[Goober911]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Goober911 Goober911:

andyt andyt:

IT doesn't take combat experience to know to be on alert when manning a checkpoint. .

This one sentence demonstrates you know SFA.
Where did you get your insight - CNN??

Actually, it demonstrates a basic understanding of the point of a checkpoint. Be alert.

You said you were ex military. Have you been out that long to forget something as simple as this?

No I do not. I referred to the experience of these volunteers that had perhaps a week or 2 of training. If they had more they were lucky- if they had experienced soldiers with them- they were twice lucky

Running a check point is tricky- You know that as well as I do.

[Gunnair]

Goober911 Goober911:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Goober911 Goober911:

This one sentence demonstrates you know SFA.
Where did you get your insight - CNN??

Actually, it demonstrates a basic understanding of the point of a checkpoint. Be alert.

You said you were ex military. Have you been out that long to forget something as simple as this?

No I do not. I referred to the experience of these volunteers that had perhaps a week or 2 of training. If they had more they were lucky- if they had experienced soldiers with them- they were twice lucky

Running a check point is tricky- You know that as well as I do.

It certainly is when you are checking fellow citizens. That being said, the basic premise is to be alert.

Andy was spot on and you needlessly shit on him for it.

Bad form.

[PostFactum]

[stratos]

$1:

I might not know where to deploy for best advantage to lay down overlapping arcs of fire, but I'd sure as fuck have my gun at the ready and be on alert - just from simple fear. I mean at least 30 soldiers were shot. What, were they all clumped together having a beer or what?

I might die of a heart attack or who knows maybe hell has frozen over but...... I agree 100% with AndyT's statement. How the heck did they get 30 of them in a short fire fight. These guys seriously screwed up and paid the price for it.

AndyT one thing a person try's to learn in the Military is to try and resist the instinct of grouping together when in a dangerous situation for exactly this reason. It is very hard to fight against and we humans do it unconsciously, it's kind of a comfort in numbers mentality. In this case I see a utter failure in the Officers and NCO's who where in command of this group.

Heck AndyT I would +5 you if your points were opened. You showed a good basic understanding of a military situation with no military background. You might think of it as common sense but in reality I've found it that common sense is not that common in this type of scenario.

[andyt]

$1:

Chocolate tycoon heads for landslide victory in Ukraine presidential election

For a man with presidential ambitions, it was not a propitious scene. Petro Poroshenko stood atop a bulldozer between a line of police and an angry crowd chanting expletives at him. Shouting into a loudhailer he urged calm, asking protesters to desist from storming the presidential headquarters in Kiev.

Hardcore elements in the crowd didn't like his speech; they responded with jeers of "dickhead" and "Jew trash". (Actually, Poroshenko is a Christian.) Someone dragged him off his perch. Others managed to rescue him from this seething frontline. Masked youths grabbed the tractor and used it as a battering ram to force a path though police. Clouds of smoke billowed across Ukraine's warring capital.

This was early December. Six months later Poroshenko is on the brink of becoming Ukraine's new president. Opinion polls suggest he will win the first round of Sunday's presidential election by a landslide. Such is his lead he may even beat his nearest rival, former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko, in the first round, avoiding the need for a run-off vote on 15 June.

For Poroshenko, it has been a steep rise to popularity that begs two questions: how has he managed it? And will this support help him accomplish one of the toughest jobs in the world today: running Ukraine?

Softly spoken, articulate, and fluent in English, Poroshenko bears little resemblance to the bear-like ousted president, Viktor Yanukovych. A former foreign minister and minister of trade, Poroshenko is no political newbie. But he has managed to dodge the unpopularity that has engulfed the rest of Ukraine's governing class.

Poroshenko's current popularity has much to do with adroit positioning. He wasn't one of the three opposition leaders – the current prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, boxer Vitali Klitschko and ultra-nationalist Oleh Tyahnybok – who signed a deal with Yanukovych. And his business fortune came not from the murky world of energy but from something altogether more palatable: chocolate.

"Poroshenko was on the Maidan [central square in Kiev]. But at the same time he escaped unpopular decisions," said Olexiy Haran, a professor of comparative politics in the capital. "He managed to present himself as balanced, reasonable and successful." Even when he popped up on Maidan, paying for food, water and firewood for protesters, he was careful to play both sides. "Russia isn't our opponent, but our partner," he told the liberal Moscow newspaper Novaya Gazeta. "Understand, Euro-Maidan is not a movement away from Russia, but from the Soviet Union."

Following years of oligarchic misrule, does Ukraine really need another rich man in charge? "I think he has this feeling of public service in him," said Orysia Lutsevych, a research fellow with Chatham House's Russia and Eurasia programme. Lutsevych acknowledged that Poroshenko was wealthy, with his own business interests. But she added: "His business looks legitimate. It wasn't built on corrupt trade in gas and oil with Russia." Unlike other Ukrainian politicians "he was never involved in any big scandals".

