what happened to the großrossiya thread

[Dinner]

It is not the army it is controlled by states. Army is paid for by Feds while the national guard are part timers paid by states. They all have regular civilian jobs and only show up if the governor declares an emergency. Every time something comes up the NG gets called and it doesn't matter if it is a flood, a protest, or a big sporting event. They assist local law enforcement and the local agencies are usually in charge with the NG just helping them out with additional manpower. In times of war the Feds can nationalize them but the incident you spoke about was the state governor helping local agencies.

BTW Russia has officially killed more civilians in Syria than ISIS. You must be so proud of your country's combination of incompetence and not giving a **** to such an extent it is a war crime.

http://time.com/4129222/russia-airstrikes-syria-civilian-casualties-isis/

[Ellestar]

It is not the army it is controlled by states. Army is paid for by Feds while the national guard are part timers paid by states. They all have regular civilian jobs and only show up if the governor declares an emergency. Every time something comes up the NG gets called and it doesn't matter if it is a flood, a protest, or a big sporting event. They assist local law enforcement and the local agencies are usually in charge with the NG just helping them out with additional manpower. In times of war the Feds can nationalize them but the incident you spoke about was the state governor helping local agencies.

BTW Russia has officially killed more civilians in Syria than ISIS. You must be so proud of your country's combination of incompetence and not giving a **** to such an extent it is a war crime.
http://time.com/4129222/russia-airst...sualties-isis/

Well, it's an interesting read, even if it lacks concrete facts.

In one of the worst known incidents, an air raid shelter in the village of al Ghantu was reportedly hit in a Russian airstrike on October 15th, killing up to 48 people from one extended family. Among the dead were at least 23 children and nine women.

If an air raid shelter was hit as it was supposed to, then it's not actually an air strike problem, it's more of a recon problem, no?

Then again, what exactly people did in the shelter? It's not like it's WW2 and you have time to go to a bomb shelter to hide from a massive air raid that visibly flies through kilometers of your land, and that actually bombs random civilian buildings in cities (like you bombed Germany and Japan in WW2). It's both too hard to get to a shelter when one single plane flies to a random place in a country to hit one specific target, and it doesn't make any sense to do it either - one plane will definitely not target some random civilian building, you need a thousands of tons of bombs to bomb indiscriminately, like the West did in WW2 and Vietnam.

Also, who said that it wasn't used as a military warehouse? It seems to me that a bomb shelter is a good place for military supplies, and a bad spot to hide from a targeted bombing by a lone planes - after all, lone planes are likely to hit some specific targets that can be used by terrorists, like bomb shelters, instead of just random civilian buildings.

So, the question is, were there any military supplies that could have been spotted by air or land recon? If they were, well, it's kinda their fault that they were sitting on a military ammunition there, no?

***

– Airwars presently assesses 44 Russian incidents as having likely killed civilians in Syria to October 30th – which between them reportedly killed 255 to 375 non-combatants. This is roughly ten times the level of credible allegations against US-led Coalition operations in Syria.

Looks like this one is per month, but then again, we bombed half as much as NATO did in it's entire bombing campaign, so it sounds like a trick to mislead readers.

[Proteus_MST]

...

Then again, what exactly people did in the shelter? It's not like it's WW2 and you have time to go to a bomb shelter to hide from a massive air raid that visibly flies through kilometers of your land, and that actually bombs random civilian buildings in cities (like you bombed Germany and Japan in WW2).
...

Are you sure?
From the article:

Airwars project director Chris Woods says that video footage of airstrikes released by the Russian government indicate that Russian warplanes are using more primitive, unguided munitions. One video shows a Russian long-range bomber dropping “sticks” of unguided bombs from above the clouds.

“That was a very worrying image for us. There is no control of those munitions. Just dropping a stick like that means its going to cause significant damage on the ground over a wide area,” he says. “We’re very used to seeing those images going back to Vietnam or even the Iraq war in the early 1990s, but we don’t tend to see those kind of images anymore, simply because western militaries have changed the way, generally speaking, they fight.”

That sounds like the bombing has more in common with the carpet bombing campaigns of 1945, than with pinpoint accuracy strikes.
I for my part would, under these circumstances, definitely prefer to hide in bomb shelters than be out in the open.

It also gives a good explanation why there are reports about hospitals getting hit ... with unguoided bombs released from great altitudes you surely don´t have the accuracy that is needed to avoid hitting hospitalös as collateral damages

[Ellestar]

Yeah, yeah, we're barbarians from Bronze Age and drop sticks and stones.

http://russia-insider.com/en/military/smart-weapons-russia-using-syria/ri10231

Imagine, we don't only know about satellite guidance, we also got a first ever satellite in space. Shocking, i know. I mean, barbarians, and first satellite. How could it be?

[Proteus_MST]

Yeah, yeah, we're barbarians from Bronze Age and drop sticks and stones.

http://russia-insider.com/en/military/smart-weapons-russia-using-syria/ri10231

Imagine, we don't only know about satellite guidance, we also got a first ever satellite in space. Shocking, i know. I mean, barbarians, and first satellite. How could it be?

