confirmation', and then for months).

That ('famous') itch in my small toe is telling me that before soon, there was a group of 'men in black' (MiB) inspecting that wreckage, carefully recovering every bit and piece of avionics, tidily packing and then taking that away… very, very, far away: all the way across the Atlantic Ocean.

….and over there, across the 'Big Pond', there is an agency named National Air and Space Intelligence Center (PDF): it came into being through re-organisation of the Foreign Technology Division of the US Air Force – the branch famous for sending its 'MiBs' all over the world. For example to collect MiG- and Yak-fighters, Mil-helicopters, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and different Soviet air-to-air missiles, and other Soviet made weaponry, whenever these were captured – whether in Korea or Yugoslavia of the 1950s, then in Vietnam, in the Middle East, in Chad, or wherever else… and then study them closely, back during the (I) Cold War.

That would explain the rest of the story: essentially, Su-34's avionics has been compromised – to the Americans, and thus to Ukrainians.

Unless the Russians find a way to upgrade it, significantly, the type is near-defenceless to such SAMs like PAC-2 and PAC-3.

So, the speculation is that NASIC exploited Russian tech to come up with a countermeasure. It's a nice thing to publish, because whether true or not, it scares Russian pilots.
Click to expand...
You'd not expect the Ukrainians (and friends) to tell the world if/how they have found a way to defeat Russian systems. Similarly, you'd not expect the Russians to acknowledge recent higher loss rates and systems' ineffectiveness. Since none of the parties involved are likely keen on verifying their part of this situation, a lack of hard evidence is not surprising. Operational security is taken very seriously in all militaries, but doesn't quell informed speculation.

Cooper's narrative of exploiting found/captured Russia equipment by Ukraine (and friends) does make sense and has happened many times in the history of warfare. One of the best known examples was the capture of a German radar station in occupied France in early 1942 by British commandos. The Brits not only examined the radar in situ, but hauled away key components of the radar system and captured a German radar technician. The exploration of information obtained allowed the British to fine tune their development and use of chaff (code name "Window.")
External Quote:
Examination of the radar array also allowed British scientists to conclude that they would have to deploy a countermeasure that had recently been developed, code-named Window. Examination of the Würzburg array showed that it was impervious to being jammed by conventional means used by the British during the early years of the conflict; thus Window would have to be deployed against German radars. The effectiveness of Window against Würzburg radar arrays was confirmed by a raid conducted by RAF Bomber Command on 24 July 1943 against Hamburg (Operation Gomorrah); the bombers used Window, all of the radar arrays in Hamburg were blinded and their operators confused, unable to distinguish between the radar signature of a real bomber and several pieces of Window giving off a similar signature.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Biting

Of course advantages as a result of such exploration are usually relatively short lived as both sides in a conflict continually work to gain/regain the upper hand. Think real world, hi-tech version of MAD Magazine's "Spy vs. Spy." Sometimes these solutions are technological, other times resulting from change of tactics or missions.
 
Mendel said:
So, the speculation is that NASIC exploited Russian tech to come up with a countermeasure.
Click to expand...

It also sounds like a "magic bullet" type argument for a complex situation. The story could be completely true, but still just a part of the reason for higher Russian AC loses. In addition to the FrankinSAMs, there is also the shooting down/destroying of the A50s and the resulting possible grounding of them:

External Quote:
Russia has likely grounded its fleet of A-50 early warning and control aircraft after Ukraine shot down a second one in two months, the UK Ministry of Defense said in an intelligence update on Saturday.

The A-50 is an airborne radar system that detects enemy aircraft, missiles, and air defense systems. They also provide daily command and control to Russian air operations and identify ground targets.

Before these two losses, Russia was believed to have only eight of the high-value aircraft, which cost hundreds of millions of dollars to build.

Justin Bronk, an air war specialist from the think tank the Royal United Services Institute, previously told the BBC that losing an A-50 with its 15-strong specialist crew would be a "highly operationally significant and embarrassing loss" for Russia's air force.

Losing these planes from the skies likely "significantly degrades the situational awareness" provided to Russian aircrews, according to the UK department.

Russia has lost three of these high-value planes in total. Kyiv's forces first hit an A-50 in February 2023, when an exploding drone flew to an air base in Belarus and destroyed an A-50 parked on the runway.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/othe...nsustainable-losses-says-uk-intel/ar-BB1jdX16

Even before the 2nd shoot down, it seems the A50 were operating further out than before.

