Ukraine army “Only BUKs in ATO-zone were stationed in Kramatorsk”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

The Ukraine army responded to  Dutch TV NOS Nieuwsuur on questions about locations of BUK systems in Eastern Ukraine in the period when MH17 was shot down.

Journalist Rudy Bouma of Nieuwsuur sent several Tweets about this.

The Ukraine army states to Nieuwsuur that the only BUK systems in the ATO-zone were stationed at Kramatorsk air force base. The video published by a Ukraine military TV station  on July 16 showing BUKs was taken at Kramatorks airbase according the Ukraine Army.

Bellingcat has some info on Kramatorsk. The airport is located here. 48.706024, 37.631665. It is 80 km north-northwest of Donetsk.

The distance from Kramatorsk to the location where MH17 was hit by a BUK missile is about 90 km. Too far away for a BUK missile launched from Kramatorsk.

The radar shown in the video is of type 36D6-M1. So far nobody has been able to geolocate the location where the video was made.

The video shows a tower which could be a TV-tower. This site has a list of TV-towers in Ukraine.

Outside the ATO-zone Ukraine had BUKs stationed at Vasylkivka & Velykomykhailivka in Donetsk-region.

Ukraine Army also stated there were no BUK’s near Zarosjtsjenskoje on July 17. Zarosjtsjenskoje was under control of pro-Russia separatists at July 17. Russia showed satellite photos showing two BUK Telar vehicles near Zarosjtsjenskoje. People living in the area told severall journalists they did not see any BUK in the area. See this post.

Ukraine did not explain about the Russian satellite photos.


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

64 Comments on Ukraine army “Only BUKs in ATO-zone were stationed in Kramatorsk”

  1. However admin in your own words of the comments – ‘The sat picture showing two BUKs in a field near Z is clearly faked.’

    Fare thee well

  2. “Zarosjtsjenskoje was under control of pro-Russia separatists at July 17.”

    How do you know that?

  3. I don’t know how believable this assertion is by Ukraine.

    There is nowhere around Kramatorsk Airfield that seems to resemble the scenes in the video.

    In the first scene, there is a rusty water tower visible. In the second scene, a TV antennae is in the far distance and it overlooks a wooded area that seems to be bisected by a road.

    If anyone can find those features and match them up with a view from the airfield, I’d love to hear the argument.

  4. sotilaspassi // December 9, 2015 at 8:28 am // Reply

    Based on the MH17 evidence, only possible BUK launch sites are around the torez-saurdemorga-snizhne triangle (as DSB estimated). It’s futile and waste of energy to study any impossible options.

    • Some also considered futile to argue against Newton’s Mechanics and see how they were surprised. And with Newton at least there was a lot of verifiable data in favour of his theory. There were just no means to verify limits relevant to Quantum Mechanics.

      In case of DSB estimation based on simplified and actually false assumptions without presenting verifiable data we get not a theory but propaganda or religion. But we remember your trajectory assumption. Unphysical and simplistic as usual. So no surprises that your religios believes forbid you from looking anywhere beyond your narrow desires

      • sotilaspassi // December 9, 2015 at 12:43 pm // Reply

        I believe in physics. I have done my own study.
        There are several factors that make south and north directions simply impossible.

        • Believe????
          Physics is not a religion. It is independent of your believeing or not believing in it.

          Factors are subjective term. Not surprisingly you prefer to use it.

          But let me help you a little bit. DSB model relies on shrapnel speed assumption. What is wrong with their assumption? I assume that you know some basic physics

          • sotilaspassi // December 10, 2015 at 9:35 am //

            It’s co-insidence that DSB findings match with mine.

            Every sane person know MH17 destroying BUK missile came from ahead after looking at the debris and knowing something about how BUK SAM works.

          • You indeed have no clue. You just believe and rely on others authority. Kind of silly

            But let’s return to physics. How to estimate the speed and distribution of shrapnel? How valid is the assumption by DSB that there is a particular distribution and speeds of shrapnel are same and constant in coordinate system linked to missile?

          • sotilaspassi // December 14, 2015 at 10:56 am //

            BUK launched from Z would detonate on the right side of MH17. That is 100% certain.
            BUK coming from Z and exploding on left side of MH17 would not cause the damage we see (no shrapnell from left to right). That is 100% certain.

