Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Satellite Images Show Russians Shelling Ukraine

Posted by timothy on from the one-for-all-and-what's-the-password? dept.

U.S. officials today made public satellite imagery which they say proves that Russian forces have been shelling eastern Ukraine in a campaign to assist rebel groups fighting Ukraine’s government. The U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which released the civilian-taken satellite images Sunday, said they show visual evidence that Russia has been firing shells across the border at Ukrainian military forces. Officials also said the images show that Russia-backed separatists have used heavy artillery, provided by Russia, in attacks on Ukrainian forces from inside Ukraine. One image dated July 25/26 shows what DNI claims is “ground scarring” on the Russian side of the border from artillery aimed at Ukrainian military units in Ukraine, as well as the resultant ground craters on the Ukrainian side of the border:

25 of 582 comments (clear)

  1. So by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Eurasia has always been at war with Eastasia.

  2. Great... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The side that apparently blew a 300-civilian passenger jet out of the sky because they're too dumb to know what a Boeing looks like is getting direct military support from a major regional power which just happens to have nuclear weapons.

    And I thought my hometown of Detroit was fucked.

    1. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ugmm, haven't you been watching the news. A Malaysian jet knowingly and delibrately flew into an innocent russian missle that was minding its own business. The honorable president Putin is demanding an appology from Malasia and the Ukraine for the destruction of it costly missile. The USAians response to this event is completely opposite to what would have happened 20 years ago. What has changed? We (the USA) became part of the global league of economic partners who strive for transcendent harmony and economic prosperity through translateral partnerships both domestically and abroad. What that means is the Russian oligarchs have invested majorly in the USian economy and news outlets. Not only will the USA not keep illegals out of the country, it will do nothing to combat the russian bear, if it would hurt our economic partnerships. The USA is not an country, it is just a few of those points of lights that bush senior was talking about soo long ago.

      The USA died in 2008 when Ron Paul lost the canidicy.

    2. Re:Great... by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not only could they not tell it was Boeing, it was flying at over 33,000 feet. The other military planes they were targeting can't even fly over 20,000 feet. Those were turboprops and fighter jets.

    3. Re:Great... by tlambert · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I bet you could not tell the difference between a civilian plane and a military plane flying at 30,000 feet over a war zone either.

      I could. The civilian plane would have a radar transponder that said "Hi, I am Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17".

    4. Re:Great... by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The side that apparently blew a 300-civilian passenger jet out of the sky because they're too dumb to know what a Boeing looks like is getting direct military support from a major regional power which just happens to have nuclear weapons. And I thought my hometown of Detroit was fucked.

      Well, if you want to put it that way the plane would never have been shot down if Russia had supplied a professional crew instead of teaching the separatists how to aim and pull the trigger. At least with the Russian military firing they probably know what they're aiming at.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re: Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You'd be foolish to shoot unknown aircraft on a civilian route. Well, you'd either be foolish or criminally insane, take your pick.

    6. Re:Great... by Culture20 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's an unfair characterization. They might be tipsy or hung over.

    7. Re:Great... by MTEK · · Score: 5, Funny

      Putin's Russia is what happens when the Bond villain actually wins.

    8. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Self defense"? Look, you can call it a lot of things, but you can't call it that. Otherwise I could call the following scenario "self defense":

      Guy comes to my house and kills a member of my family. In "self defense", the next day I go and burn down his house with him and his family in it.

    9. Re:Great... by Calavar · · Score: 4, Informative

      Oh god, someone has fed you such a backwards picture of the story. Let me give you a highly abridged recent history of Ukraine:

      In 2004, Viktor Yanukovych, who has always been buddy-buddy with Putin, ran for President against Viktor Yushchenko. He wanted closer relations with Russia wheras Yushchenko wanted closer relations with the EU. Yushchenko was poisoned in the middle of the campaign and nearly died. He was left permanently disfigured. He also claimed that it was the KGB that tried to assassinate him.

      Yanukovych won the election initially, but the Ukranian Supreme Court overturned the election results because of widespread fraud and voter intimidation. In the new elections, Yushchenko won despite still being seriously ill from the poisoning.

      In 2010 Yanukovych ran for president and narrowly won, defeating a candidate from Yushchenko's party: Yulia Tymoshenko. Yulia Tymoshenko became PM (in Ukraine, the PM is second in command to the President, but they can be from opposing parties), and since the elections were so closer, she and her minority party still had a lot of power. When they made moves to advance the integration process with the EU, Yanukovych charged Tymoshenko with several counts of corruption. She was found guilty and imprisoned. The Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International both claim that the charges were trumped up and were political in nature. Just a couple of years later, in 2013, Yanukovych had finally gathered enough of his own party members in Parliament and cancelled the EU integration process entirely.

      This is what sparked the protests in Ukraine: repeated attempts of the pro-Russian faction to use undemocratic means to defeat the pro-EU faction.