Poroshenko made his own money – Forbes puts his net wealth at $1.3bn – from his chocolates, earning him the nickname of "the chocolate king". His other business interests include shipbuilding, construction and media.

So what would a Poroshenko presidency hold? A champion of European integration, Poroshenko is seen by many voters as the best person to reform the country's failing economy.

He can be under no illusions as to the grave challenges ahead. "If a country is to deal with Russia as an equal, it must be strong," he said last weekend. In the space of two breathless months, Russian president Vladimir Putin has annexed Crimea and fomented an armed uprising in the Russophone east and south. One of the Poroshenko's activists was brutally beaten up in Makiyivka, a town near Donetsk. In Luhansk, next to the Russian border, other members representing him on the local election commission were taken hostage.

On the campaign trail, Poroshenko has cast himself as the man who can rescue Ukraine from its numerous afflictions: break-up, corruption, a rampant shady economy and lousy governance. His long-term goal is to transform his nation of 46 million into a modern European state. He wants to decentralise power, amend the constitution and sign the latest chapter in the EU association deal, which he personally drafted as foreign minister. The European path will help Ukraine modernise, he argues, and – as his campaign slogan puts it – "to live in a new way".

But the spectre of a Yugoslav-style collapse remains. Poroshenko takes a hardline against pro-Moscow separatists. "What language do we have to speak with terrorists? That's right, the language of force," he told an election rally last week, according to the Kyiv Post. But the details remain fuzzy. The Ukrainian army is already skirmishing with Russian-backed rebels around the town of Slavyansk; casualties on both sides growing; results inconclusive.

Meanwhile, Tymoshenko has accused her old rival of secretly cosying up to Russia. In March, Poroshenko and Klitschko met with billionaire Dmitry Firtash in Austria. Firtash made his fortune from murky intermediary gas pipeline deals with Gazprom; he is fighting attempts by the US to extradite him on corruption charges. It is well known he has close Kremlin contacts.

Putin's view of Poroshenko – an implacable foe or a man he may be able to do business with – is unclear. Some believe that recent de-escalatory moves by Russia suggest the Kremlin may view him as an acceptable interlocutor.

In reality, though, there's little evidence Poroshenko is a Russian patsy. The businessman has paid a high price already for his outspoken pro-western views. Last summer Moscow banned chocolates from his Roshen factory in Lipetsk, southern Russian, supposedly on health grounds. In March riot police shut down the plant and seized its warehouse. Poroshenko also lost his shipyard in the Crimean port of Sevastopol when Russian troops overran the Black Sea peninsula. He has vowed to use all levers to get Crimea back.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/m ... e-election

[PostFactum]

I'll be voting for him.

[Goober911]

Here is how I see it. An attack using 2 choppers. They would also have had ground support. Some would have made their way fowards while ground vehicles approached. The attack occurred at approx 3 or 4 am. Those with experience know this is a high risk time for an attack due to a number of reasons.


This CP was monitored and holes were found. This was not an off the cuff unplanned operation. This was planned well and with strict timings. Using choppers vehicles and ground support it has to have had troops that were well trained. This was not a bunch of I'll trained insurgents.

And who were they up against. Volunteers with little to no training. Poorly equipped and yes it could be laid at the feet of their Officers/NCOs. But tell me how many of them had much military experience???

I would hazard a guess that a fair number were recent volunteers. No combat experience. Poorly led, fed @ equipped.

[Gunnair]

Goober911 Goober911:

Here is how I see it. An attack using 2 choppers. They would also have had ground support. Some would have made their way fowards while ground vehicles approached. The attack occurred at approx 3 or 4 am. Those with experience know this is a high risk time for an attack due to a number of reasons.


This CP was monitored and holes were found. This was not an off the cuff unplanned operation. This was planned well and with strict timings. Using choppers vehicles and ground support it has to have had troops that were well trained. This was not a bunch of I'll trained insurgents.

And who were they up against. Volunteers with little to no training. Poorly equipped and yes it could be laid at the feet of their Officers/NCOs. But tell me how many of them had much military experience???

I would hazard a guess that a fair number were recent volunteers. No combat experience. Poorly led, fed @ equipped.

Lots of guessing going on there.

[Goober911]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Goober911 Goober911:

Here is how I see it. An attack using 2 choppers. They would also have had ground support. Some would have made their way fowards while ground vehicles approached. The attack occurred at approx 3 or 4 am. Those with experience know this is a high risk time for an attack due to a number of reasons.


This CP was monitored and holes were found. This was not an off the cuff unplanned operation. This was planned well and with strict timings. Using choppers vehicles and ground support it has to have had troops that were well trained. This was not a bunch of I'll trained insurgents.

