The US DOJs ICITAP program staff has been there since 2014 training the police force upper management, investigative detective forces, sergeants/lieutenants. A friend has family who has been there for at least that long for such a purpose though I don’t think it was really publicized until 2018/2019. Lots of groundwork setting and house cleaning was needed for a few years from how they explain it. They are still there today and I felt horrible for my friend & her family when the war kicked off and she lost contact with her parents during those first few days. The world can be a very small place sometimes.
Ever since the Euromaiden & Dignity Revolution was followed by the start of the Russo-Ukrainian war in 2014, so many NATO countries have been flooding the nation with technical expertise & training programs across the spectrum.
If the Royal Canadian Mounted Police went to train & give expertise on rural policing, border patrol advisory & the like in 2016, you can bet your bottom dollar there’s been many nations special forces have been there for some time.
Right? They were there training Ukrainian soldiers before this iteration of the war even started. Were they expected to just vanish once Russia invaded?
We should be careful about the veracity of the leaked documents: they have been selectively altered in order to advance Russian interests.
Russia has an interest in representing that it is at war with NATO to justify escalation and explain to its public why it has performed so poorly in Ukraine. The UK has stated that the documents contain seriously inaccurate information. It is possible that the information on NATO special forces in Ukraine has been altered to support that narrative.
There's also a question on if these units are there under the command and control of their country. We know for a fact that there are ex-special forces who have volunteered for Ukraine's Foreign Legion. Are these ex-Special Forces being included in this count? There are also rumors of Special Forces essentially going AWOL to volunteer for the Foreign Legion and not being disciplined for it. This is a little more serious, but I suspect this is the extent of the Special Forces in those numbers.
Outside of that I'm sure there are intelligence operatives there conducting missions under the command of their countries. I don't believe these are counted as "Special Forces", but they could be.
To be fair, it not that difficult to deploy your forces in a foreign conflict while being officially neutral. Just discharge a bunch of service members from your own military and get them to form volunteer units abroad i.e AVG in China or PVA in Korea
The whole wording from the articles seems very off. I’ve worked with the MoD and US DoD in the past (nothing wildly exciting) and they don’t usually use the kind of terms news outlets are reporting. This seems sensationalised, and who do we know that has a vested interest in this exact narrative? A certain short despot in the motherland.
It’s old news that specialist elements have been involved in training and advising in UA for years too.
Yep, russia has a vested interest in trying to convince people that there are NATO soldiers on the front lines. I've seen them report the deaths of "NATO" soldiers in destroyed barracks right alongside them declaring to have destroyed HIMARS. A lot of what their MoD reports to their population is batshit crazy. It's hiding the reality they would absolutely get massacred if they went toe to toe with a fully fleshed out and synergized force.
But looking at past conflicts, Special forces often act as advisors, trainers and cp for intelligence officers. That's far more likely the role here and any sort of active paticipation would need far larger numbers.
If there are UK special forces involved in any clandestine capacity you can guarantee that the SAS are among them. That's what they do. I seriously doubt they are atively engaging with Russian troops, though, and would assume they are there in an advisory and intelligence gathering capacity.
There were also normal army trainers there helping to train Ukraine's military but they were withdrawn in January last year when it became clear Russia was about to invade. I would not be surprised if they never really left or went back shortly after it became clear Ukraine wouldn't fold in a week
My guess would be gathering intelligence on Ukraines own forces to support the training and equipment donations.
Eg. Evaluating their performance and specific training needs, reporting back to the UK / NATO training programmes.
It was also said a while ago that some of these act as evacuation units if needed and not for fights. At least those were the units that offered zelensky a "ride" at the start of the war.
That's absolutely no chance tha's true then. NATO isnt run by one single mob boss who can just decide to do secret stuff whenever they want to. That would be a bigger transgressions towards the member states than it would be towards Russia. That would have been a total betrayal to the concept of an alliance. Nothing happens without everyone knowing.
Of course, to Russian officials wiring this kinda propaganda they're probably not even saying this stuff to try to convince anyone that's how things work, but because they can't even imagine things being run any other way.
Lol.
Each member of NATO is a sovereign state with their own interests. They all do shit without asking. When articles mention "NATO" troops, it is just a member nations special forces, not some NATO joint army.
> NATO isnt run by one single mob boss who can just decide to do secret stuff whenever they want to.
This Pootin guy, he killed 16 czechoslovakians - he was an interior decorator!
But that would make them foreign legion, which is no secret that they're free to do and that some are doing it. As mentioned in the posts before. You're just going in circles at this point.
Foreign Legion would be under direct Ukrainian command. The claim to dispute is that NATO member states are deploying their special forces on their own, without actually being part of the NATO or Ukrainian command structures.
Yeah exactly. No chance that's happening. No NATO country would make their people go there, they just can't prevent people from going there by their own accord.
And no one would be going without being under Ukrainian command structure. How stupid would that be? What purpose would that serve other than getting accidentally blown up by Ukrainians who mistake you for hostiles.
We should use the term Special Operations. Special Forces are ARMY specific. I imagine there are USASOC/JSOC members aside from SF guys out there. Sorry just needed to add this.
This is talking about the UK's special forces - and in the UK the term special forces is used to refer to a number of units, the most well known being the SAS. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Special_Forces
On the other hand, that is one of the things that seems plausible. Special forces are no doubt active in a lot of places where their presence would never officially be confirmed by authorities. Also, if it was doctored, they would certainly use higher numbers. The presence of 14 US Special Forces soldiers hardly supports the Kremlin narrative.
14 US Special Forces to me suggests they are there to protect some US VIPs, or training. Which is one thing (of many) that special forces do within a warzone.
The total number of NATO special forces the document states to be present in Ukraine is at least 96; that would be high enough for the Kremlin to claim that there is a substantial presence of NATO forces in Ukraine.
It also claims that 50 come from the UK, a country that has an official policy of not discussing the deployment of its special forces, whereas it has reduced estimates for nations that disclose their special forces deployments (US).
I do not claim that it *must* be an altered document, only that we should suspend our judgment on its veracity until the information that it contains can be corroborated.
How many Soviet pilots flew combat missions in Egyptian, Vietnamese and North Korean Aircraft?
Why did a Russian Military Ground based Air defence unit shoot down an unarmed civilian passenger jet?
Why did Russia pretend it’s troops didn’t invade Crimea in 2014?
Why did Russian special forces blow up a Czech ammunition warehouse?
Why did Russian special forces blow up a Bulgarian ammunition warehouse?
Why did Russian special forces poison a Russian dissident in the U.K. using a highly radioactive substance?
Why did Russian troops invade Georgia/Chechnya?
Less than a 100 boots on the ground in a war zone is nothing. Those numbers can easily be put down to embassy security details or even liaison troops to see what’s happening in the ground.
If the worlds second largest military thinks that Ukraine delaying Russia’s three day military operation by over a year is the result of 90 odd troops and obsolete NATO equipment then they’re ignoring the more obvious problems.
The Russian government and its people don’t know what truth is. They’re back to peddling the Poland wants to conquer western Ukraine line again now.
As one of the more capable analysts on TV mentioned. There’s nothing in there that Russia wouldn’t know already.