I'm speculating a bit based on previous readings, but it seems the Russian Air Force, like much of the military, has fairly top-down command structure with less autonomy for its pilots than maybe NATO crews have. They may be much more dependent on not just warnings and situational information, but what to actually do from the coordinators on the A50s.

On a side note, as we've speculated before, this sure sounds like an Alien/UFO retrieval program if someone only heard bits and pieces of it:

External Quote:
...there is an agency named National Air and Space Intelligence Center (PDF): it came into being through re-organisation of the Foreign Technology Division of the US Air Force – the branch famous for sending its 'MiBs' all over the world. For example to collect MiG- and Yak-fighters, Mil-helicopters, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and different Soviet air-to-air missiles, and other Soviet made weaponry, whenever these were captured – whether in Korea or Yugoslavia of the 1950s, then in Vietnam, in the Middle East, in Chad, or wherever else… and then study them closely, back during the (I) Cold War.
 
Duke said:
You'd not expect the Ukrainians (and friends) to tell the world if/how they have found a way to defeat Russian systems.
Click to expand...
That argument smells too much of CT for me to accept it, it's unfalsifiable.

I have no doubt the US is exploiting any interesting Russian hardware that the Ukranians come across. But there's zero evidence that there's a huge tactical advantage to be had from that. And I don't agree that the existence of such an advantage would need to kept secret, it'd have a good propaganda value.
 
Mendel said:
That argument smells too much of CT for me to accept it, it's unfalsifiable.

I have no doubt the US is exploiting any interesting Russian hardware that the Ukranians come across. But there's zero evidence that there's a huge tactical advantage to be had from that. And I don't agree that the existence of such an advantage would need to kept secret, it'd have a good propaganda value.
Click to expand...
There's a difference between exploiting tactical success for propaganda purposes and revealing how the success was achieved. For example, the US made sure the world knew about the attack on Japan by Doolittle's Raiders, but the US didn't announce it had been achieved by launching Army twin-engine medium bombers from an aircraft carrier. When asked where the bombers had launched from, FDR claimed they flew from a secret US based in Shangri-la.
 
Duke said:
For example, the US made sure the world knew about the attack on Japan by Doolittle's Raiders, but the US didn't announce it had been achieved by launching Army twin-engine medium bombers from an aircraft carrier. When asked where the bombers had launched from, FDR claimed they flew from a secret US based in Shangri-la.
Click to expand...
Which, I was surprised to read on the Wikipedia page about the ship, is why we had an aircraft carrier named "Shangri La." In commemoration of that quip, and raid.
 
NorCal Dave said:
It also sounds like a "magic bullet" type argument for a complex situation. The story could be completely true, but still just a part of the reason for higher Russian AC loses. In addition to the FrankinSAMs, there is also the shooting down/destroying of the A50s and the resulting possible grounding of them:

External Quote:
Russia has likely grounded its fleet of A-50 early warning and control aircraft after Ukraine shot down a second one in two months, the UK Ministry of Defense said in an intelligence update on Saturday.

The A-50 is an airborne radar system that detects enemy aircraft, missiles, and air defense systems. They also provide daily command and control to Russian air operations and identify ground targets.

Before these two losses, Russia was believed to have only eight of the high-value aircraft, which cost hundreds of millions of dollars to build.

Justin Bronk, an air war specialist from the think tank the Royal United Services Institute, previously told the BBC that losing an A-50 with its 15-strong specialist crew would be a "highly operationally significant and embarrassing loss" for Russia's air force.

Losing these planes from the skies likely "significantly degrades the situational awareness" provided to Russian aircrews, according to the UK department.

Russia has lost three of these high-value planes in total. Kyiv's forces first hit an A-50 in February 2023, when an exploding drone flew to an air base in Belarus and destroyed an A-50 parked on the runway.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/othe...nsustainable-losses-says-uk-intel/ar-BB1jdX16

Even before the 2nd shoot down, it seems the A50 were operating further out than before.