And who were they up against. Volunteers with little to no training. Poorly equipped and yes it could be laid at the feet of their Officers/NCOs. But tell me how many of them had much military experience???

I would hazard a guess that a fair number were recent volunteers. No combat experience. Poorly led, fed @ equipped.

Lots of guessing going on there.

I disagree. The state of the Ukrainian military is common knowledge. Their training is poor. Choppers were used. Vehicles also used. I did assume they had ground support. Either way 2 or 3 of the variables would entail a well planned, coordinated attack and you average insurgents would not have that ability or experience.

[Goober911]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/05/23 ... inst-nato/

Up to 500 insurgents attacked a convoy of government troops in a clash that lasted for several hours Thursday and killed 20 rebels outside the eastern village of Rubizhne, the ministry said. It also said one soldier was killed early Friday near the same area after insurgents ambushed Ukrainian troops in a separate clash.
These claims from the Luhansk region — which has declared independence from Kyiv — could not be independently confirmed. It was also not immediately clear why reports of such a major clash in a populated area took more than a day to surface.

[Zipperfish]

Gunnair Gunnair:

[Actually, it demonstrates a basic understanding of the point of a checkpoint. Be alert.

because the world needs more lerts.

(yeah, I went there)

[stratos]

[Gunnair]

Goober911 Goober911:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Goober911 Goober911:

Here is how I see it. An attack using 2 choppers. They would also have had ground support. Some would have made their way fowards while ground vehicles approached. The attack occurred at approx 3 or 4 am. Those with experience know this is a high risk time for an attack due to a number of reasons.


This CP was monitored and holes were found. This was not an off the cuff unplanned operation. This was planned well and with strict timings. Using choppers vehicles and ground support it has to have had troops that were well trained. This was not a bunch of I'll trained insurgents.

And who were they up against. Volunteers with little to no training. Poorly equipped and yes it could be laid at the feet of their Officers/NCOs. But tell me how many of them had much military experience???

I would hazard a guess that a fair number were recent volunteers. No combat experience. Poorly led, fed @ equipped.

Lots of guessing going on there.

I disagree. The state of the Ukrainian military is common knowledge. Their training is poor. Choppers were used. Vehicles also used. I did assume they had ground support. Either way 2 or 3 of the variables would entail a well planned, coordinated attack and you average insurgents would not have that ability or experience.

When you say you are hazarding a guess, and I say you are guessing, and you disagree, well....



Okay.

[andyt]

Goober911 Goober911:

Here is how I see it. An attack using 2 choppers. They would also have had ground support. Some would have made their way fowards while ground vehicles approached. The attack occurred at approx 3 or 4 am. Those with experience know this is a high risk time for an attack due to a number of reasons.


This CP was monitored and holes were found. This was not an off the cuff unplanned operation. This was planned well and with strict timings. Using choppers vehicles and ground support it has to have had troops that were well trained. This was not a bunch of I'll trained insurgents.

And who were they up against. Volunteers with little to no training. Poorly equipped and yes it could be laid at the feet of their Officers/NCOs. But tell me how many of them had much military experience???

I would hazard a guess that a fair number were recent volunteers. No combat experience. Poorly led, fed @ equipped.

Do you have link or such to back this up? You're talking about the checkpoint attack, right? All I've read about is the armored bank car. Didn't know the insurgents had helicopters, you'd think that would make the news.

[Goober911]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Goober911 Goober911:

Here is how I see it. An attack using 2 choppers. They would also have had ground support. Some would have made their way fowards while ground vehicles approached. The attack occurred at approx 3 or 4 am. Those with experience know this is a high risk time for an attack due to a number of reasons.


This CP was monitored and holes were found. This was not an off the cuff unplanned operation. This was planned well and with strict timings. Using choppers vehicles and ground support it has to have had troops that were well trained. This was not a bunch of I'll trained insurgents.

And who were they up against. Volunteers with little to no training. Poorly equipped and yes it could be laid at the feet of their Officers/NCOs. But tell me how many of them had much military experience???

I would hazard a guess that a fair number were recent volunteers. No combat experience. Poorly led, fed @ equipped.

Lots of guessing going on there.

I disagree. The state of the Ukrainian military is common knowledge. Their training is poor. Choppers were used. Vehicles also used. I did assume they had ground support. Either way 2 or 3 of the variables would entail a well planned, coordinated attack and you average insurgents would not have that ability or experience.[/quote]

When you say you are hazarding a guess, and I say you are guessing, and you disagree, well....



Okay.[/quote]
Hazard a guess is one of those old Down home terms I grew up with. It can vary from an educated guess to black humor. Such as a dumb ass dying from doing something stupid. It would result in a comment I hazard a guess he will not do that again.