          • First of all we are discussing how unscientific is the assumption of constant speed for shrapnel in DSB report. Assumption that is extremely critical to their conclusion.
            So your attempt to discredit Zaroshenskoe is missing the point. Plus in MOD slides Zaroshenskoe is just one of the locations where Ukrainian BUKS were detected close to the front line. It doesn’t claim the launch from their. It establishes a white elephant in the room that DSB just can’t notice – UKRAINIAN BUKS IN THE AREA.
            Second, if you want to talk about it. From communication between ATC and MH17 pilot we know that less than a minute before hit he was ordered to turn towards RND point. Nearly 30 degrees turn in relation of his original path. Pilot acknowledged a command, and thus was proceeding to turn while alleged missile was already flying at him. Hence the was a change of relative angle and speed, that affected proportional navigation of the homing missile. You can evaluate the effect on intercept point yourself. In combination with true acceleration distribution of shrapnel you will get a very different pattern from what DSB is considering.
            Now the interesting next question is the time inconsistency of reported FDR timing and flightradar timings on speed. Published FDR data also claims constant heading. Now, that becomes fundamental, did pilot start the manuvor or not. Unfortunately black boxes were not independently investigated and data was revealed with suspicious long delay. If Brits deliberately cut out last 30 seconds to fit the required story will be fun to prove, but we don’t have enough information.

          • sotilaspassi // December 15, 2015 at 10:40 am //

            > Plus in MOD slides
            RU MOD lied 100%. Only a fool believe anything from them.

            >Zaroshenskoe is just one of the locations where Ukrainian BUKS were detected close to the front line.
            There is no any half credible or credible evidence of any BUK near Z.
            Only possible launch areas are in the DSB indicated area. (same area I and many others figured out year ago)
            More than half credible video+photo+eyewitness material prove that there was a BUK launcher in the area.

            So far we have not seen any indication of any UA BUK in the suitable launch area.
            But yes, it would have been “nice” to see DSB analysis of the whereabouts of every Ukrainian and Russian BUK launcher.

            >From communication between ATC and MH17 pilot we know that less than a minute before hit he was ordered to turn towards RND point.
            We know from radar material and from FDR data that the plane did not change course.

            >Published FDR data also claims constant heading. Now, that becomes fundamental, did pilot start the manuvor or not. Unfortunately black boxes were not independently investigated and data was revealed with suspicious long delay. If Brits deliberately cut out last 30 seconds to fit the required story will be fun to prove, but we don’t have enough information.

            And the Brits also modified the RU Radar video then. LOL!

            Is there any professional investigator (outside Russia) that thinks DSB findings are not correct?

          • sotilspassi:

            “More than half credible video+photo+eyewitness material prove that there was a BUK launcher in the area.”

            Can you run through what you think is actually credible evidence? My short list is the AP report, the Snizhne photo and video, and the shootdowns on the 16th.

          • Antidyatel // December 16, 2015 at 1:09 am //

            Soli, again you jumped away from main topic – unscientific report by DSB and you beliefs. My fault, shouldn’t have commented on your diversion on Zaroshenskoe in the previous post. But let’s return from the world of beliefs to science. So, DSB and you assume constant speed for shrapnel from the missile to get a matching distribution today extremely small number of impact holes. It might be surprising for you but in order to reach certain speed all shrapnel has to accelerate first. Acceleration to different shrapnel pieces will be different. For the stationary test conducted by AA this doesn’t change the pattern much. But on case of the rocket moving at speeds only 2-3 times lower than maximum speed of shrapnel the effect will quite strong. For example, in simplified assumption of constant and uniform acceleration, ray tracing to the origin will miss the mark by nearly 1 meter in the direction of missile propagation. Meaning the explosion happened 1 meter before predicted spot by DSB in case of Snijne origin. In reality accelerations are non uniform and not constant. It is school physics but DSB (and you) are not familiar with it, as you somehow manage to claim the explosion position based on damage pattern and constant speed assumption. Practically you should get pass for presentation and fail for Science.
            I like how you use MOD radar as evidence that plane didn’t turn. Aren’t they lying all the time? But it is another good example of you beliefs and lack of knowledge. Radar image is updated every 3-4 seconds. At Boeing’s speed of 250m/s we are talking about 1 km travel distance. While you are trying to make conclusions about few meters for explosion position. FDR sampling rate for new planes with upgraded black boxes is 1 Hz for heading parameter. For older planes, like MH17, it was slower but can’t find the data. In any case we are talking about averaged value over a distance of 250 m. You can’t use it for conclusions of explosion position with sub-meter accuracy. Sorry, you can, because you BELIEVE in things.
            “Is there any professional investigator (outside Russia) that thinks DSB findings are not correct?”

