Sunday 31 August 2014

The western media myth about the "invasion"of Ukraine

Kiev Putsch Regime Security and Defense Council now says there is no Russian invasion, incursion, tanks, or troops of any kind. WTF son?!

Somehow MSM is not reporting this, spoils the Hollywood-esque narrative

---Mark Sleboda

August 26, the Ukrainian authorities denied reports about the Russian invasion

26 августа власти Украины опровергли сообщение о вторжении российских войск

31 August, 2014

Yandex Translate

With the Council of national security and defence of Ukraine (NSDC) on August 26, refuted messages on the Russian military invasionto Ukraine. Speaking in the program "Freedom of speech" on ICTV channel, the representative of the national security and defense Council Andriy Lysenko said that recently communicated with the border guards and the military - Russian tanks and troops in the Donetsk region has not been seen.

Thus, according to Lysenko, provides information about the appearance of the column of about 100 pieces of military equipment in the area Gukovo, Rostov region; it is being monitored.

Earlier on Tuesday, the Ukrainian journalist Roman Baccala reported with reference to the border guards and soldiers of the volunteer forces of the invasion of the Russian regular troops to Ukraine from town in the direction of Novoazovsk. As posted by Baccala Facebook, soldiers, supported by about 30 tanks dug in the territory of Donetsk region is 8 kilometers and took control of the six border villages; exhibited roadblocks, the Russian military does not hide insignia.

On Monday reported the defeat of the Ukrainian troops of the column of Russian military equipment, which tried to make a breakthrough on the same side of the border.

Here's Why NATO's "Evidence" of a Russian Invasion is Completely Unconvincing

Patrick Armstrong

28 August, 2014

Once again the headlines shout that Russia has invaded Ukraine. Once again NATO offers blurry satellite shots from a commercial service for evidence. 
Here are June’s “invasion” satellite photos. This month’s “invasion” satellite photos are here. Again from a commercial source, Digital Globe.
Photo 1: some “Russian” SPGs in Ukraine (everybody uses “Russian,” i.e., Soviet equipment and the rebels have captured quite a lot).
Photo 2: Some deployed artillery in Ukraine (ludicrously explained as how “trained military professionals” would deploy it.
Hasn’t anyone in NATO HQ realised that the east Ukrainian rebels are pretty competent?)
Photo 3: A Russian base with stuff in it and without stuff in it (but aren’t we continually told about the Russian “buildup on the border”, always alarming, always threatening, whatever the numbers: “very, very sizable” in March40K in April12K in July20K in August. 
One should not be surprised that there’s some variance of equipment at a given base over time).
Photo 4 and 5: Some guns in Russia pointing towards Ukraine (where, by the way, as NATO intelligence may know, there is a war going on with occasional firing into Russia. All military are trained to expect the worst.)
And, by the way, if Russia did invade, don’t you think it would do it in strength rather than a couple of tanks here and a gun or two there? No wonder the Russians are laughing at this “evidence”; this isn’t evidence of anything except how gullible NATO thinks its taxpayers are.
Its time to consider what real evidence would look like. The United States has spent billions and billions of dollars on intelligence-gathering equipment; and supposedly has more assets than anyone else has ever had or dreamed of having. So, given this vast array of sophisticated devices which, one has to assume, have been watching Ukraine and western Russia for months, what would real evidence of a Russian invasion of Ukraine look like?
We would see a series of photographs, maybe even a continuous moving picture, perhaps backed up by intercepted communications, of Russian equipment forming up in a base. We would follow that column, photo by photo, moving towards Ukraine. We would watch that column, photo by photo, as it crossed the frontier and deployed.
We should also have photos of Russian artillery actually firing – after all, the guns they show are right out in the open and artillery doesn’t fire single shots. If the Russians were actually firing across the border regularly, there would be real satellite evidence showing it. That is what real proof would look like and that is what these pathetic efforts are not. Although they are negative evidence: if NATO had real evidence, we’d see it 24/7; this paltry effort demonstrates that it does not.
It’s all reminiscent of the two British reporters who said they saw Russian armour head across the border into Ukraine a couple of weeks ago, My smart phone has a camera and it has GPS too and there’s lots of map software available (I recommend City Maps 2Go, download Rostov Oblast. I’m sure their newspapers would stand the $3 it costs). A real report would have said this is the time, this is where we are, this is what we saw, here’s photos. But oops, whaddaya know! they forgot to take their smart phones with them. Gee, so we have to trust them and take their word for it.
And I don’t trust NATO and its pitiful commercial images, I don’t trust reporters who “forget” to record things and I don’t trust Marie Harf and her “social media and common sense”.
As Paul Craig Roberts puts it: “The latest Washington lie, this one coming from NATO, is that Russia has invaded Ukraine with 1,000 troops and self-propelled artillery. How do we know that this is a lie? Is it because we have heard nothing but lies about Russia from NATO, from US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power, from assistant secretary of state Victoria Nuland, from Obama and his entire regime of pathological liars, and from the British, German, and French governments along with the BBC and the entirety of the Western media?”
With this record, why would anyone believe a word coming out of Washington or NATO, Western governments or the various Western avatars of Pravda?