    10. Re:Great... by Rich0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think there is a third, and perhaps more likely explanation: Parts of the Russian military is not under the control of the government. Putin is not exactly stupid, and what is happening in that area is rapidly becoming stupid, so I think it is a reasonable guess that he hasn't got things under his control.

      The Russian military is exactly where Putin wants them to be. They're along the border so that they can invade Ukraine once the conditions are right. If Ukraine fires on the Russians then it will be called a provocation and the tanks will stream across the border.

      Putin isn't playing dumb here at all. He got the message from the EU loud and clear that they could care less about Russia invading Ukraine, and that the US is pretty upset about it but doesn't really have the power to do anything without getting into a shooting war, which they won't actually do. So, how is shelling the Ukrainians dumb? If the EU doesn't care about commandos taking over cities, the annexation of Crimea, Russian fighters shooting down Ukrainian aircraft, rebels shooting down airliners, and a nearly full-scale war raging in Easter Ukraine, then why would they care about a few shells landing on military units?

    11. Re:Great... by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Guy comes to my house and kills a member of my family. In "self defense", the next day I go and burn down his house with him and his family in it.

      Rather that just reading the anti-U.S. rants about this, you should try visiting Asia and talking to the Asians who had to live under Imperial Japanese rule. Much like the Nazis, the Japanese saw themselves as a genetically superior race, and other races were nothing more than cattle to them. My grandmother was forced to watch as her sister and niece were raped and killed by Japanese soldiers, all to coerce my grandfather (a doctor) into treating one of their officers. The Imperial Japanese needed to be put down, at all costs, for the sake of civilization.

      The correct analogy is guy terrorizes neighborhood killing hundreds of people. Then happens to go into your house and kill a member of your family. You fight back and eventually surround him in his home where he's instructed his entire family to die defending the house. You manage to take him and one family member out with a new weapon that vaporizes the part of the house he's in, which spares the rest of his family. The loss of the family member is regrettable, but it's a positive outcome when you consider the part you've conveniently left out of your analogy - that killing his entire family would have been an acceptable cost to free the neighborhood from his reign of terror.

  3. So much unnecessary trouble by troll+-1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why can't they be like the UK and Scotland where they all sit down and discuss it over a nice cup of tea? Then if they want their independence they can have it. No big fuss.

    1. Re:So much unnecessary trouble by CRCulver · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With the UK and Scotland, no politician's life depends on the outcome. Whatever happens with the Scottish referendum, the people in office now expect to eventually depart from office and enter some cushy retirement position.

      With Russia, Putin cannot afford to back down from a display of military might: it keeps his support among the masses high, and intimidates other post-Soviet states like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan which he hopes to bring into his Eurasian Union. If Putin were to back down and support a peaceful resolution whose outcome might not satisfy Russian nationalists, he could find himself out of power. It's not a matter of him being done in by the West like a Saddam or Milosevic; that claim of Western conspiracy against him is just played for the cameras. The fact is that he's got enough enemies within Russian elite circles, he's pissed too many people off, that if his hold on power weakens, he'll certainly end up imprisoned or dead.

  4. Bet he can't tell ... by perpenso · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I bet you could not tell the difference between a civilian plane and a military plane flying at 30,000 feet over a war zone either.

    I bet he can't tell them apart either, but I also bet he wouldn't fire a missile at it. *Firing a missile anyway* is the important thing here, not a failure to identify the aircraft.

  5. Weakest Russia ever by joh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wreck their economy. It worked once and the way Russia acts it would work again, no doubt. Russia has only a GDP a little better than Italy and less than Germany, France or the UK. They are utterly weak and exactly because they know it they have to act like a bully. Russia is a dwarf trying to convince itself it is a giant by making others think it is.

    1. Re:Weakest Russia ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wreck their economy. It worked once and the way Russia acts it would work again, no doubt. Russia has only a GDP a little better than Italy and less than Germany, France or the UK. They are utterly weak and exactly because they know it they have to act like a bully. Russia is a dwarf trying to convince itself it is a giant by making others think it is.

      The reason Europe wont back harsher sanctions is because if they do it will have the cascade effect of damaging their own economies because Russia and all the countries of Europe economies are all linked fairly tightly, along with the fact Russia exports a huge amount on natural gas to western Europe and if that got cut off in response to sanctions it would make things even worse so the sanctions in place target political and industrial leaders in Russia.

  6. Memory Troubles: by Hartree · · Score: 5, Informative

    "The last time the Russians got this aggressive was their invasion of Afghanistan under Jimmy Carter"

    I think you're forgetting that they invaded Georgia when George W. Bush was president.

    I think that counts as pretty aggressive.

    1. Re:Memory Troubles: by goodmanj · · Score: 5, Funny

      "The last time the Russians got this aggressive was their invasion of Afghanistan under Jimmy Carter"
      I think you're forgetting that they invaded Georgia when George W. Bush was president.