            Again you try to rely on authority and not on science. Typical western bigotry. No wonder you invented inquisition and still admire Charlemagne. Eventhough Greeks even calculated the Earth circumference in BC times, it took nearly 2000 years to brake European groupthink that Earth is not flat. All because you are so eager to believe and not to know.

          • sotilaspassi // December 21, 2015 at 8:43 am //

            Anti, BUK proximity fuse operation and target hitting methode is similar to this:
            Therefore “Z” direction is just not possible.

        • Deus Abscondis // December 16, 2015 at 10:11 am // Reply


          You state “BUK launched from Z would detonate on the right side of MH17. That is 100% certain.”

          You seem unaware of the missiles radar proximity fuse function which is to pass target by an amount so fragment field intersects with target. It is function found in other SAMs not just 9M38/9M38M1.

          You state “BUK coming from Z and exploding on left side of MH17 would not cause the damage we see (no shrapnell from left to right). That is 100% certain.”

          Almaz Antey did a credible analysis of fragment damage inside the plane as some fragments travelled mostly along the axis of the body. TNO/NLR ignored internal damage on the weak claim that after penetration of the skin at less than acute angles fragment direction is indeterminate. Clear successive damage from entry point then through beams refutes that claim as Almaz Antey showed.

          I see nothing in the Almaz Antey model of Z site that precludes left-right damage. Indeed as they have it, the S site should incur more left right damage, e.g., penetration through the left and right parts of tbe fuselage which is not seen. S site direction doesn’t account for internal damage as well as Almaz Antey model.

          There is nothing about this whole topic I feel comfortable saying I’m 100% certain about.


  5. Deus Abscondis // December 9, 2015 at 10:25 am // Reply

    Andrew “There is nowhere around Kramatorsk Airfield”

    I agree, it’s not, and no one can show a match there. Kramatorsk airfield is on a slight plateau.

    Ukraine army are lying.

    The only force known to have BUKs was the Ukraine army.

    Drop me a PM @Deus_Abscondis

    • I encourage everyone to find the exact location this video was made. The TV-tower in the background is a clue.

      • Deus Abscondis // December 10, 2015 at 3:56 pm // Reply

        It’s an antenna of some sort, can’t establish what type. Another antenna down in the valley too. There’s a tower of some type behind the rotating radar. This is a large base. I would expect it to be well behind front lines and a point from which sorties out to the front line are run. I expect there is a small river/stream at the bottom of the valley.

        • Deus Abscondis:

          The tower behind the rotating radar is a water tower of a type very common in Ukraine. The famous video of the 3rd Batallion of the 156th Air Defense Regiment parked on the side of the road in Soledar is taken next to one. This one is very rusty instead of being painted patriotic blue and yellow. That is likely a good clue.

          I think another big clue by the second image is the forested area with a road running through it.

          • Deus Abscondis // December 16, 2015 at 10:17 am //


            So far I haven’t located the large Ukrainian ‘valley’ camp in question. I don’t think it is in the immediate ‘within range of MH17’ Southern area The shot’s in the video appear to be from quite different locations. Some of the shots show quite an elevated position, the wind is blustery, Saur Mogila maybe?. There is the “valley shot”-an approximated ‘plan view’ sketch of the side of the valley may help. There is video from both sides of the water tank, here the topography is flat. There’s nothing to connect this flat land with the valley shot. Two different radars-one in the valley shot and one in the ‘flat lands’ shot. Would two radars like that be in operation of the same area? In all we may be looking at three different locations.


            P.S. Max v d W has my email if you want to ‘chunk up’ tracts of Ukraine to collaborate on searching.

    • sotilaspassi // December 9, 2015 at 12:44 pm // Reply

      We know there was BUK launcher(s) also on rebel held area and also on the border area.

      • Nope. What we have is a set of unconfirmed social media inserts without proper authorship. Attempts to claim authorship, like in casebook Paris-Match fake was discredited by Paris-Match themselves by misrepresentation of location, time of photo and means and circumstances of taking the photo.

        In case of Ukrainian Buks the photos I attributed to concrete sources and dates. But I know that you can’t sense the difference

        • sotilaspassi // December 10, 2015 at 9:31 am // Reply

          None of the BUK images taken from rebel area have been proven to be fake. Also locals and rebels confirm there was BUK unit(s) in rebel area.
          There is no image of Ukrainian BUK unit in suitable launch positions vs MH17. No single evidence. Only RU MOD lies.
          (+ Russian BUK units beside the border have been confirmed many times via satellite images etc. +Several planes have been downed from above 5km.)

