Sturgeon Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Well he's saying that it's because of the Ukrainian conflict. It has nothing to do with that. Ahah, then we get to the crux of the disagreement. Virdea? It doesn't really seem like you could prove morale issues are the result of the situation in the Ukraine, but I'm ready to be surprised. Got anything on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virdea Posted June 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Ahah, then we get to the crux of the disagreement. Virdea? It doesn't really seem like you could prove morale issues are the result of the situation in the Ukraine, but I'm ready to be surprised. Got anything on this? Yes, already posted citations cover this very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Yes, already posted citations cover this very well. Alright, I haven't gotten a chance to read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virdea Posted June 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 My point is, assuming that your sources (very questionable sources at that) are correct, the jump to 36,000 men and Vietnam style morale issues is not supported by the evidence you presented. The source is not questionable. Remember I have read all of the citations you have made to refute that source and found no reason not to agree with it. The Siberian soldier is not being counted by me because it lacks secondary and tertiary support from alternate sources, and my other data sources not part of the discussion do not have anything about this in them. I need more information to make this work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virdea Posted June 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Alright, I haven't gotten a chance to read them. I think that it would be easier, since I already posted sources to support my contention, that people with other opinions show issues with morale such as desertion, problems in Pskov, and the like are caused by some other issue. And you simply cannot say the Russian army is crap because it is conscript. The Brazilian Army is conscript and does not have these problems. You have a national effort to put thousand upon thousands of soldiers into a foreign country and claiming that problems in the very units supporting the invasion of the Ukraine are not in fact suffering from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Im siding with EE on this one (yes, big surpirse there) All and any major army has had problems with moral when any war arises, and frankly i think Russia is doing pretty good for itself for an army who has just had 60 years of training and doctrine implode on itself nothing of those links you give even remotely points to 36k, and, lay off the vice news documentary Virdea, the same youtube channel which publishes videos on consumable semen recipes shouldnt be the top notch source for Ukraine as everyone is making them out to be because they can send a handful of hipsters over-there with camera's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 The whole thread is just dumb. Without any serious information, statistical and factual data, it is impossible to do accurate conclusions as Virdea tried to do. All i can say that this thread is closer to measuring made up cr@p rather than valuable discussion. Russia started to interfere in Ukrainian conflict somewhere in late July - early August, when fighting between rebels and UAF/neo-nazi units/svidomits was very serious. Maybe even with direct fire at UAF/other cr@p, it provided some numbers of artillery guns and tanks (in unknown numbers) in late summer and after first Minsk to rebels, provided some training. But all that don't require moving Russian army in Ukraine, all that could be done from Rostov region. I am not surprised that some numbers of Russian soldiers can be in Ukriane, but they are eyes and ears in that region, not a actual fighting force. If all rebels were just badly dressed Russian soldiers, death toll of Russian forces would in 10k numbers, and at such numbers... there would be no need to even talk about this topic, it would be as obvious as it could be. The whole reason to support rebels is to make Russian army dodge this war. The more i think of it, the more all actions by our leadership is looking like attempt to enforce peace on Ukraine, there are number of allusions and even similarities with South Ossetia war in 2008. Tied 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virdea Posted June 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 The whole thread is just dumb. Without any serious information, statistical and factual data, it is impossible to do accurate conclusions as Virdea tried to do. Actually I provided serious information. Not seeing a lot coming back though. Russia could solve this argument for us. They have refused entry into most areas to the Organization for Security and Co-operation, they could simply open the doors and let the group in. The fact that they won't allow free access to the country side by this group is pretty much a smoking gun of my own assertion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Actually I provided serious information. Not seeing a lot coming back though. Russia could solve this argument for us. They have refused entry into most areas to the Organization for Security and Co-operation, they could simply open the doors and let the group in. The fact that they won't allow free access to the country side by this group is pretty much a smoking gun of my own assertion. Where? There is no serious information in those links you given. I don't think anybody have such info in free access. