No. And I will explain all the facts in this thread ๐งต:
Yesterday the @nytimes published an article about the dead russians in Makiivka... and didn't bother to ask a single military expert, officer, weapons expert, or Ukrainian.
1/n
Instead they went to an Assistant Adjunct Professor for Epidemiology at UC Berkeley, who is quoted: โIt looks like most of them were shot in the head,โ Dr. Rohini Haar, medical adviser at Physicians for Human Rights, said in an interview.
Wrong. And a military expert would
2/n
have told the NY Times that this is nonsense.
First: here are the videos of the before and after of the incident. Video 2 in the linked tweet is before and Video 3 is after.
Here is a screenshot from Video 2.
There is a Ukrainian machine gunner on the ground (red circle). I added his line of fire in yellow.
We can also spot a toy car and a tree trunk. Those are important later.
There are two additional Ukrainian soldiers in this video, but they 4/n
will move before the next video so I did not mark them. Here is a video taken by a Ukrainian soldier that participated in the events.
Now let's analyze this video. 5/n
Here is the machine gunner from earlier. He uses a PKM machine gun. The machine gun is level with the heads of the dead russians later. His job is to keep the surrendering russians in check.
And again we see the toy car. 6/n
The toy car, a children's swing and to the right another Ukrainian soldier (which the NY Times forgot to count).
And this Ukrainian soldier doesn't have his rifle up. He is not expecting any resistance. 7/n
Two more Ukrainian troops. One with his foot on the aforementioned trunk, the other to the side behind the machine gunner. Both with their rifles pointing down. They too aren't ready for any shootout.
So we have five Ukrainian soldiers, with one filming, three having their 8/n
rifles down, and only the machine gunner ready to fire.
If we add those four Ukrainian soldiers to the overhead shot we see that only one had a clear shot of the russian (green circle) that came out last and attacked the Ukrainians. And that the filming soldier (blue circle) 9/n
was the attackers target (he is the injured soldier at the end of his video).
This is the approximate view of the machine gunner and his line of fire in yellow. Also note the wall section, the position of the 10th russian soldiers, & the hands of the first russian soldiers. 10/n
If we add the position of the Ukrainian troops and their lines of fire over a screenshot of the aftermath video, you can see that two Ukrainian troops and the machine gunner had the russians on the ground in their line of fire. Only one Ukrainian soldier had a clear shot of 11/n
attacking russian. Once this russian attacks, the soldier filming drops to the ground injured and the soldier, who had his foot on the trunk moves forward to engage. And you can hear the machine gun starting to fire - but more of that later. 12/n
After the shooting.
Bullet holes have appeared on the wall behind the dead russians. How did these get there if the russians were "shot in the head"?? 13/n
And if the russians were shot were they lay, how come that the 10th did move behind the wall?
14/n
"shot in the head", but the helmets didn't move? I can show you videos from the war in Syria and the Armenia-Azerbaijan war: a headshot with a Kalashnikov at that range and the helmet flies off with half the skull and most of the brain. 15/n
These russian were hit by the much more powerful bullets of the PKM machine gun. How powerful?
Well, the first russian soldier's left hand got hit by one of the machine guns' 7.62ร54mm bullets...
The destructive power and rate of fire of the PKM machine gun alone was enough 16/n
to kill all these russians. It was not an execution, it was not a war crime.
It was a team of 5 Ukrainian troops, four of which weren't doing their job but fooling around, who tried to take 11 russian prisoner. One russian decided to rather die than surrender, and the only
17/n
Ukrainian soldier ready to fire did as is expected in such a situation. The soldier filming goes down = the machine gunner fires to neutralize any threat. That's it.
If the NY Times had asked a military or weapons expert instead of epidemiologists and lawyers, they wouldn't
18/n
have provided the russian propaganda with this gift.
If you still have doubts: here is a PKM machine gun being fired, and after that I added three times the audio from the last second of the Ukrainian soldier's video.
You be the judge what we hear in that last second.
19/end
โข โข โข
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
As many people do not realize the importance of ๐ฌ๐ฑ Greenland for the defence of the ๐บ๐ธ US, I will explain it:
โข ๐จ๐ณ chinese nuclear submarines
If you watched The Hunt for Red October, you already know the reason the US has been, is, will be worried about enemy submarines.
1/24
Enemy submarines operating off the US East Coast would sink US ships, blockade US ports, launch cruise missiles at US cities, and disrupt US supply and reinforcement transports to Europe.
Today russia's Northern Fleet has 5ร cruise missile and 9ร attack submarines at
2/24
Murmansk, which in case of war would sail towards the central Atlantic.
But to get there the russian submarines must pass the GIUK gap or Greenland-Iceland-UK gap.
During the Cold War the US Navy and US Air Force operated P-3C Orion Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) and
3/24
After the end of the Cold War ๐ธ๐ช Sweden demilitarized #Gotland island, the key strategic location in the Baltic Sea.
After russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, Sweden remilitarized the island. The new Gotland Regiment (P 18), an armored formation, is a signal to enemy and allies, 1/9
that Sweden WILL DEFEND Gotland.
Sweden also formed a second amphibious battalion, ordered Blekinge-class submarines, bought Patriot air defence systems, grows its air force with Gripen E fighters, ordered modernized RBS 15 Mk. IV anti-ship missiles, etc. etc. 2/9
In short: Sweden is investing in its defence, with equipment orders and upgrades, as well as unit formations and relocations that signal the country's intent to defend all of its territory.
Are the Swedish forces strong enough to defeat a russian invasion 4-5 years after the 3/9
They last added a frigate to their Navy in 2011. They plan to add the next by around 2032 (!).
This is an unserious clown-show!
Alas, they are just as unserious as ๐ฉ๐ช๐ซ๐ท๐ฌ๐ง๐ฎ๐น๐ช๐ธ๐ธ๐ช๐ณ๐ด๐ง๐ช๐ต๐น๐ณ๐ฑ๐ฎ๐ช. Governments in Europe refuse to accept that we are in an emergency far
1/14
worse than any in the last 80 years.
โข russia is invading Ukraine, which will fall if we do not triple our military aid.
โข China will invade Taiwan, which will cut off all trade with Japan and South Korea
โข Trump is gonna break all bonds with Europe, and invade Panama
2/14
This means Europe can no longer rely on the highly trained and exquisitely equipped 100,000 US troops based in Europe to defend us.
Furthermore since russia invaded Ukraine the US Army has continuously two armored brigades and one light brigade on rotation in Europe, which
3/14
What does Trump's victory mean for NATO - listed from most certain to worst:
1) Operation Atlantic Resolve, which protects Eastern Europe since russia's invasion of Ukraine, will almost certainly end. 2) The only two US Army brigades in Europe (2nd Cavalry Regiment in ๐ฉ๐ช &
1/4
173rd Airborne Brigade in ๐ฎ๐น๐ฉ๐ช) will very likely return to the US. 3) US Air Force units in Europe will likely be reduced, but I doubt Trump will close the bases... he needs them to bomb Iran. 4) US nuclear sharing with ๐ฉ๐ช๐ฎ๐น๐ณ๐ฑ๐ง๐ช๐น๐ท will likely end, leaving Europe without
2/4
tactical nuclear weapons. 5) Trump could pull US officers and assets from NATO's command structure... which would cripple NATO commands like the Allied Air Command, Allied Land Command, Joint Forces Command Naples, etc. leaving NATO unable to command forces to fight a russian
3/4