          • Putting Paris-Match photo into shows sharp difference between BUK and rest of the photo. Your Bellingcat sect was praying on that method, so you should accept it.

            There is no witness that is out their ready to testify. Only anonymous junk retold by social media.
            None of the BUK photos in rebel area can be dated convincingly. Making them irrelevant for the time being or more likely to be planted “evidence”.

            JIT had a lot of avenues to get real facts but they preferred to focus on hearsay. That alone indicates more than your photos of BUKS on Russian side ofbthe border

          • sotilaspassi:

            “None of the BUK images taken from rebel area have been proven to be fake.”

            There are no verifiable BUK images from the rebel area available to proven to be fake. You cannot prove a negative. There are uncorroborated social media image postings of unknown provenance made by unknown persons taken at unknown times and posted well after the downing. After 18 months, not a single photographer has come forward to admit to making a photo or video and provide the original electronic file.

            There isn’t a single original image file of any kind for neutral parties to examine.

  6. Liane Theuer // December 10, 2015 at 9:52 pm // Reply

    The problem with most of the Buk-videos : They were deleted.
    So I have only screenshots, but no links.
    Unfortunately, you can not use any photos here in the comments.
    For example the Kramatorsk sighting of BUK 121.
    Onother one are Buk-M1 to the north near Donetsk in Avdeevka.

    I have screenshots of another video from the location we are looking for. There you can see more of the landscape. And you can see one of the cars belonging to Private Bank (white with a green stripe). We know that Right Sektor was using this cars on many occasions.
    Another clue : Defense Minister of Ukraine Colonel-General Valery Geletey visited the site on July 5, 2014. May be there exist an article about that.

    This link is still working :
    16/3/2014 : „SAM “Buk” in Kurakhovo, Donetsk region.This morning went to the car and saw a tractor pulling a 2 SAM “Buk” on the highway Donetsk Zaporozhye“

    And this one too :
    Start watching at 3:37. An ukrainian general gives an interview with Buk 324 and 330 in the background.
    Maybe somebody understand what he is saying.

    Here a video of Buk 332 and another one near Kramatorsk in March 2014 :

  7. Liane Theuer // January 11, 2016 at 11:15 pm // Reply

    admin wrote : „The video published by a Ukraine military TV station on July 16 showing BUKs was taken at Kramatorks airbase according the Ukraine Army.“

    That´s a lie. For comparison look at this video taken on april 30/2015. BUK in Kramatorsk fires a missile. It was even mentioned by the OSCE.
    The location looks quite different as the one July 16/2014.

    May 8/2014 Buk 121 in Kramatorsk

    Ukrainian Army moves three SA-11 Buk systems away from Donetsk April 2/2015. Buk 321, 332, 312.

    • Liane Theuer:

      “May 8/2014 Buk 121 in Kramatorsk”

      The video is taken on March 12, 2014 in Krasnoarmieysk. Note the vegetation’s lack of leaves, and also the fact that the street scene matches the main street through Krasnoarmieysk, while Kramatorsk lacks such divided hihgways. The Admin has linked to several other copies of the same video, and still photos of the movement were also taken by Ukrainian media concern Orbit.

  8. Liane Theuer // January 11, 2016 at 11:20 pm // Reply

    To the video released by the TV station of the Ukraine army :

    This video seems to mix different times and locations.

    The man in the helicopter seen at 4:20 in the video is General Sergiy Kulchytskiy. He died May 29/2014 when separatists shot down a Ukrainian army helicopter near the town of Slovyansk. Link :

    At 4:56 in this video the badge of the SBU is to be seen.

    And we know, that Defense Minister of Ukraine Colonel-General Valery Geletey visited this unit July 5/2014 :
    Valery Geletey, which was proposed by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, was appointed as defense minister on July 3/ 2014 and he resigned on October 12/2014.
    As a Defense Minister he has also been part of several scandals.
    Geletey threatened to file a law suit against Yulia Timoshenko, who accused him in selling weapons to militants in Donetsk and Lugansk.
    In September, he also accused Russia of using tactical nuclear weapons against Kiev army fighters.
    In early October, Russia’s top Investigative Agency launched a criminal case against Geletey over murder accusations, the use of prohibited means and methods of warfare and genocide.

    Ukrainian Defence Minister Valeriy Geletey said the rebels had probably used a Buk system that Russia had seized from Ukraine during its March annexation of the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea.