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virdea Posted June 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 NATO General German News Agency of high repute International News Agency of high repute Financial Times - moderate repute but lots of feet on the ground. Russian politician making extensively cited argument. Russian citizens both sources through competent news agencies I hit the research gold standard with that one. Note, I could have included VICE - good news agency and very accurate, just a bit wild FOX - Not a good source. They tend to make stuff up from the porch rather than sending people into the field. Russian TV/Newspapers. All government controlled or cowed. Spout party line or get thrown in jail. Direct Ukrainian information not vetted by a major news outlet for accuracy. And I have the for-pay access materials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnsignExpendable Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 You have yet to show me information about dissent and desertion in other units, which you promised you could. If you want to show correlation between such dissent and the Ukrainian conflict, you can't stop at one example. You're saying that Russian citizens are a source? Okay, as a citizen of the Russian Federation I will tell you that serving in the Russian army as a conscript is horrible and people go to great lengths in order to avoid it, or once they're in, to great lengths to not do any work. The source is not questionable. Remember I have read all of the citations you have made to refute that source and found no reason not to agree with it. The Siberian soldier is not being counted by me because it lacks secondary and tertiary support from alternate sources, and my other data sources not part of the discussion do not have anything about this in them. I need more information to make this work. Then maybe gather more information before posting? Right now you're building a correlation on one data point, which is absolutely ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 NATO General German News Agency of high repute International News Agency of high repute Financial Times - moderate repute but lots of feet on the ground. Russian politician making extensively cited argument. Russian citizens both sources through competent news agencies I hit the research gold standard with that one. Note, I could have included VICE - good news agency and very accurate, just a bit wild FOX - Not a good source. They tend to make stuff up from the porch rather than sending people into the field. Russian TV/Newspapers. All government controlled or cowed. Spout party line or get thrown in jail. Direct Ukrainian information not vetted by a major news outlet for accuracy. And I have the for-pay access materials. Vice is not accurate they send a few neckbeards to a bar in Belarus and think they are walter fucking Cronkite Infact, by the logic that Russian news isnt accurate, neither should any Ukrainian or American news be as for politicacians, they will say anything, whether they be on one side of the border or the other wars are usualy pretty milked for public support. So a Russain politician saying "Putin is throwing our boys away in Ukraine" is not a logical and accurate statement on the Russian military, rather than a ploy to get votes and as far as Nato generals, i dont think even the biggest borderline Fascist warmonger has stated there are 36 thousand Russian soldiers in Ukraine Tied 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 To spice up this thread :trollface: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 To spice up this thread :trollface: blah blah blah "Them Russkie's got slanted eyes, cant be from no European aryan you-cran" i would like to remind every one of you that the Soviet union was a big country, and when it collasped many people did not feel like dropping what little they had to return to their native lands. Hell, there were plenty of oreintal Russians in East Germany as there were in the Stans really interesting video though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virdea Posted June 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Vice is not accurate they send a few neckbeards to a bar in Belarus and think they are walter fucking Cronkite Infact, by the logic that Russian news isnt accurate, neither should any Ukrainian or American news be as for politicacians, they will say anything, whether they be on one side of the border or the other wars are usualy pretty milked for public support. So a Russain politician saying "Putin is throwing our boys away in Ukraine" is not a logical and accurate statement on the Russian military, rather than a ploy to get votes and as far as Nato generals, i dont think even the biggest borderline Fascist warmonger has stated there are 36 thousand Russian soldiers in Ukraine First, remember it is far more difficult for me to argue from my side because I have to cite and use facts, and you can just say you do not believe them and do not have to back up your theories with replies. For example, my facts on what journalism sources to use. 1. You saying Vice is inaccurate does not make them inaccurate. They put people onto the ground, they get close to the action, and they act uncomfortable questions, and they lack major affiliation. I did not use them merely because they have data not supported by secondary sources available by me. If more data comes to me, data is also included. The presence or lack of beards on reporters is not a common measure of reporting accuracy in the United States. I give you that Russian may indeed measure press on that criteria, I do not know, but the scientific study of the press as accepted by the rest of the world does not find beards to be a measure of anything with regard to reporting. 2. Russian news is inaccurate because the news agencies are controlled by the government, or by fear of what the Russian government will do to them There is no major, untainted, Russian news outlet. Remember, if you own a Russian TV station and the Putin admin does not like you - he jails you, kills you, kills your family, jails your reporters, or kills your reporters. Russia is 148 on the list of 180 countries in terms of Press Freedom (2014 rating). Zimbabwe has succeeded in beating Russia this year and last in press freedom. Columbia news Journal rates Russian news sources an "untrustworthy." I could not publish a paper and present it in an academic forum with accepted scholars of journalism if I based my paper on a Russian news source, unless I essentially re-reported the story. Generally you want a mean press freedom (not position, although position is easy to compare for laymen) of 30 or better to trust the media source by RWB standards. While it is possible for a country with poor press freedom to have a media standout, Russia has none. 3. The Ukraine, at 127, is also not a reliable source. The reason for quoting Reuters and DW is that they are. They require multi-sources, have defined editorial policy, require statements of facts to be vetted, and have a policy that publicly admits editorial mistakes. Each organization has a charter that allows minimal or no political interference with content. Other news services like this are BBC and oGlobo . Some media gets tags for slanting and requires some resourcing - al Jazeera has an issue of selective reporting and pre-testing that makes them go back and forth on reliability. 