I'm speculating a bit based on previous readings, but it seems the Russian Air Force, like much of the military, has fairly top-down command structure with less autonomy for its pilots than maybe NATO crews have. They may be much more dependent on not just warnings and situational information, but what to actually do from the coordinators on the A50s.
Click to expand...
If the stories of A50 traps and concerted efforts to bring down them are legit, I'm surprised the Ukrainians (and friends) waited so long in making the decision(s) to go after them. The US/West knows how important our ability to protect combat support force multipliers like AWACS/C3I aircraft and aerial tankers in wartime has been in SEA, Granada, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. We also know how much the Brits' lack of airborne early warning aircraft cost them in terms of naval losses during the Falklands War. I'd have thought blinding the Russian Air Force early on would have been a high priority.

The PRC has figured out the value of such asserts for their adversaries. Their long range PL-17 air-to-air missile was designed to destroy AWACS and tanker type aircraft.
External Quote:
The People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) appears to be on the brink of fielding an AAM that could pose a challenge to potential adversaries. The PL-17 (CH-AA-X-12) likely has a range of around 400 kilometres, using a dual-pulse solid rocket motor combined with a lofted trajectory to achieve the distance. The weapon is intended to engage what are sometimes referred to as high-value airborne assets, such as airborne early warning or tanker aircraft.
https://www.iiss.org/online-analysi...ssiles-push-the-performance-payload-envelope/

NorCal Dave said:
On a side note, as we've speculated before, this sure sounds like an Alien/UFO retrieval program if someone only heard bits and pieces of it:

External Quote:
...there is an agency named National Air and Space Intelligence Center (PDF): it came into being through re-organisation of the Foreign Technology Division of the US Air Force – the branch famous for sending its 'MiBs' all over the world. For example to collect MiG- and Yak-fighters, Mil-helicopters, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and different Soviet air-to-air missiles, and other Soviet made weaponry, whenever these were captured – whether in Korea or Yugoslavia of the 1950s, then in Vietnam, in the Middle East, in Chad, or wherever else… and then study them closely, back during the (I) Cold War.
Click to expand...
As I've noted somewhere here on MB, these NASIC recovery/exploitation teams do exist. I was seconded to one such (then FTD) team as a subject matter expert (SME) for the MiG-29 crash at the Paris Air Show in 1989. How the spooks got hold of the stuff we got to see I don't know, and I knew better than to ask. Whatever FTD learned in total was OBE soon afterwards, however. Within a couple years after the Paris crash, the German Air Force took over the MiG-29s the Soviets had supplied to the East Germans. "Air Force Magazine" did an article not long after the MiGs were absorbed into the Luftwaffe on the USAF pilots and technicians who went to Germany for real "hands on" experience with the Soviet built fighters.
 
Last edited:
I don't think this was posted here back in December.
Article:
Former Wagner head Yevgeny Prigozhin was killed under the oversight of former FSB Director and current Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev, according to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ).

Patrushev reportedly warned Russian President Vladimir Putin that relying on Prigozhin and his mercenaries in the war with Ukraine posed a threat to the Kremlin, ultimately leading to a bomb being planted under the wing of Prigozhin's plane.

On Aug. 23, Wagner's leader was waiting at Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport for his private plane to be checked and prepared for departure. According to Western intelligence services, it was during this delay that a small bomb was placed under the wing of the aircraft.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Dec. 22 that the current investigation is just "tabloid reading" and described the WSJ as being "very fond of producing pulp fiction."
 
External Quote:
France has sent its first troops officially to Ukraine. They have been deployed in support of the Ukrainian 54th Independent Mechanized Brigade in Slavyansk. The French soldiers are drawn from France's 3rd Infantry Regiment, which is one of the main elements of France's Foreign Legion (Légion étrangère).
https://asiatimes.com/2024/05/france-sends-combat-troops-to-ukraine-battlefront/

Haven't seen this from any other source, but if true opens some intriguing possibilities. I'm particularly interested to see if the French consulted with other NATO members. Also curious if the US/NATO provided the logistical support to move the Legionnaires and their kit.
 
deirdre said:
do you need support to move 100 guys and their backpacks?
Click to expand...
Rations, weapons, ammo, comm gear, body armor/personal equipment, medical supplies, maintenance equipment/spares, etc., probably even their own vehicles. No way they can count on the Ukrainians to supply such things, the FFL will be pretty much self sufficient. Probably very little commonality in equipment in any event.