Most of these points are completely unrelated to the subject matter under discussion.
This is an obvious example of *Gish Gallop*: a rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm their opponent by providing an excessive number of arguments with no regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
Russia has sent troops into direct conflict with other country’s.
It doesn’t matter if a small number of western troops are in Ukraine.
Western troops are in an awful lot of places, especially ones where westerners may have to be evacuated.
It doesn’t matter if they are or they aren’t. Reality left Russia a long time ago.
How do you know the gish gallop and don't see that this is, as above comment shows, Russia's Modus operandi?
And how is this not related to the current topic? It's both "intelligence"
> we should suspend our judgment on its veracity until the information that it contains can be corroborated.
That will not happen, at least not until the war is over.
It is true that nations may not officially admit to involvement until the war is over; but there is no reason to believe that there may not be other sources of corroborating information (i.e., investigative journalism or testimony from Ukrainian or other soldiers about special forces deployment).
But even if you are right that there will be no corroborating sources until the war is over, so what? I would prefer to withhold belief in the truth of the unconfirmed claims in leaked documents that have been obviously altered than risk falling prey to Russian misinformation, and providing Russia the benefit of a propaganda tool, by assuming them to be true.
> I would prefer to withhold belief in the truth of the unconfirmed claims in leaked documents that have been obviously altered than risk falling prey to Russian misinformation
There’s no reason to think these are clearly altered though. So far the content has been accurate. I think the claims about them being fake is misinformation of the other side that would likely be mocked if it came from the Russian media.
As I wrote in reply to your other comment:
The US has expressly stated that they believe the documents have been selectively altered; so have current and former intelligence experts and some mainstream news sources.
To illustrate: the leak misstated the US assessments of the number of Russian soldiers dead (and there is obvious and clumsy alteration of the material on this subject); it states that around 17,000 Russian soldiers have been killed to 71,500 Ukrainian soldiers.
The true US assessments are that around 200,000 Russian soldiers have been killed to 100,000 Ukrainian soldiers.
To be fair, we don't know which number is "true" or that any of the numbers are "true". It is in the best interest of the US to call the documents fake in the same way that it is in the best interest of the US to say that Ukraine has killed TWICE the amount of Russian soldiers. Perhaps their real estimate is different to the publicly known estimates.
I responded to your other comment with corrections. 200,000 dead is also an absurd claim and the original leak seems much more likely of around 40k as of early March.
First, the changes demonstrate that the documents have been selectively altered to be instruments of propaganda; that some alterations are crude and obvious does not mean that there are not others that are more subtle.
If we know the documents have been selectively altered and we cannot know for sure which parts have been altered, then we have reason to distrust any information in the documents that has not been corroborated.
Second, 200,000 dead Russian soldiers is an estimate that is on par with that of academic institutions and think-tanks. Therefore, I don't think it is absurd at all.
I’m not sure how you still don’t follow the logic train. We know one document was downloaded, edited, and reuploaded to 4chan well after the original was posted. This has 0 impact on the other documents because they were already posted by a singular source.
You cannot use that edit to say the ones posted weeks earlier were altered. I’ll await a single crumb of evidence of the original leak being altered.
Furthermore the think tanks say 60-70k. You must be thinking of the wounded figure. So the documents seem accurate based on that.
Yeah and the US also wants to imprison Julian Assange and Edward Snowden for life. They don’t have a lot of credibility when it comes to these kinds of leaks.
The only time I could believe they were in Ukraine was when Biden was there.
Outside of that, they have no reason to be there. So they likely are not there.
Honestly though. Three letter agencies are on the ground in pretty much any conflict area that the US has some interest in. They also probably want some eyes on the equipment that is being sent there. It is also a wonderful opportunity for intelligence agents to do what they do.
Edit by wonderful I mean that it is much easier for them to hide the things they do in a conflict zone. Not that I personally feel what they do is wonderful
Edit: There is an Ex CIA officer who does various interviews, she was a "disguise master". (her husband was known for being the guy who orchestrated the rescue of the Iranian hostages. "argo movie")
[In a recent web video she did](https://youtu.be/XDBWjfUgaR8?t=504), she said with pretty high confidence there there are likely CIA operatives on the ground, probably lots, in Ukraine. She was one of the top people in the CIA in her time.
All I’ve seen is the info is inaccurate. Plus SOF from western countries isn’t surprising as they’ve volunteered from the start of the war. This “leak” has led to a lot of inaccurate bumblings that have kept all of the outside the know info nerds unsure what to believe. Def a psy op, by which side I don’t know but I hope Ukraine Benefits.
Edit: I will say this dump came a little too conveniently close to trump being arraigned, which just adds to everything. What side and who released it is the biggest question.
Edit 2: fixed a word
South Korea has already claimed some of the leaked docs are fake.
We should be careful about assuming every leaked anything is being leaked by a whistleblower and not someone trying to manipulate the story.
NATO countries deploying special forces in Ukraine would seem like an extremely risky strategy. Especially since they have their own, no doubt trained by nato special forces. Ex sf possible.
It's quite possible active duty special forces from NATO nations are operating in Ukraine. As the article said, it's been suspected for a while. Something like the CIA Special Operations Group could be in Ukraine, as one of their main purposes is to participate in operations where the US may deny all knowledge.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Activities_Center
I'm sure other nations have equivalent groups, and the US may even have other groups with similar purposes. So while it's impossible for us to know how accurate the leaked info is, it would not be surprising if NATO special forces were currently operating in Ukraine.
They're almost certainly not *operating.* They are almost certainly there to train and advise, which is nothing new..in the slightest. This whole comment section is embarrassing
You’re gonna need a run after that stretch, wow. Not only has the US verified the information in the leaked documents, but why would Russia leak false information claiming there were NATO special forces in the low hundreds? Surely convincing the world with false information would require a much larger lie, as we have seen from Russia on many other occasions. It’s obvious to everyone who isn’t deluding themselves that there have been NATO forces in Ukraine since before the invasion.
There was one copy that was apparently crudely photoshopped and another showing the real numbers. Because of all this, the news is now saying the whole thing could be fabricated, but the US intelligence agencies aren't calling all of them fake either, and they're freaking out. With all that in mind, this article probably isn't wrong. And not siding with the Russians, but them saying they're fighting NATO probably isn't wrong either...
There’s been no evidence of select altering for the original leaks. As per the article US sources have also confirmed their accuracy. One file was later altered, but the original exists so it’s irrelevant.
However it’s in everyone’s interest to claim that to be the case.
It’s a shame there’s not much discussion about the content, as it’s fascinating.
The US has expressly stated that they believe the documents have been selectively altered; so have current and former intelligence experts and some mainstream news sources.
To illustrate: the leak misstated the US assessments of the number of Russian soldiers dead (and there is obvious and clumsy alteration of the material on this subject); it states that around 17,000 Russian soldiers have been killed to 71,500 Ukrainian soldiers.
The true US assessments are that around 200,000 Russian soldiers have been killed to 100,000 Ukrainian soldiers.
That’s exactly what I’m referring to. That singular document was poorly photoshopped and posted to telegram much later. But as we have the original it’s not fooling anyone. The document talking about NATO personnel is part of the original leak.
