|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On June 09 2023 23:56 Zaros wrote:
We all know what side Zeo is on, I just ignore anything he posts.
why not be open-minded about everything?
NATO does pose a threat to Russia.... Russia did what's in its best interests.
Ukraine is the 3rd MOST corrupted country IN THE WORLD
Ukraine stopped the dam that was giving Crimea water and it dried out the entire area, making an area they once called home basically untenable.
Russia has stated if they had NATO's word that Ukraine wouldnt be able to join they wouldn't "invade"
all nato had todo was officially announce that wouldnt happen, and MAYBE they wouldnt have been invaded.. but we would never know...
why wouldnt nato just say that and perhaps prevent war? even if it was an empty promise?
perhaps NATO knows war makes money... and we could easily say NATO started this just as much as Russia.
When you back a scared-cat into a corner they will fight back.
I dont care who wins/loses all i know if a call to arms happen where i am to fight whoever ill be going. if you care so much about ukraine winning and russia being obliterated, you would stop internet posting and go help Ukraine fight if this fight
means so much.
Tucker Carlson once said "is this war not just a land dispute" this war is getting out of hand... but my guess is once the fighting is over the world will go back to the way it was...
just my opinion. who knows who cares
|
On June 09 2023 23:35 Magic Powers wrote:Not a fan of one-sided reporting. Both sides must be losing hardware at an increased rate and I don't see the purpose of only showing Ukrainian examples. KyivIndependent posts daily estimates of Russian losses. https://twitter.com/KyivIndependentBrief summary (starting June 3rd) that I quickly put together from the infographics. Note: I'm only posting 3 of the more relevant categories due to time constraints. There are 12 categories for hardware and 1 for casualties. ![[image loading]](https://i.gyazo.com/e56b93f5586aca9c12849454b1988d61.png)
You're not a fan of one sided reporting? I... wasn't aware of this. Honestly. And I for one would be more than happy to help you call out every person on this forum that says something that could be considered anti-Ukrainian, and not post something anti-Russian too. The reverse too, imagine someone saying Russia was guilty of the dam failing and not posting evidence that Ukraine could also be to blame. I agree with you, I don't see the purpose of only saying Russia is to blame for everything either and I look forward to and applaud you enforcing your dislike of one-sided reporting on this forum. More power to you.
There is intense fighting going on which, according to some outlets isn't even going on right now. Take the UK intelligence agency for example:
Looking at their statements one would come to the conclusion that nothing is happening at all. Do you think visual evidence of destroyed Leopard tanks and Braleys is not something noteworthy? Or maybe a major offensive that same agency was foreshadowing for half a year finally happening? Are these things something the public should not be made aware of?
I think there is a lot of misinformation going around about the offensive happening in Southern Ukraine so I don't think there is much point in forwarding speculation. Visual evidence of something happening? Since when is that taboo? I have no problem with you writing that 1000 Russian tanks exploded yesterday on the front without any source given, or you can say 10.000 Ukrainians died without the passport/personal documents of each and every person. But at this moment I don't see a problem in sticking with visual evidence. You are more than welcome to post visual evidence to back up your claims too. I would love to see everything that's happening right now. On both sides.
|
On June 10 2023 00:24 JUSTMEBEASTN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2023 23:56 Zaros wrote:
We all know what side Zeo is on, I just ignore anything he posts. why not be open-minded about everything?
Because this whole war is treated like a sports event by most people. You are either team ukraine or team russia, and depending on your team choice, you apply scepticism very differently.
But the difference is that if you are team ukraine, its pretty easy to do so without appearing delusional or batshit insane. Their propaganda is easy to repeat without looking like a lunatic because they don't make shit up that much and if they do its more often just a case of them being mistaken. And ofc it helps that most of us ukraine supporters are either morally lucky in our choice of team, or genuinely on the right side.
On the other hand, if you are team russia and want to be a good sports fan, you end up having to go off the deep and and make wild claims, like ukraine being the 3rd most corrupt country in the world, that crimea was drying out, that russia would not have invaded if ukraine didn't want to join nato, which zelensky put on the negotiating table earlier last year. Not even getting into the woods about why russia doesn't want ukraine to join nato, however justified that might be from their position.
