|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
Truth to be told, it's difficult to collaborate all those accounts. It will be great if even half of those SUs are really down.
|
On February 29 2024 06:00 Silvanel wrote:Truth to be told, it's difficult to collaborate all those accounts. It will be great if even half of those SUs are really down.
Russian sources collaborated most of them and claimed friendly fire
|
On February 29 2024 23:59 iopq wrote:Show nested quote +On February 29 2024 06:00 Silvanel wrote:Truth to be told, it's difficult to collaborate all those accounts. It will be great if even half of those SUs are really down. Russian sources collaborated most of them and claimed friendly fire
If the A-50s were responsible for IFF, and there's now downtime where they aren't available to confirm whether or not to shoot, it might make sense. Pretty unbelievable numbers though.
|
@iopq
Not really. Since 17.02 Ukraine has claimed to shot down 13 planes. Out of those, Russia has confirmed 3 (2xSu-35 and 1xA-50) as far as I know. For the rest, we do not have definitive proof, only some videos circulating over the internet, and many of those show different planes than claimed or are, in fact, not new and date back in some cases even to 2022.
The true number probably lies somewhere in the middle. I obviously cheer for the bigger oner, but let's be real, the information battle is as much as important as any other and Ukrainians are not always accurate.
|
Canada11607 Posts
The truth need not be in the middle when you have one actor that outright denies the most obvious (our ship was not hit, it's simply a malfunction.. as it limps into port, taking on water.) If anything, if the number was 13, I'd go so far as 12/13, but never 6/13 just because Russia denies the sky is blue.
|
On February 29 2024 00:27 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2024 18:17 zeo wrote:On February 28 2024 17:34 Evotroid wrote:On February 28 2024 16:54 zeo wrote:
Kwark pulling out the Scott Steiner math for this one Alright, I bite, where exactly do you think the math mistake is here? Every single number in that post is pulled out of an ass with flawed reasoning/logic based on 'I feel' and Reddit upvotes. Show nested quote +On February 28 2024 17:45 Excludos wrote:On February 28 2024 16:54 zeo wrote:
Kwark pulling out the Scott Steiner math for this one Do you understand the meaning of the word "example"? He made it exceptionally clear it was "pulled out of his ass". You can't use that against him when he literally says it in the post. This is the dumbest argument I've seen in a long time Show nested quote +On February 28 2024 18:59 FriedrichNietzsche wrote:
Kwarks Percentages are nothing than a feeling or a wild guess. So what. Little to no relevane/substance imo.
That goes for you too. Are Russian sympathisers incapable of understanding thought experiments? If I give an example of "If I had 10 bananas and you took 2, how many would I have left?", the answer "Lol you don't have 10 bananas" is not the intellectual argument you think it is
that is a very dumb analogy and if you thought about if for more than couple of seconds you would understand why..
|
Osaka27180 Posts
There are currently three reports in the queue from this thread, with the same people reporting each other.
If all of you all think the other people posting are reportable, why do you continue? It impossible to moderate 700 page threads, so do it yourselves. If you want to discuss something go ahead, but don't address the people you think are reportable.
|
On March 01 2024 08:11 Falling wrote:
The truth need not be in the middle when you have one actor that outright denies the most obvious (our ship was not hit, it's simply a malfunction.. as it limps into port, taking on water.) If anything, if the number was 13, I'd go so far as 12/13, but never 6/13 just because Russia denies the sky is blue.
I don't want to use the line "both sides lie" because one side is agressor and other on the defense. Obviously I want Ukraine to win. But the truth is both sides use information as a means of conducting warfare. Some Ukrainian claims are just as absurd as Russian. So in absence of evidence I err on side of caution. If You guys want to belive some really unprobable claims without any evidence...well thats on You.
|
On March 01 2024 09:52 Manifesto7 wrote:
There are currently three reports in the queue from this thread, with the same people reporting each other.
If all of you all think the other people posting are reportable, why do you continue? It impossible to moderate 700 page threads, so do it yourselves. If you want to discuss something go ahead, but don't address the people you think are reportable.
I found the thread rather civil the last few pages.
Putin annual speech was yesterday. Nothing new really.