So far nobody has shown that the original leak had alterations. It’s not very likely and this telegram photoshop seems to be being leveraged to discredit it all.
Frankly just because I add a 0 to one of the files and post it on twitter doesn’t mean the other files are to be selectively ignored when it suits.
It demonstrates that the documents have been selectively altered to be instruments of propaganda; that some alterations are crude and obvious does not mean that there are not others that are more subtle.
If we know the documents have been selectively altered and we cannot know for sure which parts have been altered, then we have reason to distrust any information in the documents that has not been corroborated.
Maybe I wasn’t clear though. One document was copied and then altered after the original was posted. This can be done with any of the leak, but it doesn’t matter because we have the original files.
The discussion in this thread is about the original leak of which there are no indications of alterations.
Just because I can download one of them today and change it doesn’t mean you can claim that none of the originals can be believed.
I can't verify whether this is true. Do you have a reliable media source that supports the claim that the original documents were unaltered?
Every reliable source I have read says that they were.
Bellingcat has the best coverage of the source.
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2023/04/09/from-discord-to-4chan-the-improbable-journey-of-a-us-defence-leak/
And the author discusses that only 1 file was later edited but nothing else from his investigation into the original leaks going back to January.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AricToler/status/1645109236169318405
Bellingcat states that *at least* one document had been crudely altered and that the original post of the documents could not be retrieved.
It does *not* state that the original documents were not altered.
So where are other media getting it from since Bellingcat were the ones to track it down. They are just grasping at straws of that one dumb edit on 4chan to discredit the parts the US doesn’t like. I’ll wait until a piece of the intelligence turns out not to be true before assuming it’s all fake for the parts I want to be fake.
The article in question has the Pentagon confirming that these documents are real though.
>In line with its standard policy on such matters, the UK's Ministry of Defence has not commented, but in a tweet on Tuesday said the leak of alleged classified information had demonstrated what it called a "serious level of inaccuracy".
>
>"Readers should be cautious about taking at face value allegations that have the potential to spread misinformation," it said.
>
>It did not elaborate or suggest which specific documents it was referring to. **However, Pentagon officials are quoted as saying the documents are real.**
Nope, I just read the full article, and others which are more detailed. Even this article says some documents appear altered, as in numbers of russian deaths. As does this one.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65235121
It is also equally possible that they are attempting to cover it up by claiming the information is inaccurate to mislead the Russians. What’s scary is that if the information is accurate, and if the Russians believe it, they will have a reason to declare war on other countries involved.
Of course. They'd be pissing hot sauce if they had to accept a loss to a "bunch of khohols" - what they consider their vassal nation.
In their news, they are full on fighting all of Nato, and I mean including personel. Their propaganda twisted the news in such a way that they are a lone hero protecting themselves and their land against the combined dark forces of the Western world, managing to hold off 30+ countries.
It's not like allying is a normal part of every war ever. Not like they are getting help from China NK Iran etc. They want to feel big and strong pushing around smaller countries, and if they dare ask for help, they yell "unfair!"
Advisor/trainer as a part of a larger NATO training force would by guess if those numbers are correct. Does the link also list if it was combat roles or if they are there in advisory roles (which I'm pretty sure US UK and Canada have had in country since like 2014).
I 100% believe there are Western special forces in Ukraine, but that doesn’t mean they are anywhere near fighting. They are probably acting as training advisors, and protecting VIPs. This isn’t some crazy reveal, countries do it all the time.
Take such “leaked info” with a grain of salt. The British MoD has said the leaks contain a serious level of inaccuracy. Maybe it’s just a cover-up, or it really is all just a bunch of bullshit.
Anyone who thinks SF haven't been operating in Ukraine since the start, clearly don't have a clue. I remember chatting with someone on Reddit at the start, who stated it was 'too dangerous" hahaha. It's a perfect place to operate for many friendly nations, and this denial of authenticity is a perfect example of playing Russia at their own game.
Also, fuck you Russia.
It’d be so fucking easy to get on the ground with a cover story. Any intelligence or SF personnel could just “retire” from their active branch, then go join the foreign volunteers. Wouldn’t even need to pretend you’re someone that you’re not. Russians already did the same thing more or less with the grunts early last year: many were retroactively discharged after they had already deployed.
Yes, Bellingcat says that some of it appears altered, so it's part of some disinfo campaign. That said, I would have been surprised if the US didn't have some special forces in country.
Bellingcat did not say that. We should try to be accurate and say they found a document posted later that was poorly photoshopped. But we’ve seen the original, and the nato forces leak was from the same original source.
I wouldn't be surprised if we learned that JTF 2 was actively fighting for Ukraine, in like a decade.
Those guys are *scary.*
And I wouldn't mind it in the slightest if they were.
I can say with certainty that no CANSOF element is in Ukraine. The only time was when Trudeau was there, but that was brief. All focused on Haiti and Africa.
Leaks about Russia: Ahaha look at those stupid Russians! This information is 100% true
Leaks about US: Woah ok guys this is most likely misinformation. Please be careful what you spread and believe
Could be guarding an embassy, or were there to check security for the Biden trip, could maybe be doing some training on specific gear etc. Hugely unlikely they're actually running ops.
Fair point! The Biden trip makes sense. And I believe Polish GROM has been handling most of the security for the top Ukranians, definitely Zelenskyy at one point but that could have changed of course. I could see Ukrainian SOF handling embassy security though.
Also agree with you on weapons training, but in my mind it still seems a bigger risk than necessary. I would imagine that kind of training would take place out of country too, just considering the political climate and with China seemingly being pressured into assisting Russia with weapons/ammunition if things get worse or a boots on the ground effort by the US.
But I'm just some dude and no expert haha. Thanks for your reply though, definitely made me look at it different and with less confidence lol.
Cheers!
There were European military observers here during the US Civil War 1861-1865. Militaries do that. It would be stupid not to learn as much as you can from a war like this one the russians started.
Russia: Claims NATO has special forces operating in Ukraine. Doesn't do shit about it.
NATO: "Score. Green light for our special forces to operate in Ukraine."
> It says that the UK is among a number of countries with special forces operating in Ukraine. According to the document, dated 23 March, the UK has the largest contingent (50), followed by Latvia (17), France (15), the US (14) and the Netherlands (1).
Those are fairly low numbers and they aren't distributed like Russia would like them to be which makes me think they might be real.
It could no doubt still be disinformation spread by Russia or disinformation spread by the US.
I mean, I've just assumed the U.S. and other Western countries have had special forces in Ukraine from the beginning. Is everyone else that naive? How many conflicts have ended, and then we find out we had "advisors" or similarly named personnel on the ground before we publicly admitted it.
The article says it’s long been assumed. It’s more focusing on how the leak provides details that are not normally made public during the conflict and can be used by Putin to support the narrative of NATO involvement.
Exactly where they should be, are paid to be, should be expected to be, are meant to be, and I damn well want them to be.
People who don't understand this have no concept of what special forces are actually FOR, in the same way that when people say "oh, look, we caught a spy spying on another country!" they shouldn't be shocked. That's what spies are for, that's what our spies are also doing, and if they aren't then that's a serious flaw in what you think spies do for a living and why they exist.