And eventually people get tired of that kind of crazy so they stop engaging.
|
On June 10 2023 00:24 JUSTMEBEASTN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2023 23:56 Zaros wrote:
We all know what side Zeo is on, I just ignore anything he posts. why not be open-minded about everything? NATO does pose a threat to Russia.... Russia did what's in its best interests. Ukraine is the 3rd MOST corrupted country IN THE WORLD Ukraine stopped the dam that was giving Crimea water and it dried out the entire area, making an area they once called home basically untenable. Russia has stated if they had NATO's word that Ukraine wouldnt be able to join they wouldn't "invade" all nato had todo was officially announce that wouldnt happen, and MAYBE they wouldnt have been invaded.. but we would never know... why wouldnt nato just say that and perhaps prevent war? even if it was an empty promise? perhaps NATO knows war makes money... and we could easily say NATO started this just as much as Russia. When you back a scared-cat into a corner they will fight back. I dont care who wins/loses all i know if a call to arms happen where i am to fight whoever ill be going. if you care so much about ukraine winning and russia being obliterated, you would stop internet posting and go help Ukraine fight if this fight means so much. Tucker Carlson once said "is this war not just a land dispute" this war is getting out of hand... but my guess is once the fighting is over the world will go back to the way it was... just my opinion. who knows who cares
Before the war NATO in Europe had like 1 combat ready rapid response force of 10k people and a bunch of countries that try to spend the minimum they can on defense budget, and are eager to buy Russian gas and oil. There was no threat to Russia.
Meanwhile Russia spent many months putting tanks on trains to the Ukranian border, all the while every world leader was urging him not to do it, Macron even called days before the invasion. It's Russia and Putin who ignored dialog and started to destroy, murder and pillage. And they are still murdering and pillaging.
Is it in Russia's best interest that they now have 200k dead soldiers, hundreds of thousand of smart scientist and specialists who fled the country, Finland and Sweden in NATO and every EU country rapidly increasing defense budgets?
|
So when Russia blew up the Dam they apparently didn't tell their own armed forces and lot of soldiers ending up drowning as a result. Also add the fact Russia has been caught in an intercepted phone calls admitting their own sabotage group caused the breach, which they did not expect to be so big.
The invaders wanted to blackmail Ukraine by blowing up the dam and caused a man-made disaster in our country's south."
"It's not them [Ukraine – ed.] who have struck. Our sabotage group is there. They wanted to scare them with this dam. It didn't go according to plan, it was more than they planned," says the Russian military.
The occupier goes on to describe the consequences of this disaster, which Russia is trying to hide: rising water levels, flooding and destruction.
Source
Russian soldiers were being swept away by raging floodwaters and running for their lives after the Nova Khakovka dam collapsed on Tuesday, a Ukrainian officer has claimed.
Captain Andrei Pidlisnyi claimed that Russian troops were killed or wounded in the chaos after the Kakhovka dam was ripped open. The officer suggested that Vladimir Putin’s soldiers may not have received an advance warning of what he claimed to be a Russian attack.
“No one on the Russian side was able to get away. All the regiments the Russians had on that side were flooded,” Pidlisnyi reportedly said, according to CNN.
Both Ukraine and Russia have traded blame for the breach of dam on Tuesday, while President Vladimir Putin called the destruction a “barbaric act", in his first public reaction.
The breach of the dam in southern Ukraine took place as Ukrainian troops prepared to launch the offensive to recover lost territory.
Andrei Pidlisnyi further said he believed the Russians deliberately attacked the dam to disrupt Ukrainian forces’ plans for an upcoming offensive.
“Around 3 am, the enemy blew up the Kakhovka Hydro Power Plant in order to raise the water level to flood the approaches and the left bank of the Dnipro River, as well as the settlements located there. And to make it impossible for the Ukrainian armed forces to advance in the future," he said.
According to Pidlisnyi, the Russian military, located on the east bank of the river, suffered serious impacts due to the breach.
Meanwhile, the Ukrainian military officials were able to watch the events unfold through the use of drones and troops present near the river.
The police and troops in Kherson were bringing people out from inundated areas after the flooding while the Russian forces had kept shelling the residential neighbourhoods.
It is not immediately clear whether the dam separating the Russian and Ukrainian forces in Kherson was attacked by the two of them or whether it collapsed due to structural damage.
Source
|
Careful StealthBlue, you just posted an article from a pro-Ukrainian propaganda source using the term 'invaders' to denote Russian troops as well as another article from... no one knows what a news18 is... implying also that Russia is to blame.
Certain users here are very sensitive to one-sided reporting, please keep this in mind for future posts
edit: @Magic Powers - sorry for jumping the gun with this one I hope you don't mind. You can tell the next one
|
On June 10 2023 01:09 zeo wrote:
Careful StealthBlue, you just posted an article from a pro-Ukrainian propaganda source using the term 'invaders' to denote Russian troops as well as another article from... no one knows what a news18 is... implying also that Russia is to blame.
Certain users here are very sensitive to one-sided reporting, please keep this in mind for future posts
edit: @Magic Powers - sorry for jumping the gun with this one I hope you don't mind. You can tell the next one
The correct term is not invader, it is orc. Sorry. Orc and trolls are friend, I understand you are upset.
|
On June 10 2023 00:24 JUSTMEBEASTN wrote:just my opinion. who knows who cares
Really? Because to me it looks like mindlessly copied Kremlin talking points. ;-)
|
|
|
On June 10 2023 01:21 0x64 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 01:09 zeo wrote:
Careful StealthBlue, you just posted an article from a pro-Ukrainian propaganda source using the term 'invaders' to denote Russian troops as well as another article from... no one knows what a news18 is... implying also that Russia is to blame.
Certain users here are very sensitive to one-sided reporting, please keep this in mind for future posts
edit: @Magic Powers - sorry for jumping the gun with this one I hope you don't mind. You can tell the next one The correct term is not invader, it is orc. Sorry. Orc and trolls are friend, I understand you are upset.
I'll keep that in mind 0x64. Your words truly do speak for the kind of person you are.
Anyway, on an unrelated note another view on the Bradleys and Leopard 2A6 you won't be seeing anywhere else you get your news from... you maybe you will? Lets see how long before it shows up in MSM:
EDIT: Actually WTF, reading around this isnt another angle of the first post. A summery from the video: After initially losing 4 M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs, 1 Leopard 2A6 and a BMR-2 armored demining vehicle in one location, 4 more M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs drove to the exact same position and started taking loses.
|
On June 10 2023 01:09 zeo wrote:
Careful StealthBlue, you just posted an article from a pro-Ukrainian propaganda source using the term 'invaders' to denote Russian troops as well as another article from... no one knows what a news18 is... implying also that Russia is to blame.
Certain users here are very sensitive to one-sided reporting, please keep this in mind for future posts
edit: @Magic Powers - sorry for jumping the gun with this one I hope you don't mind. You can tell the next one
What would be the neutral term, "liberators"? ;-)
|
United States43646 Posts
On June 10 2023 00:24 JUSTMEBEASTN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2023 23:56 Zaros wrote:
We all know what side Zeo is on, I just ignore anything he posts. why not be open-minded about everything? NATO does pose a threat to Russia.... Russia did what's in its best interests. Ukraine is the 3rd MOST corrupted country IN THE WORLD Ukraine stopped the dam that was giving Crimea water and it dried out the entire area, making an area they once called home basically untenable. Russia has stated if they had NATO's word that Ukraine wouldnt be able to join they wouldn't "invade" all nato had todo was officially announce that wouldnt happen, and MAYBE they wouldnt have been invaded.. but we would never know... why wouldnt nato just say that and perhaps prevent war? even if it was an empty promise? perhaps NATO knows war makes money... and we could easily say NATO started this just as much as Russia. When you back a scared-cat into a corner they will fight back. I dont care who wins/loses all i know if a call to arms happen where i am to fight whoever ill be going. if you care so much about ukraine winning and russia being obliterated, you would stop internet posting and go help Ukraine fight if this fight means so much. Tucker Carlson once said "is this war not just a land dispute" this war is getting out of hand... but my guess is once the fighting is over the world will go back to the way it was... just my opinion. who knows who cares
Your opinion is dumb and you should feel bad. NATO is a defensive alliance, Russia has a nuclear deterrent, and Russia is a garbage land that nobody wants to live in, not even Russians. Nobody is threatening Russia. The reason all the countries around Russia want to be members of a defensive alliance is because Russia keeps trying to eradicate them.
