I reported that ^ post (by gen3115) as spam a while back. Shouldn’t it be deleted?
Yuri Ignat, the UA Air Force speaker, and other “UA sources” made some epic revelations the other day, in two parts here:
And (both on the same subject):
I am no expert on the subject of the first post at all, but even I thought that it sounds like a pile of. I then read a few people who understand the subject matter discussing the very claims made by Ignat. Here is one
example (an extremely short version):
When I read the second part, I thought
What is the purpose of this rubbish? A “sympathetic Russian engineer” left them a note (in a one-way drone meant for destruction via explosion)? Give me a break. How idiotic is that? They really do think people are plain stupid. Anyway, later came a rebuttal from a Ukrainian who has a pretty good grip on the subject (the post was made in both, Ukrainian and English):
It is very sad that a reputable media outlet is writing incorrect information.
1. Russian Shaheds are not controlled in flight via Telegram and do not send video broadcasts somewhere via Ukrainian mobile networks.
2. Shaheds do not have Artificial Intelligence inside.
3. Shaheds still fly based on satellite navigation signals and jamming affects them.
4. No notes from Alabuga from “friendly engineers” has ever been found.
What is the truth?
A tracker is installed on Shaheds. Tracker sends information about Shahed's location and flight data (speed, altitude). Data is sent via a telegram bot. Mobile networks and sim cards are used for sending. Sim cards can be Russian, Ukrainian and from other countries.
We find hundreds (thousands) of these modems and SIM cards in the wreckage. We do not allow the Shaheds to send the info via our mobile networks.
Once again, Shaheds are not remotely controlled, they have no such functionality, they are just trying to transmit their location.
Дуже шкода, що авторитетне видання пише не вірну інформацію. 1. Російські Шахеди не управляються я в польоті через Телеграм і не посилають нікуди відео трансляції через українські мережі мобільного зв'язку. 2. Шахеди не мають всередині штучного інтелекту 3. Шахеди, як і раніше, літають на...
t.me
What is the purpose of these reports and publications? I mean people at the Economist should be sophisticated enough to sort through the obvious rubbish. But here we are.
Washington Post dropped an article a couple of days ago. The very brief summary of the contents:
The article in question:
I am not one to usually talk about “propaganda”, but there appears to be a certain kind of mood being set in the news over the past couple of weeks or so. In the meantime,
That’s the commander of the Chosen Company. His next post (the reply in Ukrainian above) says that he and most of his subordinates are done with the Ukrainian Armed Forces. This comes a week or two after the commander of the 47th asked for his dismissal due to “idiotic commands” (and also promised revelations). Ryan has been there for a long while - the guy even learned Ukrainian.
Regrding the Russian air raids, past three days:
And
Basically the same, but a different source:
There is a lot of talk about “Look, Russia wants to “bomb” Ukraine into oblivion and does not want to negotiate”. Not much talk that I see about what preceded this multi-day raid:
I grabbed that ^ screenshot yesterday, so that would be “4 days ago”, not 3 as indicated. Regardless, the “narrative” is pretty clear, no? Or are we forcing Russia to agree to the “unconditional ceasefire”, or whatever it is, is part of the negotiations while the Russian attacks are not kosher? Four days ago, Lavrov said that there will be a strong response to the Ukrainian drone attacks, which followed the next day and what we see reported above.
Furthermore, the reports from the UA Air Force, as cited above via Vitaly’s posts, indicate that 299 drones were intercepted by EW. Where did these drones go? Konrad’s post cited above indicates that about 19% of Shaheds (67) were not intercepted on that day. If we apply the same interception rate over the past five days (I don’t want to look at the “true” numbers and do the actual math), we get 228 UAVs hitting their targets (or something, as they were not intercepted). So which ones hit what and does it matter? Judging by the standards set by another ongoing conflict, the casualties rate is more than acceptable, no? Anyway, this is weird stuff and I don’t feel good talking about it, but shouldn’t it be talked about (with clear understanding that Russia being the aggressor here and all)?
In light of this, Merz stepped up again and made a rather odd statement, again. I am following translation of various sources here (and maybe Kato can clarify?), but this is the common theme:
Pretty much every other source I read or listened to said that (the main idea) France, UK, US, and now Germany have removed the restrictions on the weapons they supply and that now Ukraine can use these weapons “to attack military positions on the Russian territory and they couldn’t do that before”. Three things here: 1) there was no specific talk about the long-range weapons, but that is all the media and everyone talk about (though they are obviously included); 2) Ukrainians had already attacked the Russian territory (not just “military positions”) with the weapons supplied by the aforementioned countries; 3) other countries had already said explicitly that there are no restrictions on the use of their weapons supplied to Ukraine (including France and, maybe, UK (from memory)) and the “restrictions” publicly expressed by the US were not followed, so the US had to catch up updating the public narrative (I discussed it previously). So what are we talking about here? Is he planning to supply Taurus? More empty talking, which is par for the course? I will try to continue on this point tomorrow as this has gotten to be rather long as it is.
www.amnesty.org