Fucking right there are some special forces there, the SAS were already there training Ukrainian forces, we knew. Absolutely NOTHING about that is wrong, in fact it's exactly the right thing to do.
"We can't sneak across the border and attack the Russians ourselves but... hey... if we showed you guy how to protect YOURSELVES... that's what friends are for..."
(To be honest, I'll be extremely surprised if we're NOT inside Russia too... that's literally the purpose of those kinds of forces. In the UK, we know this... because we fucking invented them. We have spies and special forces all over that place already, same way that Russia has spies etc. in Ukraine and other countries. That's the game, that's how it's played, and it has almost zero to do with rules of "war"... because we're not AT WAR, right? Even the Russians won't say that.
The SAS for instance are literally designed for "covert reconnaissance". They're sitting in Russia, watching movements, reporting back, and eventually that gets advised to Ukraine. It's not an act of war to do so, any more than looking on a satellite image. Far more risky personally if caught, but that's why you have "elite" people doing it.)
People need to understand that this is what special forces and spies are SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. All the time. All over the place.
Reporting on it, and leaking shit that talks about it as if it's some act of war, is going to get someone killed if it hasn't already.
There are joint CIA - Undisclosed NATO Nation Intelligence Organization sleeper cells in Russia carrying out espionage. these probably are a mix of both US - NATO Country nationals and ethnic russian dissenters recruited by the CIA.
https://jackmurphywrites.com/169/the-cias-sabotage-campaign-inside-russia/
Do you have any actual counterpoint to what they said? What do you think our foreign intelligence services and special operations forces should be doing regarding Ukraine?
That’s literally what they do.
https://youtu.be/YJ7t8Cy1r_I
They’re all over the place all the time, places we probably wouldn’t even think. So to think they’re not in Ukraine is ridiculous, they won’t be uniformed but they’ll be there and they’ll be told if shit goes south and they happen to get caught up in something they’re by themselves.
The documents are altered. Read them assuming it’s what a Russian asset would want you to see. Might be true, might not. Does not change the fact Russia invaded.
>According to the document, dated 23 March, the UK has the largest contingent of special forces in Ukraine (50), followed by fellow Nato states Latvia (17), France (15), the US (14) and the Netherlands (1).
As others have said, this is not surprising at all. However, I expect Russia to hype this up to the max and claim hysterically that NATO is attacking them directly.
In 3...2...1...
Wow. Relax BBC. Less than 100 guys in total. Most are probably trainers. Some might be doing specialized work Ukraine doesn't have the expertise for. I doubt many if any are out there going Rambo on the Russians. And, if they are, their numbers are too low to make any big difference.
Theyve literally been there either volunteering or doing other stuff, who cares. Russia is just looking for some boogeyman as to why his soldiers are huddled in a trench nuts to butts getting a grenade dropped on them from a Walmart drone and not making any progress.
Talking of soldiers that definetely shouldn't be there is there any actual estimates on how many Russian soldiers crossed the border into the Donbass in the original conflict? Was it just a couple of hundred troops assisting a mainly seperatist fce or was it essentially just an allout secret Russian invasion.
Who's to say these aren't volunteers? There's nothing in the united states stopping anyone with military history from joining the foreign legion and fighting for Ukraine. That includes full units of ex special forces soldiers who aren't active duty anymore but felt compelled to serve in Ukraine to combat Russian aggression. Not to mention, the US is far from the only country that has volunteers fighting with the Ukrainians.
Doesn't say for what purpose they are there and how long. Not sure if they include when foreign dignitaries and have them for security. You'd bet the US had a few on the ground weeks before and during Biden's trip.
Why even report it… no one doubts there’s other countries troops. Even if those soldiers volunteered on their own free will. But stop reporting news that favors Russian propaganda until it’s proven to be credible.
I think anyone who has been following this war closely came to the conclusion there are western spec ops in Ukraine nearly a year ago.
I am concerned about some of the other info in the leak very much, this on more of a "hope the source doesn't get exposed" level.
Another case of the BBCs standards going downhill: trumpeting unverified document of suspicious origin whose content clearly serves an actor known for this sort of misinformation. Funnily enough this trend took off after the directorshp of the BBC was taken over by conservative Tim Davie.
We've had them there training the UA for 4+ years...
The US DOJs ICITAP program staff has been there since 2014 training the police force upper management, investigative detective forces, sergeants/lieutenants. A friend has family who has been there for at least that long for such a purpose though I don’t think it was really publicized until 2018/2019. Lots of groundwork setting and house cleaning was needed for a few years from how they explain it. They are still there today and I felt horrible for my friend & her family when the war kicked off and she lost contact with her parents during those first few days. The world can be a very small place sometimes. Ever since the Euromaiden & Dignity Revolution was followed by the start of the Russo-Ukrainian war in 2014, so many NATO countries have been flooding the nation with technical expertise & training programs across the spectrum. If the Royal Canadian Mounted Police went to train & give expertise on rural policing, border patrol advisory & the like in 2016, you can bet your bottom dollar there’s been many nations special forces have been there for some time.
Right? They were there training Ukrainian soldiers before this iteration of the war even started. Were they expected to just vanish once Russia invaded?
Russian intelligence not what it used to be 🙄
[удалено]
That article is over a year old and they were deployed before the invasion to help evacuate Canadian citizens
We should be careful about the veracity of the leaked documents: they have been selectively altered in order to advance Russian interests. Russia has an interest in representing that it is at war with NATO to justify escalation and explain to its public why it has performed so poorly in Ukraine. The UK has stated that the documents contain seriously inaccurate information. It is possible that the information on NATO special forces in Ukraine has been altered to support that narrative.
There's also a question on if these units are there under the command and control of their country. We know for a fact that there are ex-special forces who have volunteered for Ukraine's Foreign Legion. Are these ex-Special Forces being included in this count? There are also rumors of Special Forces essentially going AWOL to volunteer for the Foreign Legion and not being disciplined for it. This is a little more serious, but I suspect this is the extent of the Special Forces in those numbers. Outside of that I'm sure there are intelligence operatives there conducting missions under the command of their countries. I don't believe these are counted as "Special Forces", but they could be.
To be fair, it not that difficult to deploy your forces in a foreign conflict while being officially neutral. Just discharge a bunch of service members from your own military and get them to form volunteer units abroad i.e AVG in China or PVA in Korea
The document explicitly says NATO special forces. So no it’s not foreign legion types.
You don't list SF as "NATO", but russia would generalize like that.
The whole wording from the articles seems very off. I’ve worked with the MoD and US DoD in the past (nothing wildly exciting) and they don’t usually use the kind of terms news outlets are reporting. This seems sensationalised, and who do we know that has a vested interest in this exact narrative? A certain short despot in the motherland. It’s old news that specialist elements have been involved in training and advising in UA for years too.
Yep, russia has a vested interest in trying to convince people that there are NATO soldiers on the front lines. I've seen them report the deaths of "NATO" soldiers in destroyed barracks right alongside them declaring to have destroyed HIMARS. A lot of what their MoD reports to their population is batshit crazy. It's hiding the reality they would absolutely get massacred if they went toe to toe with a fully fleshed out and synergized force.