|
United States43646 Posts
On June 10 2023 00:50 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2023 23:35 Magic Powers wrote:Not a fan of one-sided reporting. Both sides must be losing hardware at an increased rate and I don't see the purpose of only showing Ukrainian examples. KyivIndependent posts daily estimates of Russian losses. https://twitter.com/KyivIndependentBrief summary (starting June 3rd) that I quickly put together from the infographics. Note: I'm only posting 3 of the more relevant categories due to time constraints. There are 12 categories for hardware and 1 for casualties. You're not a fan of one sided reporting? I... wasn't aware of this. Honestly. And I for one would be more than happy to help you call out every person on this forum that says something that could be considered anti-Ukrainian, and not post something anti-Russian too. The reverse too, imagine someone saying Russia was guilty of the dam failing and not posting evidence that Ukraine could also be to blame. I agree with you, I don't see the purpose of only saying Russia is to blame for everything either and I look forward to and applaud you enforcing your dislike of one-sided reporting on this forum. More power to you. There is intense fighting going on which, according to some outlets isn't even going on right now. Take the UK intelligence agency for example: https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1667048494677336064Looking at their statements one would come to the conclusion that nothing is happening at all. Do you think visual evidence of destroyed Leopard tanks and Braleys is not something noteworthy? Or maybe a major offensive that same agency was foreshadowing for half a year finally happening? Are these things something the public should not be made aware of? I think there is a lot of misinformation going around about the offensive happening in Southern Ukraine so I don't think there is much point in forwarding speculation. Visual evidence of something happening? Since when is that taboo? I have no problem with you writing that 1000 Russian tanks exploded yesterday on the front without any source given, or you can say 10.000 Ukrainians died without the passport/personal documents of each and every person. But at this moment I don't see a problem in sticking with visual evidence. You are more than welcome to post visual evidence to back up your claims too. I would love to see everything that's happening right now. On both sides.
Ukraine has requested an information blackout and I would assume the UK MOD is complying with it
|
|
|
On June 10 2023 01:32 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 01:09 zeo wrote:
Careful StealthBlue, you just posted an article from a pro-Ukrainian propaganda source using the term 'invaders' to denote Russian troops as well as another article from... no one knows what a news18 is... implying also that Russia is to blame.
Certain users here are very sensitive to one-sided reporting, please keep this in mind for future posts
edit: @Magic Powers - sorry for jumping the gun with this one I hope you don't mind. You can tell the next one What would be the neutral term, "liberators"? ;-)
Heros, obv.
|
JUSTMEBEASTN Profile PM Joined April 2023
About all you need to know.
The losses are painful to see, but completely expected. Given operational secrecy, we're likely only seeing footage/information from one side of the conflict. Ukraine needs to win in one area and push through, Russia needs to hold the entire line. It's sounding like the close air support Russia is getting in some areas is making a big difference because the ability to bring attack helicopters to the line of contact is making a difference given it's what they were built to do.
|
United States43646 Posts
One comparison I saw was that the German army successfully bottled the allies up in Normandy and held them for two months against increasing pressure until the German army broke, suddenly, and all at once. Both sides pour materiel and reserves into the fight and it appears that nothing happens except losses but eventually the losses cannot be replaced for one side.
|
On June 10 2023 01:35 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 00:24 JUSTMEBEASTN wrote:On June 09 2023 23:56 Zaros wrote:
We all know what side Zeo is on, I just ignore anything he posts. why not be open-minded about everything? NATO does pose a threat to Russia.... Russia did what's in its best interests. Ukraine is the 3rd MOST corrupted country IN THE WORLD Ukraine stopped the dam that was giving Crimea water and it dried out the entire area, making an area they once called home basically untenable. Russia has stated if they had NATO's word that Ukraine wouldnt be able to join they wouldn't "invade" all nato had todo was officially announce that wouldnt happen, and MAYBE they wouldnt have been invaded.. but we would never know... why wouldnt nato just say that and perhaps prevent war? even if it was an empty promise? perhaps NATO knows war makes money... and we could easily say NATO started this just as much as Russia. When you back a scared-cat into a corner they will fight back. I dont care who wins/loses all i know if a call to arms happen where i am to fight whoever ill be going. if you care so much about ukraine winning and russia being obliterated, you would stop internet posting and go help Ukraine fight if this fight means so much. Tucker Carlson once said "is this war not just a land dispute" this war is getting out of hand... but my guess is once the fighting is over the world will go back to the way it was... just my opinion. who knows who cares Your opinion is dumb and you should feel bad. NATO is a defensive alliance, Russia has a nuclear deterrent, and Russia is a garbage land that nobody wants to live in, not even Russians. Nobody is threatening Russia. The reason all the countries around Russia want to be members of a defensive alliance is because Russia keeps trying to eradicate them.