The US has regularly provided logistical support, especially air lift, for FFL deployments, going back to Indochina. The issue here isn't the ability of the US to provide such support, it's the geopolitical decisions/political will in the US/NATO that lead up to transporting the troops/gear.
 
Last edited:
Duke said:
No way they can count on the Ukrainians to supply such things,
Click to expand...

i thought WE were supplying all that stuff! Would be nice if the Ukrainians shared some of the $billions, by at least feeding the Legionaires. :(

Duke said:
The issue here isn't the ability of the US to provide such support, it's the geopolitical decisions/political will in the US/NATO that lead up to transporting the troops/gear.
Click to expand...
i know.
 
deirdre said:
Article:
But the French Foreign Ministry explicitly denied a deployment of French troops to fight in the Russia-Ukraine war.

"FAKE NEWS ALERT," it wrote on X. "Disinformation campaigns on France's support to Ukraine are as active as ever. Let's have a look. France has not sent troops to #Ukraine."




Source: https://twitter.com/francediplo_EN/status/1787495544358633487
Click to expand...

I've come to a similar conclusion, nothing about an actual deployment on sites like BBC, France24, Foriegn Affairs, etc. When I first read the article making the claim, I was skeptical and researched if "Asia Times" was legit. I found it's hard news reports were generally factual, but its opinion pieces tended to be anti-PRC.

There is also a slim chance the article is accurate, a huge scoop for AT, but the deployment having been meant to be kept secret until after it was completed. I seriously doubt it, but knowing Macron has talked about sending troops as recently as late last week (see below), the potential has to be considered. Besides, some units of the FFL are based in some fairly obscure locations (French Guyana, Corsica, Djibouti, French Polynesia etc) where movements/deployments are less likely to be seen/reported by the media.

External Quote:
French President Emmanuel Macron reaffirmed he did not rule out sending troops to Ukraine, saying the issue would "legitimately" arise if Russia broke through Ukrainian front lines and Kyiv made such a request, in an interview with the Economist published Thursday.
https://www.france24.com/en/france/...oops-for-ukraine-if-russia-breaks-front-lines
 
deirdre said:
i dont know what this is. Peoples republic of China? wouldnt that mean they WOULDNT alert Putin to sending in troops?
Click to expand...
Yes, People's Republic of China, the official name of that worker's paradise.

Probably any number of reasons why AT would/would not publish an article, but I'm not familiar enough with their geopolitical stances to speculate. Apparently they DID publish this article, as opposed to it having been published and falsely attributed to them. I just found this "Newsweek" article published earlier today fact-checking the AT claim, it appears to mirror what I already said as their "Truth-o-meter" (my term) indicates the chances of the deployment are low, but not zero.

External Quote:
There is no evidence for this claim. It has been denied by the French government and the sources it is based on provide no credible proof or references.

https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-are-french-foreign-legion-troops-already-ukraine-1897973
 

Attachments

Article:
Stephen Bryen indique surtout s'être basé sur un tweet publié par… Sputnik, le média porte-voix du Kremlin (et bien connu pour diffuser de fausses informations).

Dans ce message, daté du 13 avril (et qui n'est aujourd'hui plus accessible), Sputnik rapportait les mêmes informations que l'auteur américain. Comble de l'absurde : dans un article publié aujourd'hui, Sputnik indique désormais que l'information concernant des troupes françaises en Ukraine proviendrait… de Stephen Bryen.

External Quote:
Stephen Bryen indicates above all that he based himself on a tweet published by… Sputnik, the media mouthpiece of the Kremlin (and well known for spreading false information).

In this message, dated April 13 (and which is no longer accessible), Sputnik reported the same information as the American author. The height of the absurd: in an article published today, Sputnik now indicates that the information concerning French troops in Ukraine comes from... Stephen Bryen.
To nobody's surprise, Bryen also writes for the Epoch Times.
 
Mendel said:
Stephen Bryen indicates above all that he based himself on a tweet published by… Sputnik, the media mouthpiece of the Kremlin (and well known for spreading false information).

In this message, dated April 13 (and which is no longer accessible), Sputnik reported the same information as the American author. The height of the absurd: in an article published today, Sputnik now indicates that the information concerning French troops in Ukraine comes from... Stephen Bryen.
Click to expand...

its not suspicious at all that they quote him at length but he never mentions Sputnik in the quote.
 