4. The United States at 48 is well within the area where media is mostly free, and the issues there are mostly issues of surveillance rather than interference, which is illegal per se and per quod and jealously protected. Since the US lacks censorship per quod and per se we instead use a case/by/case on it, and that requires we NOT use FOX news, who fails in terms of media accuracy and pretests. AP, CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, LA Times, St. Petersburg Times, NBC news all fit into a modern window of what is acceptable news coverage, and you will even see these organizations punish their own reporters publicly for failing to meet standards. So I have cited reasons not to trust Russian media. Politicians will say anything is not an accepted research paradigm for vetting political speech. Gotta do better than that. That is a cited and vetted document that agrees with other presentation I have made, and also follows Potomac (2014) who is alternately sourced (but sadly, very expensive to read.) There are no Fascists on active duty in any NATO countries military structure. By operational definition, if you wish to use that, then you get very close to living in a Fascist country yourself. I did not make any claims about oriental faces in the Ukraine. An eastern face could be a supporting fact in a pile of other facts, but alone is not something that can be used. As I have said several times. Using this is a straw man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnsignExpendable Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 If you don't like the media, you could read thousands of people's livejournals that live and breathe the conflict. Your suspicion of Russian TV is absolutely no reason to dismiss Russian language sources. By the way, I'm still waiting for reports of dissent in all those other Russian units you insist are in the Ukraine. Or is the 76th VDV somehow special? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virdea Posted June 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 I am going to leave behind the uncited replies, but i will for edification discuss vetting political speech. This is the same standards that a writer will use when presenting a data packet to a person who has to develop action plans. "Our country is ruled by the regime which stands against both the interests of Russia as a whole, and practically every its citizen. Except only for the top people in the security services and the corrupted bureaucracy, that use the state machine in their private interests. This regime makes the steady go to destroy all the institutes of the democratic society: elections, free media, independent court." Garry Kasparov said this of Putin and the current Oligarchy . This is an example of political hyperbole that has no way to be developed into an action item. It is a statement without support. There is certainly evidence that elections in Russia are compromised, that free media has been extinguished, and that an independent court no longer functions, this statement is not even a starting point for showing any of this. Politicians publish well researched, vet-table, strong papers every day - the gentle from Pskov has done just that, and since his contentions are supported by exterior research we can believe much of what he writes. Titov and his recent papers on the jailing of businessmen is an example of a paper with teeth that can be judged and vetted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnsignExpendable Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 That's a lot of words, none of which support your thesis that there is a correlation between unit unrest and invasions of the Ukraine. You have not linked to "well researched vettable strong paper". You are trying to form a correlation based on one data point. You need more. A lot more. You claimed to have them, where are they? Tied 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Hey guys, there's no need to use venom in your language like that, both of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 Hey guys, there's no need to use venom in your language like that, both of you. EE has some valid points, maybe if someone was saying these things about your home country sturgeon, you might talk as passionately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 16, 2015 Report Share Posted June 16, 2015 This is a reminder that I expect everyone to maintain adult conduct with each other. If you cannot agree with someone else - even if you find their opinion objectionable - you can simply disagree and move on. What has really gone on in this thread is a clash of egos masking a legitimate disagreement. No one in this thread is for any reason incapable or unable of holding their posting to a high standard, but both EE and Virdea have let their egos drive. I've done what I can to set you both back on the right track, but it has remained fundamentally a contest of egos. This forum is not the place for it. At every step in this thread, either of you could have set your ego aside and handled the topic more gracefully. Whoever has the greater share of responsibility is therefore a moot point. Fortunately for me, I think the subject of this thread is fundamentally at the heart of the issue. Virdea has made some statements that don't seem readily falsifiable. Correct or not, that is probably a topic of discussion best set aside for the time being. For these two reasons - that I think more ego than mind is at play here, and that I do not think the topic is very productive, I am closing this thread. Take care, gentlemen, and forget about this. Cheers, -Nathaniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts