Jump to content

Russia v Ukraine - How This Is Going To End


Pinetree
 Share

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Fanta said:

God know how many civilians die a day and have so for years in Yemen but that is not even in the news. Maybe the victims aren’t white enough?

What a crock. You want to know why? Because it's a civil war, and if one side or the other wins nothing else will come of it. If Ukraine is defeated, there are Russian tanks in Tallinn a year later. Body bags will be headed back to NATO countries, and there is a real risk of a nuclear war. Yemen, not so much.

Whataboutism ... 

 

23 minutes ago, Fanta said:

The idea of UAF electronic counter measures sending the missiles off target 

Give us an example of the equipment Ukraine is using to do this with if you please.  

  • Like 2
  • Cool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

What a crock. You want to know why? Because it's a civil war, and if one side or the other wins nothing else will come of it. If Ukraine is defeated, there are Russian tanks in Tallinn a year later. Body bags will be headed back to NATO countries, and there is a real risk of a nuclear war. Yemen, not so much.

Whataboutism ... 

Give us an example of the equipment Ukraine is using to do this with if you please.  

I won’t go off topic but if you cannot see the hypocrisy and manipulation of public opinion involved so be it.
The link was posted by KRLMRX the other day showing Russian EWS equipment. The US would have the same however it is, no doubt, a military secret. 3 times in 24 hours the issue of the Odessa attack has been posted in this thread. The fall of Sieverodonetsk once (?). Think about that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Fanta said:

1 missile hits a civilian building and it a global tragedy that you need to know about within the hour because it helps the war effort. 

These civilian deaths are conveniently being used as propaganda and the world is overreacting. Ok, got it.

45 minutes ago, Fanta said:

95 out of 100 Russian missiles are hitting military targets and it is NOT mentioned because it hurts the war effort. 

Russian missiles are extremely accurate. This was a very rare mistake. Understood.

46 minutes ago, Fanta said:

The idea of UAF electronic counter measures sending the missiles off target was ignored and brushed under the carpet because that leads to a conclusion that Ukraine are in a small way party to some of the civilian deaths

Possible that the Ukrainians are deflecting these missiles onto civilian targets themselves in the act of trying to shoot them down. Gotcha.

50 minutes ago, Fanta said:

So many sheeples being led to the emotional slaughter house. 

This part I don’t get. So because people condemn a barbaric invasion and all that ensues, it makes them mindless ovines?

In that case, equally mindless are the 5th Column who consider themselves “in the know” because they get their news from outside the mainstream, completely unaware that they’re being played. 

The true “Sheeple” are those who by default condemn the mainstream media and instead believe everything they read on “Moon Of Alabama”.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BigHewer said:

This part I don’t get. So because people condemn a barbaric invasion and all that ensues, it makes them mindless bovines?

That was not my intent. Of course the invasion should be condemned. The people I labelled as sheeple are the ones that believe Russia is waging a war against civilians because that is all they hear and they don’t question this. This tragedy and, sadly, far too many more like it are being used for propaganda purposes and as a distraction from the fact that Ukraine is losing. Badly. I would have assumed that the people involved in this thread would have recognized that deflection and not encouraged it. Of course we need to discuss it and never forget it however labelling this incident as a deliberate attack seems disingenuous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Fanta said:

That was not my intent. Of course the invasion should be condemned.

Fair enough, and thank you for clarifying. Agreed.

  • Cool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, oldschooler said:

Two very different events, in magnitude & type , 23 years apart, is clearly not “ double standards” . Answer my Answer to your points ! 😞😉

What about when the US 'accidentally' bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade then? Three innocent people died. 

Precision munitions aren't always precise, regardless of which side is using them.

I'm calling hypocrisy. 

We should stop this war by advocating a truce, before more innocent people die.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EdwardV said:

If Ukraine is defeated, there are Russian tanks in Tallinn a year later. Body bags will be headed back to NATO countries, and there is a real risk of a nuclear war. Yemen, not so much.

Whataboutism ... 

Fearmongerism … 

We have previously discussed your fear of Putin in Paris. I thought we came to the conclusion that based on Russia’s military “success” to date and their capabilities that conquering Ukraine in it’s entirety let alone goose stepping into Germany is neither achievable or desirable. Now you have downgraded Russia’s military expansion to only Estonia and have added the ultimate boogeyman of nuclear war. Really? What about Georgia? Russia has unfinished business there. Putin is 69 years old. From the annexation of Crimea in 2014 to the Russia-Ukraine war was 8 years. At that rate he will be an octogenarian by the time he orders the troops into Europe. If you believe that is a realistic scenario I am going to buy some antler blood because that must be good stuff. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, BigHewer said:

In that case, equally mindless are the 5th Column who consider themselves “in the know” because they get their news from outside the mainstream, completely unaware that they’re being played

All the mainstream media does is quote the Ukrainian government, so who's getting played here? Even the Fox News article quoted the Ukrainian government as its source.