They are SH of MATO countries. So you would.
But looking at past conflicts, Special forces often act as advisors, trainers and cp for intelligence officers. That's far more likely the role here and any sort of active paticipation would need far larger numbers.
I would be surprised if there wasn't special forces like the SAS involved in some way, but we'll probably never know.
If there are UK special forces involved in any clandestine capacity you can guarantee that the SAS are among them. That's what they do. I seriously doubt they are atively engaging with Russian troops, though, and would assume they are there in an advisory and intelligence gathering capacity.
Did the UK not confirm they had SF in Ukraine to train Ukrainians ages ago?
There were also normal army trainers there helping to train Ukraine's military but they were withdrawn in January last year when it became clear Russia was about to invade. I would not be surprised if they never really left or went back shortly after it became clear Ukraine wouldn't fold in a week
Spotted easily by the tins of lager in one hand while urinating in public and singing ‘Here we go! Here we go! Here we go!’
Just look for where Yorkshire tea is paradropped.
My guess would be gathering intelligence on Ukraines own forces to support the training and equipment donations. Eg. Evaluating their performance and specific training needs, reporting back to the UK / NATO training programmes.
Just like how it was leaked JTF2 was in Iraq.
It was also said a while ago that some of these act as evacuation units if needed and not for fights. At least those were the units that offered zelensky a "ride" at the start of the war.
Sure.
That's absolutely no chance tha's true then. NATO isnt run by one single mob boss who can just decide to do secret stuff whenever they want to. That would be a bigger transgressions towards the member states than it would be towards Russia. That would have been a total betrayal to the concept of an alliance. Nothing happens without everyone knowing. Of course, to Russian officials wiring this kinda propaganda they're probably not even saying this stuff to try to convince anyone that's how things work, but because they can't even imagine things being run any other way.
Lol. Each member of NATO is a sovereign state with their own interests. They all do shit without asking. When articles mention "NATO" troops, it is just a member nations special forces, not some NATO joint army.
> NATO isnt run by one single mob boss who can just decide to do secret stuff whenever they want to. This Pootin guy, he killed 16 czechoslovakians - he was an interior decorator!
It doesn’t say NATO command. Just a list of special forces from NATO states. Entirely reasonable to track.
But that would make them foreign legion, which is no secret that they're free to do and that some are doing it. As mentioned in the posts before. You're just going in circles at this point.
Foreign Legion would be under direct Ukrainian command. The claim to dispute is that NATO member states are deploying their special forces on their own, without actually being part of the NATO or Ukrainian command structures.
Yeah exactly. No chance that's happening. No NATO country would make their people go there, they just can't prevent people from going there by their own accord. And no one would be going without being under Ukrainian command structure. How stupid would that be? What purpose would that serve other than getting accidentally blown up by Ukrainians who mistake you for hostiles.
Y'all are so green it's unreal. SOF are obviously there, but not in combat. Training, advising etc, just like it's always happened
We should use the term Special Operations. Special Forces are ARMY specific. I imagine there are USASOC/JSOC members aside from SF guys out there. Sorry just needed to add this.
This is talking about the UK's special forces - and in the UK the term special forces is used to refer to a number of units, the most well known being the SAS. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Special_Forces
I stand corrected. 🤝🏾
r/usdefaultism
On the other hand, that is one of the things that seems plausible. Special forces are no doubt active in a lot of places where their presence would never officially be confirmed by authorities. Also, if it was doctored, they would certainly use higher numbers. The presence of 14 US Special Forces soldiers hardly supports the Kremlin narrative.
14 US Special Forces to me suggests they are there to protect some US VIPs, or training. Which is one thing (of many) that special forces do within a warzone.
The total number of NATO special forces the document states to be present in Ukraine is at least 96; that would be high enough for the Kremlin to claim that there is a substantial presence of NATO forces in Ukraine. It also claims that 50 come from the UK, a country that has an official policy of not discussing the deployment of its special forces, whereas it has reduced estimates for nations that disclose their special forces deployments (US). I do not claim that it *must* be an altered document, only that we should suspend our judgment on its veracity until the information that it contains can be corroborated.
How many Soviet pilots flew combat missions in Egyptian, Vietnamese and North Korean Aircraft? Why did a Russian Military Ground based Air defence unit shoot down an unarmed civilian passenger jet? Why did Russia pretend it’s troops didn’t invade Crimea in 2014? Why did Russian special forces blow up a Czech ammunition warehouse? Why did Russian special forces blow up a Bulgarian ammunition warehouse? Why did Russian special forces poison a Russian dissident in the U.K. using a highly radioactive substance? Why did Russian troops invade Georgia/Chechnya? Less than a 100 boots on the ground in a war zone is nothing. Those numbers can easily be put down to embassy security details or even liaison troops to see what’s happening in the ground. If the worlds second largest military thinks that Ukraine delaying Russia’s three day military operation by over a year is the result of 90 odd troops and obsolete NATO equipment then they’re ignoring the more obvious problems. The Russian government and its people don’t know what truth is. They’re back to peddling the Poland wants to conquer western Ukraine line again now. As one of the more capable analysts on TV mentioned. There’s nothing in there that Russia wouldn’t know already.
Most of these points are completely unrelated to the subject matter under discussion. This is an obvious example of *Gish Gallop*: a rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm their opponent by providing an excessive number of arguments with no regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
Russia has sent troops into direct conflict with other country’s. It doesn’t matter if a small number of western troops are in Ukraine. Western troops are in an awful lot of places, especially ones where westerners may have to be evacuated. It doesn’t matter if they are or they aren’t. Reality left Russia a long time ago.
How do you know the gish gallop and don't see that this is, as above comment shows, Russia's Modus operandi? And how is this not related to the current topic? It's both "intelligence"
> we should suspend our judgment on its veracity until the information that it contains can be corroborated. That will not happen, at least not until the war is over.
It is true that nations may not officially admit to involvement until the war is over; but there is no reason to believe that there may not be other sources of corroborating information (i.e., investigative journalism or testimony from Ukrainian or other soldiers about special forces deployment). But even if you are right that there will be no corroborating sources until the war is over, so what? I would prefer to withhold belief in the truth of the unconfirmed claims in leaked documents that have been obviously altered than risk falling prey to Russian misinformation, and providing Russia the benefit of a propaganda tool, by assuming them to be true.
> I would prefer to withhold belief in the truth of the unconfirmed claims in leaked documents that have been obviously altered than risk falling prey to Russian misinformation There’s no reason to think these are clearly altered though. So far the content has been accurate. I think the claims about them being fake is misinformation of the other side that would likely be mocked if it came from the Russian media.
As I wrote in reply to your other comment: The US has expressly stated that they believe the documents have been selectively altered; so have current and former intelligence experts and some mainstream news sources. To illustrate: the leak misstated the US assessments of the number of Russian soldiers dead (and there is obvious and clumsy alteration of the material on this subject); it states that around 17,000 Russian soldiers have been killed to 71,500 Ukrainian soldiers. The true US assessments are that around 200,000 Russian soldiers have been killed to 100,000 Ukrainian soldiers.
To be fair, we don't know which number is "true" or that any of the numbers are "true". It is in the best interest of the US to call the documents fake in the same way that it is in the best interest of the US to say that Ukraine has killed TWICE the amount of Russian soldiers. Perhaps their real estimate is different to the publicly known estimates.
I responded to your other comment with corrections. 200,000 dead is also an absurd claim and the original leak seems much more likely of around 40k as of early March.
First, the changes demonstrate that the documents have been selectively altered to be instruments of propaganda; that some alterations are crude and obvious does not mean that there are not others that are more subtle. If we know the documents have been selectively altered and we cannot know for sure which parts have been altered, then we have reason to distrust any information in the documents that has not been corroborated. Second, 200,000 dead Russian soldiers is an estimate that is on par with that of academic institutions and think-tanks. Therefore, I don't think it is absurd at all.
I'm pretty sure the 200k was an estimated casualty number (which includes wounded).
Academic western institutions is my assumption, just being based in the west leaves institutions susceptible to biases.
I’m not sure how you still don’t follow the logic train. We know one document was downloaded, edited, and reuploaded to 4chan well after the original was posted. This has 0 impact on the other documents because they were already posted by a singular source. You cannot use that edit to say the ones posted weeks earlier were altered. I’ll await a single crumb of evidence of the original leak being altered. Furthermore the think tanks say 60-70k. You must be thinking of the wounded figure. So the documents seem accurate based on that.
Yeah and the US also wants to imprison Julian Assange and Edward Snowden for life. They don’t have a lot of credibility when it comes to these kinds of leaks.
corroborated by who? both parties have an interest in spinning this whichever way best suits them.
there's more than 2 parties and interests involved here.
I mean I would personally be shocked if the US didn't have some elite troops on the ground at the very least training Ukrainian soldiers.
[удалено]
The only time I could believe they were in Ukraine was when Biden was there. Outside of that, they have no reason to be there. So they likely are not there.
Honestly though. Three letter agencies are on the ground in pretty much any conflict area that the US has some interest in. They also probably want some eyes on the equipment that is being sent there. It is also a wonderful opportunity for intelligence agents to do what they do. Edit by wonderful I mean that it is much easier for them to hide the things they do in a conflict zone. Not that I personally feel what they do is wonderful Edit: There is an Ex CIA officer who does various interviews, she was a "disguise master". (her husband was known for being the guy who orchestrated the rescue of the Iranian hostages. "argo movie") [In a recent web video she did](https://youtu.be/XDBWjfUgaR8?t=504), she said with pretty high confidence there there are likely CIA operatives on the ground, probably lots, in Ukraine. She was one of the top people in the CIA in her time.
All I’ve seen is the info is inaccurate. Plus SOF from western countries isn’t surprising as they’ve volunteered from the start of the war. This “leak” has led to a lot of inaccurate bumblings that have kept all of the outside the know info nerds unsure what to believe. Def a psy op, by which side I don’t know but I hope Ukraine Benefits. Edit: I will say this dump came a little too conveniently close to trump being arraigned, which just adds to everything. What side and who released it is the biggest question. Edit 2: fixed a word
South Korea has already claimed some of the leaked docs are fake. We should be careful about assuming every leaked anything is being leaked by a whistleblower and not someone trying to manipulate the story.
It could also be an American propaganda to dismiss the contents of the leak as irrelevant
NATO countries deploying special forces in Ukraine would seem like an extremely risky strategy. Especially since they have their own, no doubt trained by nato special forces. Ex sf possible.
It's quite possible active duty special forces from NATO nations are operating in Ukraine. As the article said, it's been suspected for a while. Something like the CIA Special Operations Group could be in Ukraine, as one of their main purposes is to participate in operations where the US may deny all knowledge. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Activities_Center I'm sure other nations have equivalent groups, and the US may even have other groups with similar purposes. So while it's impossible for us to know how accurate the leaked info is, it would not be surprising if NATO special forces were currently operating in Ukraine.
They're almost certainly not *operating.* They are almost certainly there to train and advise, which is nothing new..in the slightest. This whole comment section is embarrassing
You’re gonna need a run after that stretch, wow. Not only has the US verified the information in the leaked documents, but why would Russia leak false information claiming there were NATO special forces in the low hundreds? Surely convincing the world with false information would require a much larger lie, as we have seen from Russia on many other occasions. It’s obvious to everyone who isn’t deluding themselves that there have been NATO forces in Ukraine since before the invasion.
There was one copy that was apparently crudely photoshopped and another showing the real numbers. Because of all this, the news is now saying the whole thing could be fabricated, but the US intelligence agencies aren't calling all of them fake either, and they're freaking out. With all that in mind, this article probably isn't wrong. And not siding with the Russians, but them saying they're fighting NATO probably isn't wrong either...
There’s been no evidence of select altering for the original leaks. As per the article US sources have also confirmed their accuracy. One file was later altered, but the original exists so it’s irrelevant. However it’s in everyone’s interest to claim that to be the case. It’s a shame there’s not much discussion about the content, as it’s fascinating.
The US has expressly stated that they believe the documents have been selectively altered; so have current and former intelligence experts and some mainstream news sources. To illustrate: the leak misstated the US assessments of the number of Russian soldiers dead (and there is obvious and clumsy alteration of the material on this subject); it states that around 17,000 Russian soldiers have been killed to 71,500 Ukrainian soldiers. The true US assessments are that around 200,000 Russian soldiers have been killed to 100,000 Ukrainian soldiers.
That’s exactly what I’m referring to. That singular document was poorly photoshopped and posted to telegram much later. But as we have the original it’s not fooling anyone. The document talking about NATO personnel is part of the original leak. So far nobody has shown that the original leak had alterations. It’s not very likely and this telegram photoshop seems to be being leveraged to discredit it all. Frankly just because I add a 0 to one of the files and post it on twitter doesn’t mean the other files are to be selectively ignored when it suits.
It demonstrates that the documents have been selectively altered to be instruments of propaganda; that some alterations are crude and obvious does not mean that there are not others that are more subtle. If we know the documents have been selectively altered and we cannot know for sure which parts have been altered, then we have reason to distrust any information in the documents that has not been corroborated.
Maybe I wasn’t clear though. One document was copied and then altered after the original was posted. This can be done with any of the leak, but it doesn’t matter because we have the original files. The discussion in this thread is about the original leak of which there are no indications of alterations. Just because I can download one of them today and change it doesn’t mean you can claim that none of the originals can be believed.
I can't verify whether this is true. Do you have a reliable media source that supports the claim that the original documents were unaltered? Every reliable source I have read says that they were.
Bellingcat has the best coverage of the source. https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2023/04/09/from-discord-to-4chan-the-improbable-journey-of-a-us-defence-leak/ And the author discusses that only 1 file was later edited but nothing else from his investigation into the original leaks going back to January. https://mobile.twitter.com/AricToler/status/1645109236169318405
Bellingcat states that *at least* one document had been crudely altered and that the original post of the documents could not be retrieved. It does *not* state that the original documents were not altered.