I don´t doubt that russia has the capabilities to drop smart bombs ...
the question is, what percentage of bombs dropped by russia are actually smart.
After all, smart bombs are surely much more expensive than dumb bombs (and may be on lower supply),
so from a logistical and financial perspective it would make sense to have less than 100% of the bombing runs drop smart bombs

(and actually the article confirms the use of 100 kg and 250 kg dumb bombs as well as possibly FAB-500 dumb 500 kg bombs ... I somehow have no doubts that these bombs have a very good capability to kill civilians and also to damage houses (and/or destroy appartments and kill their inhabitants) if they hit them. ... Would you, with 100-250 (and maybe 500) kg bombs falling around you, stay in your house, or would you prefer to seek out a bomb shelter? )

[rah]

Obviously hide in a bomb shelter that had a huge sign over it declaring that it's also a munitions dump. DOH

[Sava]

I can't believe a Russian just took the US to task for bombing the Germans and Japanese

ARE YOU FROM THIS UNIVERSE?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Ellestar]

I can't believe a Russian just took the US to task for bombing the Germans and Japanese

ARE YOU FROM THIS UNIVERSE?

Civilians are civilians. Didn't US citizens just complained that Russia killed 200 civilians with air strikes? Well, you killed 100 thousands with nukes alone.

[Dinner]

A lot of the problem is Russia doesn't have many smart weapons and most of their bombs are dumb bombs. Dumb bombs are highly inaccurate so they only real way to get them to work effectively is to drop a lot of them on a whole area. This is what Russia is doing and this is why they are mostly killing civilians.

BTW this was all made illegal after WW2 and states now have an obligation to make all reasonable efforts to not hit civilian targets. There is a good case Russia has not been doing this because they just don't care. We know Assad has deliberately been targeting civilians.

[Ellestar]

I don´t doubt that russia has the capabilities to drop smart bombs ...
the question is, what percentage of bombs dropped by russia are actually smart.
After all, smart bombs are surely much more expensive than dumb bombs (and may be on lower supply),
so from a logistical and financial perspective it would make sense to have less than 100% of the bombing runs drop smart bombs

(and actually the article confirms the use of 100 kg and 250 kg dumb bombs as well as possibly FAB-500 dumb 500 kg bombs ... I somehow have no doubts that these bombs have a very good capability to kill civilians and also to damage houses (and/or destroy appartments and kill their inhabitants) if they hit them. ... Would you, with 100-250 (and maybe 500) kg bombs falling around you, stay in your house, or would you prefer to seek out a bomb shelter? )

Well, a better question is, does Russia use only smart bombs in places where a miss by unguided bomb may hit a civilian population? And the answer is that we can't know. Both Western and Russian press, just as "independent" organizations are not really independent and they'll tell whatever is good for their owners.

Besides, it's not even an important question. I mean, look at the bigger picture. That article is basically a propaganda that USA is more careful in it's air strikes than Russia. But it's not even a significant comparision. USA destroys order in multiple countries in a row, and Russia tries to restore order. Just look at all these countries - Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia, Syria - in every one of these countries situation was changed for worse by USA. Does it really matter if Russia kills 200 civilians trying to save a country, if said country was almost destroyed by USA beforehand? And millions are dead or misplaced because of USA actions. And who is really responsible for these deaths, Russia or USA?

[Dinner]

Civilians are civilians. Didn't US citizens just complained that Russia killed 200 civilians with air strikes? Well, you killed 100 thousands with nukes alone.

In WW2 before the Geneva Convention was amended (and the USSR signed that amendment). So, once again, you are trying to come up with excuses for your own country's criminal actions.

[Ellestar]

In WW2 before the Geneva Convention was amended (and the USSR signed that amendment). So, once again, you are trying to come up with excuses for your own country's criminal actions.

Oh come on. What did i say about turning off your "****** mode"? We have a permission from a Syrian government, so Russian actions are perfectly legal. It's the NATO who illegally bombs Syria.

[Dinner]

Dur! You are being retarded now. I said the Geneva Convention got changed after WW2 to make mass bombing of cities and civilian targets illegal. Thus your claims of "but the US did it in WW2!" don't hold water because prior to WW2 there was no agreement outlawing it where as now there is an agreement outlawing it. Thus current Russian bombing of civilian targets is illegal under the Geneva Convention.

This is not difficult to follow, dude.

[Ellestar]

Dur! You are being retarded now. I said the Geneva Convention got changed after WW2 to make mass bombing of cities and civilian targets illegal. Thus your claims of "but the US did it in WW2!" don't hold water because prior to WW2 there was no agreement outlawing it where as now there is an agreement outlawing it. Thus current Russian bombing of civilian targets is illegal under the Geneva Convention.

This is not difficult to follow, dude.

Ok, ok, then follow this: Both NATO and Russia are bombing targets in Syria, and hit civilians. The only difference is that Russia was invited by Syria, and NATO is doing it illegally. Comprehend?

[giblets]

Russia is killing civilians at a much faster rate