I'm not denying civilian deaths, but why are there no journalists reporting the situation on the ground, as used to be the case in previous wars? In past wars, all the major news organisations had reporters embedded in their friendly side's forces. You'd think that Ukraine would be delighted to host them. Why do we have to rely on a foreign government as our single source of truth, and why do you buy that? It's as if we don't want a rerun of failing to find nonexistent WMDs 

 

Edited by dbrenn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dbrenn said:

All the mainstream media does is quote the Ukrainian government, so who's getting played here? Even the Fox News article quoted the Ukrainian government as its source.

All Western MSM uses Ukrainian (and US) claims as their source. The ISW is infamous for it. Russia is it’s own worst enemy in the news stakes. 

11 minutes ago, dbrenn said:

In past wars, all the major news organisations had reporters embedded in their friendly side's forces. You'd think that Ukraine would be delighted to host them. It's as if they don't want a rerun of failing to find nonexistent WMDs 

To be fair the death of foreign journalists in combat areas would be a disaster for both sides. So they are protected and taken to areas that best serve the needs of the protecting sides in advancing the information war. There are some Western  journalists near the front lines covering the war from Ukraine’s perspective however the UAF has been going backwards not forwards so it is a very dangerous place to be. I don’t imagine the Russians many foreign journalists embedded in their ranks. Patrick Lancaster is the only embedded foreigner I know of publishing news from the Russian side and I think he is bonkers to go near there. The Russians have Russian journalists in their forces but their news is not the news the West wants to hear so it is not translated and reproduced.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fanta said:

All Western MSM uses Ukrainian (and US) claims as their source. The ISW is infamous for it. Russia is it’s own worst enemy in the news stakes. 

To be fair the death of foreign journalists in combat areas would be a disaster for both sides. So they are protected and taken to areas that best serve the needs of the protecting sides in advancing the information war. There are some Western  journalists near the front lines covering the war from Ukraine’s perspective however the UAF has been going backwards not forwards so it is a very dangerous place to be. I don’t imagine the Russians many foreign journalists embedded in their ranks. Patrick Lancaster is the only embedded foreigner I know of publishing news from the Russian side and I think he is bonkers to go near there. The Russians have Russian journalists in their forces but their news is not the news the West wants to hear so it is not translated and reproduced.

Might have something to do with thing like this.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Might have something to do with thing like this.

Duh… go into a active war zone and get shot at. No surprise there. Where were their minders? Idiots. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Duh… go into a active war zone and get shot at. No surprise there. Where were their minders? Idiots. 

So you keep asking where are the western journalists and then respond by saying only an idiot would go into an active war zone and get shot at?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fanta said:

All Western MSM uses Ukrainian (and US) claims as their source. The ISW is infamous for it. Russia is it’s own worst enemy in the news stakes. 

To be fair the death of foreign journalists in combat areas would be a disaster for both sides. So they are protected and taken to areas that best serve the needs of the protecting sides in advancing the information war. There are some Western  journalists near the front lines covering the war from Ukraine’s perspective however the UAF has been going backwards not forwards so it is a very dangerous place to be. I don’t imagine the Russians many foreign journalists embedded in their ranks. Patrick Lancaster is the only embedded foreigner I know of publishing news from the Russian side and I think he is bonkers to go near there. The Russians have Russian journalists in their forces but their news is not the news the West wants to hear so it is not translated and reproduced.

I get your point that war reporting is dangerous, and war correspondents are some of the bravest people around. 

We saw lots of them in Yugoslavia and Iraq though - I remember footage of Christiane Amanpour in a steel helmet flinching at a nearby explosion and looking genuinely frightened. 

Now all we see are lazy quotes from the Ukrainian government, relayed to us by journalists sitting in nice safe offices in Western capitals. We also see unquestioning belief of Ukrainian government messages by people here, who even accuse those who look for alternative sources of information as "sheeple". The whole thing is back to front. Why not just read news directly from the Ukrainian Ministry of Information? Why have news outlets at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fanta said:

The link was posted by KRLMRX the other day showing Russian EWS equipment. The US would have the same however it is, no doubt, a military secret. 3 times in 24 hours the issue of the Odessa attack has been posted in this thread. The fall of Sieverodonetsk once (?). Think about that. 