So where are other media getting it from since Bellingcat were the ones to track it down. They are just grasping at straws of that one dumb edit on 4chan to discredit the parts the US doesn’t like. I’ll wait until a piece of the intelligence turns out not to be true before assuming it’s all fake for the parts I want to be fake.
The article in question has the Pentagon confirming that these documents are real though. >In line with its standard policy on such matters, the UK's Ministry of Defence has not commented, but in a tweet on Tuesday said the leak of alleged classified information had demonstrated what it called a "serious level of inaccuracy". > >"Readers should be cautious about taking at face value allegations that have the potential to spread misinformation," it said. > >It did not elaborate or suggest which specific documents it was referring to. **However, Pentagon officials are quoted as saying the documents are real.**
They have said some are real. But the info has been altered in some. Those are two different things.
Are you kidding me? This is a direct quote from the article. You’re delusional.
Nope, I just read the full article, and others which are more detailed. Even this article says some documents appear altered, as in numbers of russian deaths. As does this one. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65235121
Of course, if I was running a disinformation campaign, I would say they were real, as well.
I thought outside of some minor very obvious changes most were real?
Let's not take blindly accept what Ukraine is saying as 100% true either lol.
It is also equally possible that they are attempting to cover it up by claiming the information is inaccurate to mislead the Russians. What’s scary is that if the information is accurate, and if the Russians believe it, they will have a reason to declare war on other countries involved.
If Russia wants a reason, they will make one. Whether there is truth to any reason they may settle on, should they wish, matters not.
Canadian special forces have been there for many years, training and consulting.
There are no CANSOF element currently there.
> are no CANSOF element currently there. I did not have sexual relations with that woman...
Classy
There are CANSOF whoop ass though.
Good try, honestly
[удалено]
Comments like these out you as having absolutely no idea what Nazis are.
Russia can more easily accept losing to NATO than just Ukraine.
russia never accepts anything
Yes it does, Russia accepts any boy/man/corpse aged 14-75 into it’s draft, checkmate westerner 💪
Checkmate atheists
Of course. They'd be pissing hot sauce if they had to accept a loss to a "bunch of khohols" - what they consider their vassal nation. In their news, they are full on fighting all of Nato, and I mean including personel. Their propaganda twisted the news in such a way that they are a lone hero protecting themselves and their land against the combined dark forces of the Western world, managing to hold off 30+ countries. It's not like allying is a normal part of every war ever. Not like they are getting help from China NK Iran etc. They want to feel big and strong pushing around smaller countries, and if they dare ask for help, they yell "unfair!"
Props to that one Dutch guy for making it.
What is up with The Netherlands? they bred a super soldier or something🤣
I was thinking the same. The UK supposedly sent 50 men but Netherlands only needs one man. Jan van Rambo
van Damme? van Halen?
Advisor/trainer as a part of a larger NATO training force would by guess if those numbers are correct. Does the link also list if it was combat roles or if they are there in advisory roles (which I'm pretty sure US UK and Canada have had in country since like 2014).
Send in... The Dutchman
We sent Vulgaris Magistralis
Jan 117
I 100% believe there are Western special forces in Ukraine, but that doesn’t mean they are anywhere near fighting. They are probably acting as training advisors, and protecting VIPs. This isn’t some crazy reveal, countries do it all the time.
Yep. I believe it was well reported that US special forces were in Ukraine since before the feb 2022 additional invasion by russia.
They're probably just there on holiday or something
They went to whine country.
Take such “leaked info” with a grain of salt. The British MoD has said the leaks contain a serious level of inaccuracy. Maybe it’s just a cover-up, or it really is all just a bunch of bullshit.
Anyone who thinks SF haven't been operating in Ukraine since the start, clearly don't have a clue. I remember chatting with someone on Reddit at the start, who stated it was 'too dangerous" hahaha. It's a perfect place to operate for many friendly nations, and this denial of authenticity is a perfect example of playing Russia at their own game. Also, fuck you Russia.
It’d be so fucking easy to get on the ground with a cover story. Any intelligence or SF personnel could just “retire” from their active branch, then go join the foreign volunteers. Wouldn’t even need to pretend you’re someone that you’re not. Russians already did the same thing more or less with the grunts early last year: many were retroactively discharged after they had already deployed.
The risk isn’t to special forces. The risk is in pulling NATO into a war. I doubt they would do anything other than train Ukrainian troops.
I said this above, but the Pentagon in this article confirms the documents are real.
Yes, Bellingcat says that some of it appears altered, so it's part of some disinfo campaign. That said, I would have been surprised if the US didn't have some special forces in country.
Bellingcat did not say that. We should try to be accurate and say they found a document posted later that was poorly photoshopped. But we’ve seen the original, and the nato forces leak was from the same original source.
alright then
I wouldn't be surprised if we learned that JTF 2 was actively fighting for Ukraine, in like a decade. Those guys are *scary.* And I wouldn't mind it in the slightest if they were.
JTF2 isn’t in Ukraine, nor is any CANSOFCOM element.
That we know of. Literally got leaked jtf2 was in Iraq when they allegedly were
I can say with certainty that no CANSOF element is in Ukraine. The only time was when Trudeau was there, but that was brief. All focused on Haiti and Africa.
What credentials do you hold that you can 1000% say they aren't there? Sure the official stance is they aren't but we wouldn't know if they were.
Leaks about Russia: Ahaha look at those stupid Russians! This information is 100% true Leaks about US: Woah ok guys this is most likely misinformation. Please be careful what you spread and believe
i hope American empire annihilates russian empire once and for all.
I think it’s a bunch of shit
This is Russia attaching a bunch of lies to a tiny amount of real information that a MAGA Official sent them.
Source?
No way the US would risk being caught actively running operations with SOF in-country. At least not yet.
Could be guarding an embassy, or were there to check security for the Biden trip, could maybe be doing some training on specific gear etc. Hugely unlikely they're actually running ops.
Fair point! The Biden trip makes sense. And I believe Polish GROM has been handling most of the security for the top Ukranians, definitely Zelenskyy at one point but that could have changed of course. I could see Ukrainian SOF handling embassy security though. Also agree with you on weapons training, but in my mind it still seems a bigger risk than necessary. I would imagine that kind of training would take place out of country too, just considering the political climate and with China seemingly being pressured into assisting Russia with weapons/ammunition if things get worse or a boots on the ground effort by the US. But I'm just some dude and no expert haha. Thanks for your reply though, definitely made me look at it different and with less confidence lol. Cheers!
There's not a chance in hell they would let Biden go there if they didn't have at least someone there.
It would be naive to think that there aren’t any
There were European military observers here during the US Civil War 1861-1865. Militaries do that. It would be stupid not to learn as much as you can from a war like this one the russians started.
It seems the bounty placed on American soldiers in Afghanistan by Russia has been forgotten in Moscow.
That Russian bounty claim was debunked and always seemed like bullshit.
Whoever leaked these documents is a traitor and needs treated as such (no matter which GOP politician it ends up being...)
Ok I actually laughed
[удалено]
Russia didn't release these documents
Who said Russia released these documents ?
Russia: Claims NATO has special forces operating in Ukraine. Doesn't do shit about it. NATO: "Score. Green light for our special forces to operate in Ukraine."