The anticipated Russian offensive may have begun (https://liveuamap.com/):

1715425199130.png
Click to expand...

Hold on, Ukraine!
 
Mauro said:
The anticipated Russian offensive may have begun
Click to expand...
or maybe not

Excerpts from ISW:
Article:
Russian forces began an offensive operation along the Russian-Ukrainian border in northern Kharkiv Oblast on the morning of May 10 and made tactically significant gains. Russian forces are likely conducting the initial phase of an offensive operation north of Kharkiv City that has limited operational objectives but is meant to achieve the strategic effect of drawing Ukrainian manpower and materiel from other critical sectors of the front in eastern Ukraine.

Russian and Ukrainian sources did not specify the Russian elements that launched the offensive operations along the border, but it is highly likely that Russian forces have reserves ready to commit to intensify their offensive operations north of Kharkiv City in the coming days. Western and Ukrainian media reported that Ukrainian military sources stated that Russian forces intend to establish a 10-kilometer buffer zone along the northern border in Kharkiv Oblast, a zone likely intended to push Ukrainian forces out of tube artillery range of Russian logistics in Belgorod Oblast and bring Russian forces within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City.

The limited efforts that Russian forces are currently conducting do not suggest that Russian forces are immediately pursuing a large-scale sweeping offensive operation to envelop, encircle, and seize Kharkiv City, however. Russian operations in the Vovchansk direction do not immediately support an advance towards Kharkiv City since Vovchansk is located on the eastern side of the Siverskyi Donets River and Pechenizkyi Reservoir. Ukrainska Pravda reported that Ukrainian military sources are considering that Russian offensive actions near Vovchansk may be diversionary.

ISW continues to assess that Russian forces will likely struggle to seize Kharkiv City should they aim to do so. A Russian effort to seize Kharkiv City would require long drives across open terrain on a scale that Russian forces have not conducted since the start of the full-scale invasion.

Russian forces likely decided to launch offensive operations along the international border area to take the best advantage of the relatively brief time left before Western aid arrives at the Ukrainian frontline at scale.

Kharkiv Battle Map Draft May 10,2024.png


We'll see what happens today.
 
Technically, I think this could even be considered a bunk claim:

Source: https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1795560729346555927#m

External Quote:
... a chinese man who participated in the special military operation.
He was shot in the stomach, which tore apart his insides,
and he died from his injuries.
However, he was resurrected,
and Saint Luke of Crimea appeared to him and healed him.
His internal organs were completely restored.
Or so says Russian priest Artemiy Vladimirov, who may or may not have in his sacred texts the sentence "thou shalt not lie".
 
FatPhil said:
may or may not have in his sacred texts the sentence "thou shalt not lie".
Click to expand...
While translations can differ, the one I'm familiar with around these parts is "Thou shalt not commit false witness against thy neighbor." Nothing about bearing false witness in his favor, such as claiming he was healed by St. Luke of Crimea or, for example, "little white lies" of the "No, I think that new haircut looks great!" variety.
 
Last edited:
FatPhil said:
... a chinese man who participated in the special military operation.
He was shot in the stomach, which tore apart his insides,
and he died from his injuries.
However, he was resurrected,
and Saint Luke of Crimea appeared to him and healed him.
His internal organs were completely restored.
Click to expand...
Capture.JPG


It might be relevant that Euromaidan Press is a Ukrainian news website.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromaidan_Press

External Quote:
The newspaper's founding was an attempt to "collect, rely on, and promote non-partisan, non-religious, non-biased information", as a way to address what the organization saw as a disinformation campaign by Russia in Ukraine.
From "About Us", Euromaidan Press, Oct. 2018 on Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, via Wikipedia.
 
John J. said:
View attachment 68965

It might be relevant that Euromaidan Press is a Ukrainian news website.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromaidan_Press

External Quote:
The newspaper's founding was an attempt to "collect, rely on, and promote non-partisan, non-religious, non-biased information", as a way to address what the organization saw as a disinformation campaign by Russia in Ukraine.
From "About Us", Euromaidan Press, Oct. 2018 on Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, via Wikipedia.
Click to expand...
Russia officially saying that you're lying is one of the things that should cause people to increase their priors regarding your believability.
But you aren't clear - what error have Euromaiden Press committed - are you claiming the footage is faked or the translation is wrong?
The correct counter to my post, or to Euromaiden Press themselves, was "that's nutpicking" (cherry picking the bad examples), but alas that might be seen as a criticism of all religiosity. That's not the intention of Euromaiden Press, slurring the religion, as Ukraine is a deeply Christian country.
 
claim impacts of ATACMS missile M74 submunitions, the counter claims appear in the comments



CCTV footage capturing the moment when M74 submunitions from the MIM-140 ATACMS missile with cluster warhead struck the water and beach in Sevastopol, Crimea, on June 23.It is believed that the ATACMS missile was intercepted by Russian air defenses, which caused it to explode and release its submunitions before reaching its target.