  9. Liane Theuer // January 29, 2016 at 1:25 pm // Reply

    PART 1

    Max van der Werff posted this on his Twitter account :
    „Why did priest Mikhaylo delete his album with this photo?“

    He gave a link to this forum :

    It took me some time to get the story straight :
    On August 08/2014 the Russian-speaking forum opened a thread about Buk photos that O. Mikhaylo had posted on his FB page: or
    It´s in ukrainian language !

    The photos were dated July 15/2014.
    PHOTO 1 (also posted by Max van der Werff) :
    In the foreground are 5 men. Sitting left with the black cap is Mikhaylo. In the background you see a buk with number 211. Painted in a special tricolor.
    Also in the background you see a lot of missile containers in two rows, more than forty. Six of them are removed from the first row.
    PHOTO 2 : In the foreground Mikhaylo is visible. In the background there is a lot of military equipment and the missile containers.

    After MH17 was shot down, Mikhaylo deleted all his postings from 5.7.- 01.08.2014 and disabled the comment function.
    He deleted the July 15/2014 photos and reposted them on August 01/2014.
    But he changed the buk-location from Ukraine to Russia :
    PHOTO 1 : gorodskoy okrug Domodedovo, Russian Federation.
    “gorodskoy okrug” means “urban district”. Domodedovo is Moscow airport !
    PHOTO 2 : gorodskoye poseleniye Kalininets, Naro-Fominakiy rayon.
    Naro-Fominsk was occupied by the nazis from October 21 to December 26, 1941. It was the Battle of Moscow.
    Mikhaylo made a very deliberate lie! So, it seems that he puts a message in the new buk-locations.

    Mikhaylo´s text to his Buk-photos :
    “These photos caused great and unique feeling in our Russian neighbors. Someone filled rage, someone joy because “now it is finished with Buk Cover”.
    First I ignore, but it is not Christian. Therefore, I decided to use their page to enlightenment of those who wander in the darkness.”

  10. Liane Theuer // January 29, 2016 at 1:28 pm // Reply

    PART 2

    On August 01/2014 the yaplakal-forum jumped in. (Link to the forum in Part 1)
    They collected different Mikhaylo photos and partly geotagged them. This is the result :
    Photo 1 and 2 are located north of Donetsk in the Yasinovatskiy Rayon. That´s near Avdiivka.

    Remember :
    Avdiivka was one of the buk-locations that the Russian Defense Ministry identified :
    “MH17 crashed within the operating zone of the Ukrainian army’s self-propelled, medium-range surface-to-air ‘Buk’ missile systems, the Russian general said.
    “We have space images of certain places where the Ukraine’s air defense was located in the southeast of the country,” Kartapolov noted. (..)
    Buk missile defense units in Donetsk Region, 5km north of Donetsk city, on July 14, 2014.“
    The Russians were right !

    Ukraine@war draws the usual image “Russia intensified it’s attacks including deliberate targeting of civilian areas”.
    But Mikhaylov´s photos prove : In Avdiivka were Ukrainian units ! And they shelled Donetsk.
    The separatists returned the fire from Donetsk in the direction of Avdiivka.

    Kremlintroll wrote :
    “At midday on July 18, 2014 the Russian MoD began releasing locations where Ukrainian BUK-M1 units were deployed near Donetsk, noting a KUPOL radar at Styla and remotely linked firing batteries at Avdeevka and Gruzko-Zoryanske.”

    Are Avdiivka and Avdeevka and Avdeyevka (Авдеевке) the same locations ?

    PHOTO 3 : shows a move of Mikhaylo and probably the buk to Debaltsevo on July 15/2014.
    The photo was geotagged south of Debaltsevo at the intersection of E50 (M04) and E50 (M03).
    The photo shows Mikhaylo inside a buk (as far as I can tell).
    This would be the proof that at least one ukrainian buk on July 15/2014 was south of Debaltsevo.
    If you look at the military map, Debaltsevo was deep inside the separatists controlled region.
    But obviously Mikhaylo and his crew managed to move from Avdiivka to Debaltsevo with heavy military equipment in one day.

    PHOTO 4 : Was posted on September 08/2014 in Stanychno-Luhanskyi raion, Ukraine.
    This is north-east of Luhansk. It shows Mikhaylo and a buddy on a tank. A Buk is not visible in the photo.
    The way from Debaltsevo to Stanychno-Luhanskyi raion goes via the M04 to Lugansk and then further on the P22.
    Debaltsevo – Luhansk via the M04 is exactly the way the DSB and Bellingcat claim the „murder-buk“ has taken !
    But may be Mikhaylo lied about this location too. Unfurtunatly photo 4 was not geotagged.