Mostly threats, some stuff about his re-election and some inner politics ("I'm going to make life better for all Russians"-kinda stuff)
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-68431017
|
On March 01 2024 17:07 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2024 08:11 Falling wrote:
The truth need not be in the middle when you have one actor that outright denies the most obvious (our ship was not hit, it's simply a malfunction.. as it limps into port, taking on water.) If anything, if the number was 13, I'd go so far as 12/13, but never 6/13 just because Russia denies the sky is blue. I don't want to use the line "both sides lie" because one side is agressor and other on the defense. But the truth is both sides use information as a means of conducting warfare. Some Ukrainian claims are just as absurd as Russian. So in absence of evidence I err on side of caution.
This is of course a very healthy skepticism rooted in reality. For instance, Ukraine released a number of killed soldiers a bit ago that was likely anywhere 1/2 to 1/3 of the real number. Every side in a conflict is going to be performing propaganda and lies to further their agenda. Anything else would be stupid.
However I completely agree with Falling here that there is a difference between fudging the numbers a little and basing your reality in Narnia. Russia consistently lie unabashedly about the most obvious things people can see with their naked eyes, and then doesn't care if you don't believe it. The lies aren't meant for us, it's meant for Russian citizens, and they work there. If Ukraine says something, you should be skeptical, if Russia says something, you should believe the complete opposite.
|
|
|
On March 01 2024 23:03 JimmiC wrote:
If the numbers are correct and they have lost the 13 planes in 10 days or whatever, is the hardware the bigger issue or is it the pilots? And do we know how many Pilots were lost? Are they possibly losing so many due to inexperienced pilots? Or is it that they are going way to aggressive?
Edit: for info one of the videos I watched has Russia making 17 SU34s per year.
I doubt it's the pilots. After all they could force some airline pilots in the military or sth, but I can't imagine 13 less pilots beeing a big deal
|
It's 14 now, with one more claimed Su-35 going down since my last post. Assuming those claims are not exaggerated, I have seen two possible explanations:
-There are unannounced F16 armed with AIM-120 operating in Ukraine.
-Russia is sensing weakness and is pushing hard and that includes using a lot of older guided bombs with shorter range and that means coming into the Ukrainian AA zone
Regarding pilot vs machine, I would say pilots are more important and scarcer here, but we need to remember that most of those claimed hits are over Russia controlled territory. Which means it is likely they catapulted and survived.
|
|
|
Seems that Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil infrastructure is bearing some fruits again.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/russia-bans-gasoline-exports-6-months-march-1-2024-02-27
MOSCOW, Feb 27 (Reuters) - Russia on Tuesday ordered a six-month ban on gasoline exports from March 1 to keep prices stable amid rising demand from consumers and farmers and to allow for maintenance of refineries in the world's second largest oil exporter.
Last year, Russia banned gasoline exports between September and November in order to tackle high domestic prices and shortages.
|
United States41117 Posts
Again... all during a war? What happens when, let's say, said soldiers is hurt, or worse killed? Will there be a stipulation that part of being in said theorized coalition they could not trigger any articles of NATO countries that were not part of said force? Also Ukrainian soldiers are already being trained etc.
|
United States44449 Posts
What do you mean what happens? Nothing happens. France is allowed to engage in military operations outside of NATO.
|
Yeah a French soldier being killing on a French (non-NATO) deployment in Ukraine is not an attack on France, the country.
NATO doesn't discuss triggering article 5 every time a soldier somewhere in the world dies.
|
United States41117 Posts
Except this is asking for a coalition of countries for certain tasks not just training etc. Though one can debate whether cybersecurity(hacking etc.) could be considered an act of aggression etc., but what about de-mining. Sy an artillery strike hits nearby...
I mean Spain, England, Sweden, and Denmark have been training Ukrainian soldiers for well over a year already at this point.
|
On March 05 2024 02:14 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Except this is asking for a coalition of countries for certain tasks not just training etc. Though one can debate whether cybersecurity(hacking etc.) could be considered an act of aggression etc., but what about de-mining. Sy an artillery strike hits nearby...
I mean Spain, England, Sweden, and Denmark have been training Ukrainian soldiers for well over a year already at this point.
"An act of aggression" isn't enough to trigger any articles, as Gorsameth pointed out, the location is what matters most. Russia striking a French barracks in Ukraine is fair game, Russia striking a depot in France isn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
