Some of the Russian soldiers killed while on vacation

[Duckhunter935]

Last edited Thu Sep 25, 2014, 08:14 AM - Edit history (1)

http://www.mamasoldata.org/





Since Russia refuses to acknowledge they have soldiers fighting in Ukraine and any that are are just on "vacation". The mothers have set up a webpage to show the real faces of those killed.

More at link

[Renew Deal]

1. What is this story about?

Were they on vacation in Ukraine?

[Duckhunter935]

4. Russia lies about soldiers fighting in Ukraine

They say they are on vacation and not on active duty when they are fighting and dying in eastern Ukraine.

Russia has no soldiers in Ukraine


I feel vary badly for the families

[Cali_Democrat]

46. Basically

Russia lies and says their soldiers aren't fighting in eastern Ukraine.

So when they come home in body bags, Putin tells their loved ones that they were just on vacation.

[Cha]

2. In Putin's sneaky war.. "Their bodies have been returned in recent weeks to loved ones who in many

cases had no idea where they were sent to fight."

Soldiers’ Graves Bear Witness to Russia’s Role in Ukraine

"Sergeant Barakov, who served in Russia’s Sixth Tank Brigade, was one of dozens — some say hundreds — of Russian soldiers killed in action this summer. Their bodies have been returned in recent weeks to loved ones who in many cases had no idea where they were sent to fight, have received little information about how they died and, in any event, are being pressured not to talk about it. Some families have even been threatened with losing any compensation if they do."

Thank you, Duckhunter

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5568885

"What does Russia tell the mothers of soldiers killed in Ukraine? Not much."

snip//

But such anonymity, which helps Moscow pretend that no Russian soldier fights in Ukraine, comes at a high cost. Rights groups, activists and local journalists now allege that Russia, already burdened with a dark history of soldier abuse, has suppressed the truth of its own killed soldiers, obfuscated details of their demise and buried some of the dead in unmarked graves to hide their role in Ukraine. And Russia’s response if its soldiers are caught: They’re wanderers who “accidentally” crossed the border.

snip//

Valentina Melnikova, who leads the Soldiers’ Mothers Committee, told the Daily Beast she was “personally humiliated as a citizen of the Russian Federation by our commander-in-chief’s pure, direct crime.” She said Russian President Vladimir Putin is “violating not only international laws, not only the Geneva Convention, [he] also is breaking Russian Federation law about defense. And as for the [Russian airborne commander], we should be too disgusted to even mention his name. He forces his servicemen to fight in a foreign state, Ukraine, illegally, while mothers receive coffins with their sons, anonymously.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/29/what-does-russia-tell-the-mothers-of-soldiers-killed-in-ukraine-not-much/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5568927

[dipsydoodle]

3. That is in extremely bad taste.

.

[Duckhunter935]

5. I do not think so

Russia has stated they have no soldiers in Ukraine. Soldiers ARE dying in Ukraine and the excuse put out is the were there on vacation.

I think it is sad but the truth should be put out.

I feel very sorry for there families and those soldiers deserve the respect of their service.

[Scootaloo]

6. I hope you mean Duckhunter's mockery

'Cause the website he's drawing from is created by mothers of these young men trying to stop their sons from being sent into a foreign war. Which I think is sad and admirable.

[mythology]

7. The fact that there are some people who refuse to acknowledge what Russia is doing in Ukraine

is in poor taste.

This is shedding light on what others want to deny.

[dipsydoodle]

8. I had failed to account for context in the earlier post and apologise unreservedly.

The post has been left there unedited to show I can be real dickhead times.

[Duckhunter935]

10. I edited my post

to make the point more clear.

[SidDithers]

9. Things you won't read at RT...

DU rec.

Sid

[reorg]

14. Things you don't know if you don't read RT

About 3-4,000 Russian citizens joined anti-government fighters during Kiev crackdown in Ukraine’s east, says the leader of Donetsk independent republic, noting that self-defense fighters have never concealed this fact.

"They [Russian volunteers] are among us, people of Donbass [Region, eastern Ukraine] because we are blood brothers,” said the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Donetsk People’s Republic, Aleksandr Zakharchenko, in an interview to Russian media.

“There is no secret that among the volunteers from Russia there are many military men. They are fighting together with us because they understand that it’s their duty,” he added.

According to the Donetsk PM, some of the volunteers returned home to Russia, others stayed in eastern Ukraine.