    • “But Mikhaylov´s photos prove : In Avdiivka were Ukrainian units ! And they shelled Donetsk.”

      Avdiivka was only captured by Ukraine on July 31, 2014.

      “The separatists returned the fire from Donetsk in the direction of Avdiivka.”

      They returned fire to the fields west of Avdiivka, where Ukraine had about half a dozen firing positions and a very large deployment of forces in the wedge between Donetsk Airport, Avdiivka, and Karlivka.

      “Are Avdiivka and Avdeevka and Avdeyevka (Авдеевке) the same locations ?”


      “PHOTO 3 : shows a move of Mikhaylo and probably the buk to Debaltsevo on July 15/2014. The photo was geotagged south of Debaltsevo at the intersection of E50 (M04) and E50 (M03).”

      Either the location or date is wrong. Debaltsevo was held by the separatists until July 28, 2014. Ukraine began attacking Debaltsevo at the front on July 19/20/21, 2014, and then made an armored thrust in strength south of Debaltsevo only on July 27, 2014. These are well known and undisputed facts.

    • Liane Theuer:

      “The photo shows Mikhaylo inside a buk (as far as I can tell).”

      The photo shows Fr. Mykhailo inside a KUPOL radar unit.

      “The photo was geotagged south of Debaltsevo at the intersection of E50 (M04) and E50 (M03).”

      This is also an extremely unlikely location for a KUPOL unit. All BUK’s are relatively lightly armored compared to a tank, as they are meant to operate at the rear echelon of an Army in battle, 10-15 km behind the front line. In that sense, they are similar to self-propelled howitzers in body type and strength.

      The BUK KUPOL (and Command Post) would generally be located even further back from the front lines than any wandering BUK TELAR’s, as they are data-linked for command and control by remote coms links at distances of 10’s of kilometers, and have a range of vision of around 150 km. I’d suggest likely locations of KUPOL’s would be 20-50 km behind the front lines. A Ukrainian KUPOL south of Debaltsevo on July 15, 2014 is frankly preposterous.

      • How the Buk missile system was designed to fight, was totally different from what anybody imagined at that time that it would be employed in 2014.

        As designed the Buk was tasked to protect large offensive units (Tank divisions and larger) from attack aircraft, in conditions of enemy air superiority.

        The Ukrainian civil war of 2014 however was rather like partisan activities, from Odessa to Kharkov, with little emphasis of controlling territory, so concept such as line of contact are meaningless. As the insurgents did not have any air force, the proper emplacement for Buk anti-aircraft systems of the Ukrainian army would be nowhere, so pointing out certain placements as unreasonable does not make sense.

        They make perfect sense for putting up a false flag operation, which is what they also did.

        • Athomas, you will never find the truth if you continue to be thinking in the terms of Kremlin propaganda about an imaginary “civil war in Ukraine.” A civil war is not when foreign operatives and foreign troops and armaments take part in the fighting.

          • Hector Reban // February 4, 2016 at 9:54 am //

            Except, of course, if it are CIA consultants or Academi mercenaries hired by the illegal government.

          • Prosto Tak // February 4, 2016 at 11:12 pm //

            Hector, “if.”

            But the only illegal forces were the Russian-backed separatists, and it was not them who hired anybody, it was them who were hired by Kremlin.

            By the way: so, do you really believe in those “Academi” tales?

          • Hector Reban // February 5, 2016 at 9:43 am //

            If it are CIA consultants, then Prosto will never mention they are “foreign operatives”, “foreign troops and armaments”.

            If the Ukies are lying, Then Prosto will label it as just a “mistake”.

            You are suffering from a very severe condition of manipulating ans spinning reality.

            And, no, we needn’t be questioning if the US support troops – regular or irregular – are helping the illegal government.

          • Prosto Tak // February 5, 2016 at 10:10 am //


            so I see you do believe in the fairy tales about some “foreign operatives, foreign troops and armaments” in the war zone, except from Russian, of course.

            I still cannot understand if you also believe in some “US support troops” helping the illegal separatist armed groups in Eastern Ukraine, as these are the illegal “governments” in Ukraine, as well as the Russian occupation structures in the Crimea.