Not only that. Even if "NATO" wanted to "attack" Russia (for whatever fairytale reason), I kind of fail to see how they're going to stop the air show by taking over (parts of) Ukraine. The amount of standoff munitions on standby is absolutely ludicrous compared to everything that Russia has thrown so far.
Actually, if you interpret "threatened by NATO" as "not being able to intimidate neighbors", then that is correct indeed.
|
On June 10 2023 01:09 zeo wrote:
Careful StealthBlue, you just posted an article from a pro-Ukrainian propaganda source using the term 'invaders' to denote Russian troops as well as another article from... no one knows what a news18 is... implying also that Russia is to blame.
Certain users here are very sensitive to one-sided reporting, please keep this in mind for future posts
edit: @Magic Powers - sorry for jumping the gun with this one I hope you don't mind. You can tell the next one
Reporting on unfolding events isn't the same thing as debating the moral ins and outs.
If a pro-Russian user wants to speak favorably about Putin's Russia or paint the invasion as a legitimate war, I wouldn't be happy about it but I also wouldn't argue that they should voice pro-Ukrainian arguments to balance things out. That would be an absurd demand, because they've already made the decision to side with Russia.
Reports from the front on the other hand are more a part of the objective realm and therefore it's possible to report on gains and losses from both sides regardless of a moral bias. Even pro-Russian vloggers report on Russian losses, presumably because they're still somewhat in touch with reality.
What you've been doing resembles active propaganda more than anything else.
|
On June 10 2023 03:01 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 01:09 zeo wrote:
Careful StealthBlue, you just posted an article from a pro-Ukrainian propaganda source using the term 'invaders' to denote Russian troops as well as another article from... no one knows what a news18 is... implying also that Russia is to blame.
Certain users here are very sensitive to one-sided reporting, please keep this in mind for future posts
edit: @Magic Powers - sorry for jumping the gun with this one I hope you don't mind. You can tell the next one Reporting on unfolding events isn't the same thing as debating the moral ins and outs. If a pro-Russian user wants to speak favorably about Putin's Russia or paint the invasion as a legitimate war, I wouldn't be happy about it but I also wouldn't argue that they should voice pro-Ukrainian arguments to balance things out. That would be an absurd demand, because they've already made the decision to side with Russia. Reports from the front on the other hand are more a part of the objective realm and therefore it's possible to report on gains and losses from both sides regardless of a moral bias. Even pro-Russian vloggers report on Russian losses, presumably because they're still somewhat in touch with reality. What you've been doing resembles active propaganda more than anything else.
Reading your post reminds me of a quote from 1984: “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” ― George Orwell, 1984
Realistically, we lack about 95% of the information in this war, and that entire 95% is filled with speculation and who knows what comming from who knows where. Let's say someone announced that Ukraine is announcing the confiscation of the property of men who flee the mobilization, or Russian troops tried to bribe xyz or whatever and blew up the dam. These things may be true, but they are coming from a Twitter account that almost never links to its exclusives. They place someone's photo, say this person said this and that, anonymous source ect. ect. you start searching the net for that news and nothing comes up. And basically you know its propaganda and bullshit when a news outlet has 'could not independently verify the claim' anywhere in the article.
That's 95% of everything posted as news or opinion in this thread. Completely unverifiable narrative vomit. When you start having problems with physical, verifiable and documented events because they do not follow your narrative you need to sit down and have a very long think about why evidence of something happening bothers you so much. You need to ask yourself why you arn't being told that that thing happened and what else you are not being told. Then maybe, just maybe the thought come to that hey, maybe it wasnt just the Russians being lied to the whole time. Maybe you were being lied to as well.
Something happened, it was caught on camera. Its one of the few verifiable things that happened that we know of. When you start saying that something you see with your own eyes is propaganda yet something you have no evidence of is the truth you are just setting yourself up for a lot of disappointment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