“Unfortunately, some of (the Russian volunteers) were killed,” said Zakharchenko.

http://rt.com/news/183308-russian-volunteers-ukraine-fighting/

[reorg]

11. I went to this page

It shows 29 names, mostly with picture, of persons who are said to have died in Ukraine. No proof whatsoever is provided that this is actually the case. In some instances, a social media page of the soldiers (?) is cited (vk.com) - I looked at two of these and found that one profile was deactivated and on another one the allegedly dead soldier had just uploaded a new picture on 23 September at 4:23 am.


http://vk.com/id223640462

A similar number of missed are also presented with name and picture. By missed is apparently meant that relatives were unable to contact them. Again, no proof whatsoever is provided.

And the last of the four pages lists Russian soldiers who were somehow shown to have been in Ukraine - most notoriously the ones who were arrested on Ukrainian territory 7 kilometers away from the border and sent back to Russia.

Nobody, even Russian officials, has ever denied that a number of Russian volunteers is fighting and dying in Ukraine. The above only goes to show that the Russian Military Department cited by RT is most likely correct:

“The Russian Military Department considers ‘nonsense’ the statement by Andrey Lysenko, who said, citing data from ‘operational intelligence’ that thousands of Russian troops died on the territory of Ukraine,” the Defense Ministry’s official representative, Igor Konashenkov, said in a statement.

Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council spokesman Andrey Lysenko had earlier made a statement claiming that about 2,000 Russian soldiers were killed in Ukraine while at least 8,000 were injured.

http://rt.com/news/187132-russia-mocks-ukraine-intelligence/

[hack89]

12. There are over 100 names

there are four pages of names.

[reorg]

13. yes, allegedly dead, or missed, or shown to have been in Ukraine

but still among the living. Looks like I am the only one who actually checks out these links instead of making assumptions that might suit somebody's purposes.


http://www.mamasoldata.org/melchakov-ivan/

Мельчаков Иван
98-я Свирская дивизия Воздушно-десантных войск Вооруженных сил РФ, задержан на Украине

Melchakov Ivan
98th Svir Airborne Division of the Armed Forces, detained in Ukraine

Here is the selection of those considered "gone":

http://www.mamasoldata.org/gone/

[pampango]

15. "Nobody, even Russian officials, has ever denied that a number of Russian volunteers is fighting and

dying in Ukraine." Well said.

Of course, the working definition of "volunteer" is important here. How many soldiers take their limited leave time and, rather than visiting family and friends whom they haven't seen for a long time, take that 2 weeks to travel on their own across the border and put in some more time fighting? And are they allowed to take their tanks and artillery with them when they go?

Amnesty International: Ukraine: Mounting evidence of war crimes and Russian involvement

Ukrainian militia and separatist forces are responsible for war crimes, Amnesty International said today. The organisation accused Russia of fuelling separatist crimes as it revealed satellite images indicating a build-up of Russian armour and artillery in eastern Ukraine.

Despite a fragile cease-fire, the situation on the ground remains fraught with danger and Amnesty International calls on all parties, including Russia, to stop violations of the laws of war. “All sides in this conflict have shown disregard for civilian lives and are blatantly violating their international obligations,” said Salil Shetty, Amnesty International’s Secretary General, who travels to Kyiv and Moscow in the coming days.

“Our evidence shows that Russia is fuelling the conflict, both through direct interference and by supporting the separatists in the East. Russia must stop the steady flow of weapons and other support to an insurgent force heavily implicated in gross human rights violations.”

http://amnesty.org./en/news/ukraine-mounting-evidence-war-crimes-and-russian-involvement-2014-09-05

[reorg]

16. Yes, instead of vapid speculation we need specific information

Perhaps someone should get ahold of one of those Russians who were actually there and ask them.

Failing more specific information, we'd be forced to agree with former NATO General Kujat:

Former NATO General Kujat: I don't believe evidence of Russian invasion – ENG SUBS

[pampango]

18. Which is what Amnesty International did. And we are not 'forced' to agree with a former general's

opinion. There being as many opinions as there are former generals (to tweak a common expression). If you wish to believe the former general (with whom you happen to agree) and not Amnesty International that is your right.

Of course, General Kujat also is in favor of the stationing NATO troops in the Baltic countries and Poland and supports NATO's new rapid deployment force. Whom does he think the Baltic countries and Poland are rightfully afraid of?

[reorg]

20. feel free to cite another former NATO General of his rank, experience and expertise

and what does he actually say in the article you linked?

Up until now, NATO-Russia relations have been based on the Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security, which is largely seen as prohibiting the permanent stationing of larger NATO contingents in its eastern member states. Is it time to rework or cancel the act?

The passage you're referring to is a unilateral NATO declaration. It says that NATO doesn't plan any major stationing of troops. It's a unilateral statement! So of course, you can revoke that anytime you want to, but I think doing so would be a big mistake. The value of the strategic partnership between NATO and Russia is much greater than the value you could achieve by stationing troops in the Baltic. That would be an escalation or worsening of the relationship.