          • Maksym Ponomarenko // February 5, 2016 at 2:16 pm //

            The people in Eastern Ukraine are “anti coup” forces. An illegal coup happened in Kiev. The people in Eastern Ukraine did not accept the illegal government that came to power in a violent coup. Then the newer government whom they did not vote for attacked them . In prosoto’s muddled thinking those in Kiev did nothing wrong. We should support those in Eastern Ukraine who resisted the illegal coup government

          • sotilaspassi // February 5, 2016 at 2:57 pm //



            +There has been two democratic elections since Yanu ran to Russia. Get over it.

          • Hector Reban // February 5, 2016 at 5:35 pm //

            Prosto, your reply is disengenious (again). You are twisting the matters 180 degrees.

            My view is very simple though never mentioned before, so I should take your words as spinning the wheel again: If there were no Russian regulars in the Donbass, there should be.

            The neonazi killing machine you are protecting over and over again is worth fighting against, and more so if one takes into account western powers have set norms for intervention to protect “your own” (nationals) on far lesser grounds.

            But I guess in your perverted universe you can for sure twist matters to suit the (pro)western narratives and angendas.

          • Prosto Tak // February 5, 2016 at 9:51 pm //

            Hector, sorry.

            I thought one can argue with you and your staunch anti-Ukrainian and pro-Kremlin position more or less seriously. I was wrong.

            It’s the Russian state Fascism killing machine that is murdering Ukrainians for not being subservient to Moscow which Ukraine is now fighting against. This machine, first staging violent coups in the Donbas, then changing to direct Russian military intervention but not achieving its goals to divide Ukraine, is failing already, so let’s hope it will ultimately fail and its Kremlin instigators be tried.

          • I request Hector and Prosto now kindly to stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks.

        • Athomas:

          For Ukraine, the BUK missile system is a scarce, irreplaceable, but valuable deterrent to a full scale Russian invasion, as is the S-300.

          Despite what lay people think, armor quality of armored vehicles varies widely depending on where a vehicle is expected to be in the line of battle. Rear echelon vehicles do not have armor plating to protect them from tank shells and anti-tank missiles as they are not expected to hang around and wait to meet front line armor-killer vehicles.

          For the BUK, it is sufficient for its armor to withstand 50 caliber heavy machine guns, grenades, light shrapnel, and small rockets as it needs defense from saboteurs and attack planes and helicopters and land mines. You will note that BUK’s lack even a rudimentary vehicle mounted machine gun for self defense.

          Despite what you say about no front lines, which is partly true, there was sufficient resistance around Debaltsevo to hold off a determined Ukrainian armored thrust from overrunning the positions there for 10 days. Further, on July 15, the front line checkpoints in the area were well north near Svitlodarsk and Gorlivka.

          So the idea that a rare KUPOL radar unit, which does not even have missiles, would be driven past multiple enemy roadblock checkpoints to take position 20 km deep within rebel territory is the height of absurdity.

          • Liane Theuer // February 4, 2016 at 12:33 am //

            Andrew, thanks for your reply.
            But it´s too easy to say “it cannot be”.
            What do you think ? Are the geotaggs in the yaplakal-forum wrong ?

          • “What do you think ? Are the geotaggs in the yaplakal-forum wrong ?”

            The one for Debaltsevo for July 15th is wrong for either place or date. The one near Avdeevka is at least plausible.

            They seem to be quite unverifiable.

            I’m not particularly concerned about them. MH17 was not shot down from Avdeevka.

  11. Liane Theuer // January 29, 2016 at 1:29 pm // Reply

    PART 3

    PHOTO 5 : The yaplakal-forum present another photo taken on May 09/2014 :
    It shows Mikhaylo and friends in front of Buk 231. The Buk has the same tricolor as Buk 211 in photo 1.
    Photo 5 was not geotagged.
    But Buk 231 belong to base A-1659 in Mariupol and dissapeared from there in March.

    Kremlintroll about Buks starting with number 2 :
    Base ID A-1659 Berdyanske (Mariupol)
    Command Post (CP) : Buk 200
    Target Acquisition Radar (TAR) : Buk 201
    Transporter Erector Launcher And Radar (TELAR) : Buk 211, 212, 231, 221, 222, 231, 232
    Transporter Erector Launcher (TEL) : Buk 213, 223, 233
    We have not yet found an internet record of the movement of BUK-M1 assets out of Mariupol, but it appears 6 or 7 of the BUK’s stationed there definitely left the base in March, 2014 along with the two low-loaders, as they disappear from Google Earth satellite imagery by March 30, 2014. This included BUK CP and TAR 200 and 201. Left behind at the base were two BUK TELAR’s and two or possibly three BUK TEL’s.
    Battalion 2 of the 156th Regiment was assigned to Sector D of the ATO. This base remained safely in Ukrainian hands throughout the conflict and by September 5, 2014, Ukraine had relocated all of the BUK units from this base to other locations. On July 17th, TAR 201 would have been the KUPOL radar unit detected at either Volnovakha or Styla.
    Figure 25 – Ukrainian BUK-M1 air defense assets at base A-1659 in Mariupol on Google Earth on May 30, 2014.
    CP 200, TAR 201, four TELAR’s and possibly one TEL have been deployed off base.