So let me get this straight. You don’t actually know if Ukraine has EWS equipment. However we know Russia does as we have seen pictures of them captured by Ukraine. Remember this point as we will circle back to it. Therefore you assume since Russia has them the US must too. However no one knows about them as they are super secret. You then believe these super secret units would be given to Ukraine? The US didn’t even want to give Ukraine HIMARS as they were afraid they would fall into the hands of Russia. You know like the Russian EWS units did to Ukraine. Which are probably now in America. Never mind you would need dozens of these things and as you have seen the US isn’t handing out anything in quality. Never mind the US doctrine is to shoot down missiles, not get them to hit somewhere else. Never mind you turn on one of these systems you bind every search radar within range, including your own. Exactly what high value targets would Ukraine be protecting? They have nothing of value. 
 

I think I’ll stick with the “Russian missiles suck” theory. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dbrenn said:

I get your point that war reporting is dangerous, and war correspondents are some of the bravest people around. 

We saw lots of them in Yugoslavia and Iraq though - I remember footage of Christiane Amanpour in a steel helmet flinching at a nearby explosion and looking genuinely frightened. 

Now all we see are lazy quotes from the Ukrainian government, relayed to us by journalists sitting in nice safe offices in Western capitals. We also see unquestioning belief of Ukrainian government messages by people here, who even accuse those who look for alternative sources of information as "sheeple". The whole thing is back to front. Why not just read news directly from the Ukrainian Ministry of Information? Why have news outlets at all?

Right OK we get it. You dont like the MSM and prefer to get your information from crackpot conspiracy theorist nutters. You wire in tiger. After all they are the guys who really know 🙄

The rest of us will continue to use the MSM because like it or not its the BEST sources available.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

So you keep asking where are the western journalists and then respond by saying only an idiot would go into an active war zone and get shot at?

I didn’t ask the question in the first place. I offered possible reasons why they are not there. You reinforced one of my possible reasons what they are not there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Right OK we get it. You dont like the MSM and prefer to get your information from crackpot conspiracy theorist nutters. You wire in tiger. After all they are the guys who really know 🙄

The rest of us will continue to use the MSM because like it or not its the BEST sources available.  

Try this place then. Seems to be right up your rather narrow little street:

http://mip.gov.ua/en

You'll love this one too:

https://www.mil.gov.ua/en/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

I think I’ll stick with the “Russian missiles suck” theory. 

Agree as it seems to be the most plausible as everything else is unproven. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Now you have downgraded Russia’s military expansion to only Estonia and have added the ultimate boogeyman of nuclear war.

No, just using it as an example. I’ve never mentioned Paris or Germany, but I do mention the Polish gap often. Let’s be fair, Putin has mentioned nuclear war way more times than I have. And he actually has a so called button. Let’s be fair once again. The Russian army is designed to fight NATO, not Ukraine. That’s part of the reason they are having so much trouble with them. And yes I do say Russia would be crushed by NATO. You think that would honestly stop Putin if he so decided to attack? If crushed, what are Putin’s options? He only has two. A humiliating retreat back to Russia’s border giving up everything in the process, or escalation. There is a reason the west has decided to take the massive economic hit in order to bleed out the Russian army. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Right OK we get it.

It always makes me smile when posters start using "we", as if other people can't speak for themselves and they've been elected the leader of an imaginary group. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dbrenn said:

It always makes me smile when posters start using "we", as if other people can't speak for themselves and they've been elected the leader of an imaginary group. 

Yes but "we" dropped nukes on Japan remember?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, dbrenn said:

Try this place then. Seems to be right up your rather narrow little street:

http://mip.gov.ua/en

You'll love this one too:

https://www.mil.gov.ua/en/

You trying to get me to click on dodgy sites? 

Not happening. Either link from reputable places or dont bother. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, dbrenn said:

I get your point that war reporting is dangerous, and war correspondents are some of the bravest people around. 

I think they are nuts. Same as unarmed medics and religious people in active combat zones but they are necessary nuts. DEDICATED is probably a better word. Risking life and limb for a closer look and a chance at a Pulitzer Prize is a choice that I would never even consider. Each to their own and more power to them. Medical and religious staff are brave and committed. Journalists are also but they don’t need to be there aka nucking futs.
The reliance on Ukrainian sources for news is partly fueled by the worlds demand for up to date, as it happens news. You saw the news coverage of the recent missile strikes that hit civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. The flames were roaring and the news was already being sent everywhere. Imprecise reporting from one source with a bias skewed towards their needs is the price we pay for instant news. By the time the situation is clarified the attention of the world has moved on. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By posting on Thaiger Talk you agree to the Terms of Use