No, it's about improving cooperation between NATO and Russia, it's about being prepared to solve conflicts and crises. The scope of possibilities we have at our fingertips today is actually unique in the post-Cold War era. It would be a pity if that were destroyed.

This strategic partnership has of course been rocked by Russia's course of action in Crimea and eastern Ukraine. Both NATO's secretary general and the Supreme Allied Commander Europe say that Russia is no longer a partner but a threat, an opponent. Do you share this assessment?

No, not at all. These are statements that don't contribute to de-escalating the situation, instead they escalate it.

[pampango]

22. Again, you are free to believe the opinion of a former general over that of Amnesty International.

Your general does question some of NATO's actions, as we all do. However, he supports the idea of NATO protecting the Baltic states and Poland with troops and a rapid deployment force. If he thought that Russia was not a threat, he would not support that.

[reorg]

24. read again what he actually says n/t

[pampango]

26. I did.

That's why these states (Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia) demand permanently stationed NATO troops on their territories - to shorten that response time. Some NATO members are opposed. But apparently, a rapid deployment force is now able to react more quickly than before, able at least to show a presence within a shorter time. Of course, that would be a significant deterrent factor and would contribute to these countries' safety.

Stationing NATO troops and the creation of a NATO rapid deployment force would "contribute to these countries' safety". Contribute to their safety from whom?

When push comes to shove, moving supplies is time-consuming. Personnel can be moved relatively quickly. That is supposed to allow the NATO Response Force to react more quickly. Another advantage is that multi-national troops would appear on the scene, which means NATO as a whole would be involved. Of course, you always have to remember that more troops would have to be transferred to these countries. But Russia also needs a certain amount of time to be ready for attack. That can definitely be compensated if you have an efficient early warning system.

Sounds like he is considering the possibility of a future Russian attack and defending the idea of a rapid deployment force to counter this possibility.

In Ukraine, Russia has maneuvered itself into a position that is basically a dead-end. But so has the West, because in the end, sanctions lead nowhere. Actually, this could be the last opportunity to find a common solution, but to do so, they would have to get together for talks.

I would love to see talks between Russia and the West.

[reorg]

31. and still don't understand it, apparently

'These states' demand, not the General, my friend, and it is "these states" that seek protection and support from whomever and the General was willing to provide it.

But Ukraine is where the buck needs to stop, according to him, and a long list of other senior former German politicians.

[jeff47]

19. What Russia is denying

Nobody, even Russian officials, has ever denied that a number of Russian volunteers is fighting and dying in Ukraine.

What Russia is denying is that Russia sent them. They are not volunteers.

How can you tell? They took their Russian military equipment with them. You don't pack your artillery to go on vacation.

[reorg]

21. where in the OP does it say

that they took their Russian military equipment with them?

If you have information that the Russian soldiers in Ukraine are not volunteers, a link would be appreciated.

[jeff47]

23. So you aren't following the situation at all

yet insist that everyone else is lying.

Lovely.

Using my amazing powers of typing "russian artillery ukraine" into Google, I bring you this list:

Time: Russian Artillery Units Are Firing at Ukrainian Soldiers, NATO Says
The Independent: Ukraine crisis: Nato images show Russian soldiers, artillery and armoured vehicles in 'military operations' in eastern Ukraine
HuffPo: NATO: Russian Forces Provide Artillery Support To Rebels In Ukraine

And there's been developments in the last day or so: The Russians started pulling back their artillery
NATO: Russia Has Withdrawn Many Troops From Ukraine

[reorg]

25. "NATO says ...", LOL

Even one of the highest NATO officials in the last years doesn't buy it. You can find that with Google, or just look at some other posts in this thread.

I invite you to provide proof for the Russian origin of tanks or other military hardware in Ukraine. I am not claiming that it isn't there, but no one can actually prove it. So, we rant on and on based on spurious speculation ...

[jeff47]

27. Actually, yes you are claiming it isn't there.

I am not claiming that it isn't there

Actually, you are when you claim the reports are lies.

See, if they're lies, then the equipment isn't there. If the equipment is actually there, they aren't lying.

But no, clearly RT is telling the complete truth and we can believe them blindly. Large numbers of Russian soldiers decided that a war zone in Ukraine was a lovely place to take their vacation, and a far better choice than seeing their families.

And it just happened that all of them decided to fight on one side of the conflict.

And they just happened to have heavy equipment with them that the Ukranians do not have (Buk missiles that are not white), or did not store in the area (heavy artillery).