Source: https://x.com/Archer83Able/status/1805581567491760388


.
russia2024-06-26 202846.png



GQ7GsnbWkAEvR_Q.jpg



GQ7Gsq3XIAAiOVg.jpg
 
Last edited:
Article:
CNN —

At least five people were killed and over 100 injured when missile fragments scattered over beachgoers during a Ukrainian strike on the city of Sevastopol in Russia-occupied Crimea, authorities say.

"Unfortunately, we currently have 124 victims, of which three [are] dead children and two [are] dead adults," Sevastopol Governor Mikhail Razvozhayev said on Telegram.

The Russian Ministry of Defense said in a post on Telegram that Ukraine carried out the attack using "US-supplied ATACMS operational-tactical missiles equipped with cluster warheads."

Four missiles were shot down by Russian air defense but another "deviated from its flight trajectory in the final section due to the impact of air defenses, with the warhead exploding in the air over the city," the post added.

According to eyewitnesses on the ground, there was no air raid siren which warned of the attack.

I do not see Ukraine disputing this version of events.
 
Last edited:
derwoodii said:
claim impacts of ATACMS missile M74 submunitions, the counter claims appear in the comments

CCTV footage capturing the moment when M74 submunitions from the MIM-140 ATACMS missile with cluster warhead struck the water and beach in Sevastopol, Crimea, on June 23.It is believed that the ATACMS missile was intercepted by Russian air defenses, which caused it to explode and release its submunitions before reaching its target.
Click to expand...

ATACMS cluster munitions would surely have burst an inflatable beach toy, such as the bright yellow one in the middle of your oval, or left more than just a puff of dust as it lands on not-the-most-blast-resiliant-solids-of-all-time sand. And how many of them were there - the smallest number of submunitions on an ATACMs is 300, isn't it? That looked like a couple of dozen or so, about an order of magnitude out. P(ATACMS) = very low, IMHO.

I also saw that same clip posted by a pro-Ukrainian blogger with the description that it was a Russian 9M330 missile that had lost its target and had been preprogrammed to just explode in a panic if it can't find its target again within a certain time/distance (there's more info on the launch system and not much info on the missiles themselves here: https://weaponsystems.net/system/53-9K330+Tor and here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_missile_system ). Even accompanied by a supposed proof that it was a Russian armament, not a US one:
media%2FGQ0qNKHaQAIryRd.jpg

img url as the embedding tag seems to be failing: https://nitter.privacydev.net/pic/orig/media/GQ0qNKHaQAIryRd.jpg
there's not enough data to evaluate that claim at all presently. as that photo could be anything from anywhere at any time.
 
FatPhil said:
I also saw that same clip posted by a pro-Ukrainian blogger with the description that it was a Russian 9M330 missile that had lost its target and had been preprogrammed to just explode in a panic if it can't find its target again within a certain time/distance
Click to expand...
so in either case, many civilians were wounded unintentionally as a result of the Russian AA response to a Ukrainian long-range strike, a round in a war initiated by Putin

I'm going to blame the war either way
 
FatPhil said:
ATACMS cluster munitions would surely have burst an inflatable beach toy, such as the bright yellow one in the middle of your oval, or left more than just a puff of dust as it lands on not-the-most-blast-resiliant-solids-of-all-time sand. And how many of them were there - the smallest number of submunitions on an ATACMs is 300, isn't it? That looked like a couple of dozen or so, about an order of magnitude out. P(ATACMS) = very low, IMHO.