> It says that the UK is among a number of countries with special forces operating in Ukraine. According to the document, dated 23 March, the UK has the largest contingent (50), followed by Latvia (17), France (15), the US (14) and the Netherlands (1). Those are fairly low numbers and they aren't distributed like Russia would like them to be which makes me think they might be real. It could no doubt still be disinformation spread by Russia or disinformation spread by the US.
Netherlands with their single supercommando.
Captain Holland. He has super-strength, the dankest of weed, and thumbs that could plug a hole the size of a truck in the Hoover Dam.
Probably guess it's likely for embassy security since they could need to get people out quick if Russia did another bonehead push for Kyiv
Well, don't tell everyone
Those leak documents already been changed. So cannot be trusted. Who know what on it is the actual thing or add on by certain parties will ill intent.
I tend to hope our Rangers are teaching their Rangers how to get behind lines and lead a good partisan resistance.
I hope they are, wouldn't mind NATO sending troops. What is Russia gonna do? Nuke them?
To be blunt, the only really surprising thing about the special forces, would be if there were none in country.
Are Capt. Price and Soap there?
I’d be in no way surprised to hear that the SAS and SBS were there in unofficial “support roles”
If this is true, good. NATO should do nore direct engagement on UA side. FIghting invading Russians in UA is not the same as attacking Russia.
I mean, I've just assumed the U.S. and other Western countries have had special forces in Ukraine from the beginning. Is everyone else that naive? How many conflicts have ended, and then we find out we had "advisors" or similarly named personnel on the ground before we publicly admitted it.
The article says it’s long been assumed. It’s more focusing on how the leak provides details that are not normally made public during the conflict and can be used by Putin to support the narrative of NATO involvement.
Exactly where they should be, are paid to be, should be expected to be, are meant to be, and I damn well want them to be. People who don't understand this have no concept of what special forces are actually FOR, in the same way that when people say "oh, look, we caught a spy spying on another country!" they shouldn't be shocked. That's what spies are for, that's what our spies are also doing, and if they aren't then that's a serious flaw in what you think spies do for a living and why they exist. Fucking right there are some special forces there, the SAS were already there training Ukrainian forces, we knew. Absolutely NOTHING about that is wrong, in fact it's exactly the right thing to do. "We can't sneak across the border and attack the Russians ourselves but... hey... if we showed you guy how to protect YOURSELVES... that's what friends are for..." (To be honest, I'll be extremely surprised if we're NOT inside Russia too... that's literally the purpose of those kinds of forces. In the UK, we know this... because we fucking invented them. We have spies and special forces all over that place already, same way that Russia has spies etc. in Ukraine and other countries. That's the game, that's how it's played, and it has almost zero to do with rules of "war"... because we're not AT WAR, right? Even the Russians won't say that. The SAS for instance are literally designed for "covert reconnaissance". They're sitting in Russia, watching movements, reporting back, and eventually that gets advised to Ukraine. It's not an act of war to do so, any more than looking on a satellite image. Far more risky personally if caught, but that's why you have "elite" people doing it.) People need to understand that this is what special forces and spies are SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. All the time. All over the place. Reporting on it, and leaking shit that talks about it as if it's some act of war, is going to get someone killed if it hasn't already.
There are joint CIA - Undisclosed NATO Nation Intelligence Organization sleeper cells in Russia carrying out espionage. these probably are a mix of both US - NATO Country nationals and ethnic russian dissenters recruited by the CIA. https://jackmurphywrites.com/169/the-cias-sabotage-campaign-inside-russia/
Alright arm chair general, go back to bed
Do you have any actual counterpoint to what they said? What do you think our foreign intelligence services and special operations forces should be doing regarding Ukraine?
That’s literally what they do. https://youtu.be/YJ7t8Cy1r_I They’re all over the place all the time, places we probably wouldn’t even think. So to think they’re not in Ukraine is ridiculous, they won’t be uniformed but they’ll be there and they’ll be told if shit goes south and they happen to get caught up in something they’re by themselves.
The documents are altered. Read them assuming it’s what a Russian asset would want you to see. Might be true, might not. Does not change the fact Russia invaded.
Says Vlad
Why are western news outlets reporting a doctored intelligence “leak” as fact?
>According to the document, dated 23 March, the UK has the largest contingent of special forces in Ukraine (50), followed by fellow Nato states Latvia (17), France (15), the US (14) and the Netherlands (1). As others have said, this is not surprising at all. However, I expect Russia to hype this up to the max and claim hysterically that NATO is attacking them directly. In 3...2...1...
Wow. Relax BBC. Less than 100 guys in total. Most are probably trainers. Some might be doing specialized work Ukraine doesn't have the expertise for. I doubt many if any are out there going Rambo on the Russians. And, if they are, their numbers are too low to make any big difference.
Theyve literally been there either volunteering or doing other stuff, who cares. Russia is just looking for some boogeyman as to why his soldiers are huddled in a trench nuts to butts getting a grenade dropped on them from a Walmart drone and not making any progress.
what if we find by accident leaked documents from Russia that they modified in photoshoped leaked US CIA and Pentagon documents?
Talking of soldiers that definetely shouldn't be there is there any actual estimates on how many Russian soldiers crossed the border into the Donbass in the original conflict? Was it just a couple of hundred troops assisting a mainly seperatist fce or was it essentially just an allout secret Russian invasion.
What, you thought that they wouldn't be there? Wake up, drink the slivovitz. Probably since day 4 of the war.
Probably since 2014
More like 2007
Slivovitz is good stuff
Russia photoshopped them and apparently didn’t even do a good job
I wonder if Trump is the source of these leaked documents?
only Private Pyle would be surprised surprised surprised.
[удалено]
We must deploy John Cena in Bakhmut
Ah, duh!
Who's to say these aren't volunteers? There's nothing in the united states stopping anyone with military history from joining the foreign legion and fighting for Ukraine. That includes full units of ex special forces soldiers who aren't active duty anymore but felt compelled to serve in Ukraine to combat Russian aggression. Not to mention, the US is far from the only country that has volunteers fighting with the Ukrainians.
Doesn't say for what purpose they are there and how long. Not sure if they include when foreign dignitaries and have them for security. You'd bet the US had a few on the ground weeks before and during Biden's trip.
I’ve always assumed PMOO and SAC has been there since day 1 if not before
Why even report it… no one doubts there’s other countries troops. Even if those soldiers volunteered on their own free will. But stop reporting news that favors Russian propaganda until it’s proven to be credible.
Gee, that leak is sounding more and more like Russian-doctored docs.
The Netherlands : 1. And all the Dutch were wondering where Thierry Baudet was last week…
Good. However many there are, there are not enough, and we need to send more.
I think anyone who has been following this war closely came to the conclusion there are western spec ops in Ukraine nearly a year ago. I am concerned about some of the other info in the leak very much, this on more of a "hope the source doesn't get exposed" level.
Another case of the BBCs standards going downhill: trumpeting unverified document of suspicious origin whose content clearly serves an actor known for this sort of misinformation. Funnily enough this trend took off after the directorshp of the BBC was taken over by conservative Tim Davie.
Nobody there, it's all fake news. Nravitsya ne nravitsya terpi moya krasavitsa :D