      Wow, I had no idea Jimmy Carter was the leader of Afghanistan, but if so it makes sense that Russia would follow up by invading his home state...

  7. Re:Weakest US President ever by Ogive17 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Mid-east fighting, 2000 years and going strong. Yes, clearly not having peace there is Obama's fault...

    I just don't get this bravado from some Americans that think we should be directly involved in every conflict around the globe. Ironically, all these global conflicts are a huge drain on the national treasury. Can't cut the budgets and join a few wars at the same time.

    --
    "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
  8. Re:Weakest US President ever by ljw1004 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    * Gaza can send thousands of rockets targeting Israeli citizens and they won't even say a word.

    Affects Americans right now? -- no. Is there a clear course of action in this conflict that will be best for America in the future? -- no.

    * Iran can make nuclear weapons and they won't even say a word.

    Affects Americans right now? -- no. Is there a clear course of action in this conflict that will be best for America in the future? -- no.

    * Russia can take over Crimea and they get bashed harshly with... a speech.

    Affects Americans right now? -- no. Is there a clear course of action in this conflict that will be best for America in the future? -- no.

    *ISIS can take over Iraq and kill thousands and they won't say a word.

    Affects Americans right now? -- no. Is there a clear course of action in this conflict that will be best for America in the future? -- no.

    Now here's a bullet point that you didn't mention:

    * Ubiquitous healthcare for Americans

    Affects Americans right now? -- YES! Was it a clear course of action that will be best for America in the future? -- YES!

  9. Re:What a surprise. by war4peace · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As an Eastern European, all I could tell you is: you're so very wrong.
    NOBODY in Eastern Europe is believing the Russians. We all know better, after being under their boot for 45 years or so.

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  10. Re:Weakest US President ever by NEW22 · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Gaza can send thousands of rockets targeting Iraeli citizens and they won't even say a word." -- I'm pretty sure the US is saying a word, and it is desire for a cease fire. Also, Hamas is dumb, but death count in the recent spate of attacks? Israelis: 1 died to a rocket, Palestinians: 1000 died in shelling. Looks like Israel is doing comparatively alright here. Why do you need the US doing more here? What is it you want them to do?

    "Iran can make nuclear weapons and they won't even say a word." -- Clearly you are unaware of the current state of diplomacy on this issue. Last November an interim agreement was made, observers are checking to verify Iranian compliance in agreement for a lessening of economic sanctions. We'll see if a continuing agreement can be reached by next November. What would you have done differently? The fact that you claim that the US has not said a word makes me inclined to think you are not aware of reality enough to make a sensible suggestion, but you could surprise me.

    "Russia can take over Crimea and they get bashed harshly with... a speech." -- The US can invade Iraq and Afghanistan and run military operations in Pakistan and get bashed mildly with... a speech. Iraq was a disaster perpetrated upon a bed of lies and incompetency. Would you consider it money well spent? Seriously? What is your proposed action on Russia and Crimea? You have complained about actions taken, without expressing what it is you actually want... and that's just not helpful at all. It sounds like you want more dick waving and war and are under the impression that it will help, but I could just be stereotyping you...

    "ISIS can take over Iraq and kill thousands and they won't say a word." -- What do you want? Unending US military presence in Iraq? Who do you even want to be in charge of Iraq and why? What implications would your desires have?

    Basically, it sounds like you want the US to prop up Israel, stop Iran by any means necessary, remove Russia from Crimea, and crush ISIS and prop up Iraq indefinitely. You want to do all of this heavy work and military mobilization (hint: that costs a ton of money [oh, and lives, especially if you count foreigners and care about that kinda thing]), yet simultaneously you complain about the government not cutting a dime of spending.

    Your brain is broken.

  11. Re:Weakest US President ever by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Informative

    Iran can make nuclear weapons and they won't even say a word.

    Iran dilutes nuclear material
    July 21, 2014
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/iran-dilutes-nuclear-material/story-fn3dxix6-1226995916083

    IRAN has turned all of its enriched uranium closest to the level needed to make nuclear arms into more harmless forms, the United Nations' nuclear agency says.

    THE move was expected. Tehran had committed to convert or dilute its 20-per cent enriched stockpile under an agreement with six powers last November that froze its atomic programs pending negotiations on a comprehensive deal. Those talks were extended on Saturday to November 24.

    Still, the development was noteworthy in reflecting Iran's desire not to derail the diplomatic process with the six countries - the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany.

    If you really cared about Iran and not about piling up perceived failure at Obama's feet, you sure as shit would have seen this headline from last week.

    It wasn't a secret. The AP, AFP, Reuters, and pretty much everyone was talking about it.

    /Naturally Fox News did their best to report only on the extension of talks.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!