    • Liane Theuer:

      “It shows Mikhaylo and friends in front of Buk 231. The Buk has the same tricolor as Buk 211 in photo 1.”

      This particular paint scheme is used by the 222nd Air Defense Regiment in Stryi, Lviv Oblast, Ukraine. Therefore, this BUK most likely belongs to that unit.

      The identification of Fr. Mykhailo as a Greek Catholic priest greatly increases this likelihood, as Ukrainians of the Greek Catholic Church are generally only found in Galicia in Ukraine, and this unit is located in Galicia.

      “But Buk 231 belong to base A-1659 in Mariupol and disappeared from there in March. Kremlintroll about Buks starting with number 2”

      Ukraine likely has/had at least three BUK 231’s. One in Mariupol with the 156th Regiment, one in Yevpatoria in Crimea with the 55th Regiment and captured by Russia, and one in Stryi with the 222nd Regiment. More information that just numbers are necessary to identify the vehicles to a unit. Conveniently, the three regiments appear to use distinct camo paint schemes. The 156th uses all drab green, the 222nd uses a tricolor camo with drab green, grey and red-brwon, and the 55th uses a tricolor camo with drab green, black, and yellow-green.

  12. Liane Theuer // January 29, 2016 at 1:31 pm // Reply

    PART 4
    What can be deduced based on his FB page about O. Mykhaylo ?

    He is a :
    1) a Nationalist
    2) a Military Chaplain
    3) a Fundraiser

    On 18 Feb 2014 he posted a photo of himself on the Maidan
    He sympathizes with Svoboda and Right Sector. Bandera he sees as a “Hero of Ukraine”.
    Posted on 22 Feb 2014 :
    “THANK YOU RIGHT SECTOR and all participants euromaidan !!!! You are our heroes !!!! Glory to Ukraine!!!!! Glory to heroes!!!!”
    Posted on 4 Mar 2014 :
    “Bandera slandered at the Nuremberg trials – Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations.”
    On Januar 10/2016 Mykhaylo posted this photo (he is the second from right) :

    He wears the badge of the Department of military chaplains Ukraine.
    I think he belongs to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC)
    May be his full name is Mykhaylo Arsenych :
    Mykhaylo has blessed different volunteer battalions before they went to combat missions.
    From Mykhaylo´s page :
    Consecration of the Church of the Annunciation office 2015 Horodok
    He has also made various burial ceremonies for fallen fighters.
    He sometimes informed the parents about the death of their son.

    Mykhaylo collects tons of donations that he gives to the fighters. This includes donations of weapons, night vision devices, etc.
    Mykhaylo works apparently closely with the ATO leadership, because he often travels with official ATO vehicles across the country.
    One sees him often with fighters of Right Sector and Azov:
    He has even given two brand new cars to the Right Sector. One of them came right to be used in Pisky :
    But Mykhaylo himself carries always different badges on the left arm, which I can not identify:

    What does Mykhaylo know about the ukrainian Buks ?
    And why does he want to hide it ?

    • O. Mykhaylo should read the Joint Declaration of Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill :

      Quote :
      15. It is a source of concern for us that there is a current curtailment of the rights of Christians, if not their outright discrimination, when certain political forces, guided by an often very aggressive secularist ideology, seek to relegate them to the margins of public life.
      25. It is our hope that our meeting may also contribute to reconciliation wherever tensions exist between Greek Catholics and Orthodox.
      26. We deplore the hostility in Ukraine that has already caused many victims, inflicted innumerable wounds on peaceful inhabitants and thrown society into a deep economic and humanitarian crisis. We invite all the parts involved in the conflict to prudence, to social solidarity and to action aimed at constructing peace. We invite our Churches in Ukraine to work towards social harmony, to refrain from taking part in the confrontation, and to not support any further development of the conflict.

      This raises the fundamental question of whether military chaplains should distribute weapons to a party of conflict. Especially, when they are neo-Nazis !

  13. Deus Abscondis // February 3, 2016 at 12:51 pm // Reply

    Great work Liane❗

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.