CNN: Novoazovsk does not look like the epicenter of a invasion of Russian

CNN: Новоазовск не похож на эпицентр вторжения русских

28 August, 2014

Yandex Translate

Life in Novoazovsk, who recently forces militia repelled the Ukrainian military, is the usual course and the town looks peaceful, CNN reports. According to the correspondent of the TV channel in the region is not seen in the presence of Russian "marauding army, and local residents rather frightening memories of the behavior of Kiev soldiers.

One of the Ukrainian military leaders said that a full-scale invasion from Russia allowed the militias to take control of one of the cities in the coastal area South-East of Ukraine. The CNN correspondent Diana Magnay a report from the region, which became the new front fierce Ukrainian conflict.

In the distance, behind an abandoned checkpoint is Russian border. Apparently, the Ukrainian army was in a hurry during the retreat and left of expensive equipment to rust in the open air.

Life in the nearby village seems to be quite normal, except for the headquarters of the border guards. According to local residents, it left last week, as more than 20 other border crossing points along the Russian-Ukrainian border.

Almost nothing that could protect the region from marauding army, in addition to these hills. However, no marauding army is not visible.

«I heard about the Russian tanks, but, in any case, no one can prove- said the old man. - I'm more afraid of the Ukrainian army. They come here on a motorcycle with a weapon. Sometimes they come drunk».

Forces militia, which are located on the outskirts of Novoazovsk, relaxed look. They settled in after hit this town at the Ukrainian troops. Larger port city, Mariupol, now their next target.

The commander of the militia says it's tanks are trophies that his fighters seized under Luhansk and are not produced in Russia. He doesn't want to off his face, but his nickname is "Fat" has become well known in the ranks of the militia after fighting in Lugansk.

DIANA MAGNAY, CNN correspondent: Do you think you have enough weapons and tanks to capture Mariupol?

«It is a matter of training and my people are better trained than the Ukrainian armyhere, " he explains.

Kiev is concerned that this will open a new front in the South-East of Ukraine along the shores of the sea of Azov.

DIANA MAGNAY: For the city, which, according to the Ukrainian authorities, is in the midst of direct military intervention by Russia, Novoazovsk looks extremely peaceful. Although the presence of the militia definitely feel, it seems that there should be a lot more to move on to the Mariupol or next. Diana Magnay, CNN, Novoazovsk, Ukraine.

Outside of mass media propaganda, aimed at the hoy-poloy, analyis is not so straightforward.

Did Russia Just 'Invade' Ukraine? Depends on Whom You Ask.

28 August, 2014

Yandex Translate

 As many as 1,000 Russian troops entered Ukraine on Thursday, U.S. officials reported, but whether the deployment qualifies as an "invasion" depends on whom you ask.
President Obama declined to call the Russian escalation an "invasion," opting instead for "incursion" in his remarks Thursday.
"I consider the actions that we've seen in the last week a continuation of what's been taking place for months now," Obama said. "Russia determined that it had to be a little more overt in what it had already been doing, but it's not really a shift."
But some members of Congress think it is important for the U.S. to invoke the term "invasion" and are calling on the White House and its allies to increase the penalties against Russia for its escalation of the conflict.
Democrat Eliot Engel of New York, the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said it would take "severe consequences" for Russian President Vladimir Putin to back down.
"Given the not-so-stealthy Russian invasion, it is absolutely clear that France must not transfer the Mistral-class warships to Moscow," Engel said in a statement. "I renew my call for NATO to buy or lease the ships. We can help Ukraine improve its ability to defend itself against Russian-supported separatists, and our NATO allies must know that the United States stands by its Article V commitment to them."
Military hawks in the Senate—Republicans John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina—issued a joint statement, calling for the U.S. and its allies to further increase Russian sanctions across all sectors of its economy and to provide "intelligence and defensive weapons" to Ukraine.
"Russia's ongoing aggression in Ukraine can only be called one thing: a cross-border military invasion," the senators said. "To claim it is anything other than that is to inhabit President Putin's Orwellian universe."
It was not immediately clear why the Obama administration would not use the term "invasion." U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said there was "no new set of obligations" that would arise if the administration were to use the term and White House National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden declined to further explain why the administration was avoiding use of the term.
"Regardless of what it's called," Psaki said, "Russia's actions need to stop."
Republican Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, issued a joint statement with Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon of California in which they said if confirmed, the 1,000-troop deployment would be "an act of war" by Russia against Ukraine.
In a phone conversation with National Journal, Turner said he believed the president was avoiding use of the term "invasion" because it would warrant a stronger U.S. response than the president was willing to give.
I can browse over breakfast or while on the metro."AJ, US Army OfficerSign up form for the newsletter
"This is really an invasion—and the president, by refusing to acknowledge it, is sidestepping his national and international responsibility to formulate U.S. policy as commander in chief," Turner said. "When you take 1,000 troops and tanks and move them into another sovereign country's territory, you have invaded their territory."
Obama said the U.S. would not get involved militarily in Ukraine. Psaki told reporters Thursday that plans for additional sanctions were not in the works, but Obama said that could change at next week's NATO Summit in Wales.
"The sanctions that we've already applied have been effective," Obama said. "I think there are ways for us to deepen or expand the scope of some of that work. My expectation is that we will take additional steps, primarily because we have not seen any meaningful action on the part of Russia to resolve this in a diplomatic fashion."

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.