I also saw that same clip posted by a pro-Ukrainian blogger with the description that it was a Russian 9M330 missile that had lost its target and had been preprogrammed to just explode in a panic if it can't find its target again within a certain time/distance (there's more info on the launch system and not much info on the missiles themselves here: https://weaponsystems.net/system/53-9K330+Tor and here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_missile_system ). Even accompanied by a supposed proof that it was a Russian armament, not a US one:
media%2FGQ0qNKHaQAIryRd.jpg

img url as the embedding tag seems to be failing: https://nitter.privacydev.net/pic/orig/media/GQ0qNKHaQAIryRd.jpg
there's not enough data to evaluate that claim at all presently. as that photo could be anything from anywhere at any time.
Click to expand...

External Quote:
A missile attack that saw four people killed on a beach in Russian-annexed Crimea has unsurprisingly spurred the spread of misinformation, including a photograph that is alleged to be from the scene but is in fact from the movie Jaws.
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/jaws-picture-crimea-missile-attack/

The alleged Jaws photo was used by a Ukrainian supporter blaming the deaths on the beach on the Russians.

Source: https://x.com/jurgen_nauditt/status/1804841367102763191
 
Duke said:
The alleged Jaws photo was used by a Ukrainian supporter blaming the deaths on the beach on the Russians.
Click to expand...
Just watched both beach panic scenes in "Jaws," the first with the
following the prank with the kids and the fake shark fin:
Source: https://youtu.be/W-Fn1Nr7nJE?t=121



and the second panic scene
with the real shark attacking Alex Kintner:
Source: https://youtu.be/rW23RsUTb2Y?t=112



...looking for the young lady in the rather distinctive white two-piece bathing suit.
Capture.JPG


I don't see her in either scene, either among those dashing out of the water of just milling around in the crowd afterwards. I'm pretty confident this was not from "Jaws" -- though it is slightly possible that she was an exrtra who was there long enough to get in a production still, and took off before filming (the water was famously VERY cold for that scene, and getting extras to get all the way into the water was a struggle!) It may well be a scene from one of the sequels, or one of the gazillion increasingly terrible knockoffs with various sharks, piranhas, octopuses, orcas and flying piranhas attacking various beaches and causing various panics. But as much as I love you guys, I'm not sitting through those looking for this extra and this shot...
 
JMartJr said:
I don't see her in either scene, either among those dashing out of the water of just milling around in the crowd afterwards. I'm pretty confident this was not from "Jaws" -- though it is slightly possible that she was an exrtra who was there long enough to get in a production still, and took off before filming (the water was famously VERY cold for that scene, and getting extras to get all the way into the water was a struggle!)
Click to expand...
The image is used variously to advertise Jaws:
https://www.amazon.de/Jaws-Blu-ray-US-Import/dp/B007STBUIW SmartSelect_20240628-102843_Samsung Internet.jpg
https://meetfactory.cz/en/program/detail/letni-kino-xviii SmartSelect_20240628-103106_Samsung Internet.jpg
Imdb doesn't have it, but it has one where the sea and the boats in the background look similar.

It's undisputably not recent.
 
https://bowienewsonline.com/2016/06/jaws-released/ <- The photo is on this site's news article from 2016

http://web.archive.org/web/20160628194048/https://bowienewsonline.com/2016/06/jaws-released/ <- So It did publish the article back in 2016 (though no photo in this snapshot, but that often happens with wayback machine, Sometime it saves pictures but often it doesn't)

To me this does show it is from the film Jaws (unless the 2016 article had the wrong picture)

Thus to me this looks like the picture twitter post by Juergen is not from Crimea, also the swimming costumes don't look like from today
Edit: OK Like what Mendel saiz

Plus also look at the image of the explosion at the background, the mushroom cloud with the long trail of smoke. Obviously from 2 seperate explosions, i.e. manipulated, Sure it could be the result of one hit and then after 5 minutes another explosion nearby (the mushroom cloud)

EDIT #2:
https://x.com/jurgen_nauditt The twitter account of the Jaws photo
https://www.mortimer-english.com/de/news/A-visit-to-our-Franchise-Partner-in-St.-Petersburg This looks like the same guy in Russia, Whilst this doesn't prove anything, but interesting
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mick West
George Floyd Protests and Related Riots, Looting, and other Unrest
2 3
Replies
91
Views
31K
Mendel
Mendel
Mick West
Russian Claims of a "False Flag" Chemical Weapons Attack in Douma, Syria
Replies
10
Views
7K
Agent K
Agent K

Latest posts

Back
Top