Boy, those Ukrainian rebels sure are lucky to have all those things work out in their favor!

[reorg]

29. if you stop talking to yourself

and try to read what others write for a change, you'll find it easier to make sense.

You'd still have to look for actual proof that the rebels are using Russian hardware, though, in order to be able to show it.

[jeff47]

37. And when you instantly reject such proof as a massive NATO conspiracy

why should I bother?

You are so entrenched in your beliefs that you actually think Russian soldiers are going on vacation to fight a war. We could transport you to Ukraine, walk up to equipment that only Russia has, talk to the crew in Russian about their homes in Moscow, and you will say "enjoy your vacation!".

So why should I bother correcting your delusions?

[reorg]

39. if you stop talking to yourself

and actually respond to anything I said (or provide evidence for your claims) then me might have a conversation.

[geek tragedy]

28. The onus is on those peddling absurd bullshit

like the claims that Russian troops in Ukraine are getting in some vacation war participation.

Such claims are wildly implausible--so much that defense of them is per se evidence that one is a cynical propagandist wholly disinterested in the truth or anything else that conflicts with promoting the agenda of Russia's fascist government .

[reorg]

30. the only claim I posted

is that they are volunteers, that's what the self defense forces have been saying.

The absurd claims about a "Russian invasion" are based on spurious speculation. Not even the "Mothers" of the Russian soldiers cited in the OP can show that their "sons" were forced to fight in Ukraine.

This "NGO", which they admit was supported by the US taxpayer until last year and has now to register as a foreign agent, has to date only suggested that these soldiers were ordered to fight. Not a single witness statement to this effect has been presented.

[geek tragedy]

32. "Self defense forces"

[reorg]

34. Self defense is sometimes necessary

if you have to deal with Nazi scum such as these from the "Azov batallion":



http://vladimirsuchan.blogspot.de/2014/08/new-fascism-unleashed-by-empire-on.html

[stevenleser]

38. Once again, we Jews are touched by this sudden concern about antisemitism in eastern europe.

However, we have taken note that you didn't seem to complain about the rampant antisemitism in the region to include most of Eastern Europe and Russia until it happened to dovetail with your agenda.

That isn't real concern about antisemitism.

[reorg]

42. So you agree that self defense against violent, stupid Nazis is necessary?

Perhaps that's why Russians volunteered to fight them.

I can't say whether anti-Semitism is their primary motivation. That Russians were also considered "Untermenschen" by the Nazis may play a role, and the fact that 20 million Russians died in WWII.

[stevenleser]

43. No. As long as they are fighting Russians and traitors in a time of desperate need. I would say let

them be.

[reorg]

44. It would appear that your appreciation of "Russians" is similar to, uh, never mind n/t

[stevenleser]

47. Nope. I was putting myself in the mindset of the Ukrainian government.

They who are responsible for the defense of the country.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

41. Red herring aside, it was the pro-Russian seperatists who chose to seize government buildings.....

...by force this spring, and refused to relinquish control despite multiple opportunities to do so.

Self-defense forces my ass. They and their Russian backers are responsible for the current situation in Eastern Ukraine.

[reorg]

45. Hm, I wonder why they would risk their lives doing that

[Tommy_Carcetti]

48. The precedent was set in Crimea....

....and continued in Donetsk and Luhansk.

http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/728447


"I would like to remind you that this is Novorossiya - the term used back in the tsarist epoch. Kharkiv, Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson, Odessa were not part of Ukraine in the tsarist epoch. These are the territories which were turned over to Ukraine by the former Soviet government in the 1920s. God knows what they did that for.

All this dates back to the victories won by tsarist Russia in notorious wars in the epoch of Catherine the Great and Prince Potyomkin with the center in Novorossiysk; hence the name- Novorossiya. Then for different reasons these territories were lost, but the people remained."

[MattSh]

33. Have proof of that?

They took their Russian military equipment with them.

Didn't think so...

[jeff47]

36. Yes

For example, The Ukranians didn't keep their artillery there, yet the "rebels" are shelling the Ukrainians.

Also, the Ukrainian Buk SAM missiles are an older version that's heat sensitive, and thus always painted white. After the Malaysia Airlines flight was shot down, lots of video came out from the "rebel" areas with Buk launchers with missiles that were not white.

However, you will label any such information a massive NATO conspiracy. So there's really no point in me bothering to provide proof.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

40. Well, yeah.

Because journalist/patriot extraordinaire Robert Parry sez.....

[closeupready]

17. Lives hardly started, so sad. War sucks.

K&R

[TeamPooka]

35. Putin is afraid of Russian mothers. nt