Pages:
Author

Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 85. (Read 73908 times)

legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
January 17, 2024, 07:32:02 PM
~


But hey no "facts" here, so must mean that Russia did it, but then now Poles are covering for Russia!?!?


Edi: Added the left out Wall Street Journal citation

The only fact is that, as I said, there is only speculation and you, as usual, copy-paste whatever article seems to be friendly to your version. So... nothing new here. BTW, I do see an newspaper speaking on behalf of the "European Investigators", not a quote of whatever the "investigators" have "investigated" or whatever they have said, so first problem here: not the original source, which should be easy to access for a super-news-aggregator user like you.

Ruzzia could have done it yes. The fact that the Polish are accused of not being cooperative by the "investigators" is nothing new, they are rarely fast or cooperative with the Germans the "investigators" - perhaps due to some bad experiences with Germans "investigators".

Oh quit crying now that even you can see that Ukraine is destroyed. If Ukraine had given up in the first 2 months of the war, think of all the soldiers that would still be alive. Think of how the lands and structures of Ukraine would never have been destroyed. But no. You want to keep the war going.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 2394
Merit: 1632
Do not die for Putin
January 17, 2024, 05:25:41 PM
You're just all kinds of confused here aren't you? Isn't bias pretty much the opposite of credibility? If you you know that Fox news is biased towards Trump so you adjust for their bias when reading their coverage that's cherry picking to you?

This makes no sense. Can tell by the percentage of loaded and otherwise idiotic questions with relation to the total content of your post, in this case 100%.

You can stop pretending, I doubt anyone here believes that you just found the article browsing Guardian's website and thought "hm, this sounds credible". You lifted this from whatever sewage you lift all your Kremlin talking points and thought that those western idiots in this thread would surely believe anything coming from their western media because obviously all western media works the same and does only what Biden tells it to do.

Hate to disappoint you, but this is so ludicrous outside of Putinstan that you're really wasting your time trying this cherry-picking shit over and over again. Just post links to Medvedev's drunk telegram posts and we'll at least know that you're being honest.



Actually i just browse news aggregator sites like news.google.com for keyword "Ukraine" and filter for last day to stay updated on the topic. But keep thinking that i'm an agent of Kremlin. It's interesting to watch your reaction when i point to western media pivoting, which is typically a precursor to political pivot.

Circling back to Nord Stream missed this one from few days back

Nord Stream Probe Hampered by Resistance From Poland

BERLIN—Polish officials have resisted cooperating with an international probe into the sabotage of the Nord Stream natural-gas pipelines and failed to disclose potentially crucial evidence, according to European investigators working on the case.
Those Polish officials have been slow to provide information and withheld key evidence about the alleged saboteurs’ movements on Polish soil, investigators said. They are now hoping the new government in Warsaw, which took office in December, will help shed light on the attack.

European investigators have long believed the attack was launched from Ukraine via Poland. But they say Warsaw’s failure to fully cooperate has made it hard to establish whether the attack happened with or without the former Polish government’s knowledge, according to senior officials.
...

But hey no "facts" here, so must mean that Russia did it, but then now Poles are covering for Russia!?!?


Edi: Added the left out Wall Street Journal citation

The only fact is that, as I said, there is only speculation and you, as usual, copy-paste whatever article seems to be friendly to your version. So... nothing new here. BTW, I do see an newspaper speaking on behalf of the "European Investigators", not a quote of whatever the "investigators" have "investigated" or whatever they have said, so first problem here: not the original source, which should be easy to access for a super-news-aggregator user like you.

Ruzzia could have done it yes. The fact that the Polish are accused of not being cooperative by the "investigators" is nothing new, they are rarely fast or cooperative with the Germans the "investigators" - perhaps due to some bad experiences with Germans "investigators".
legendary
Activity: 2833
Merit: 1851
In order to dump coins one must have coins
January 16, 2024, 10:29:20 PM
You're just all kinds of confused here aren't you? Isn't bias pretty much the opposite of credibility? If you you know that Fox news is biased towards Trump so you adjust for their bias when reading their coverage that's cherry picking to you?

This makes no sense. Can tell by the percentage of loaded and otherwise idiotic questions with relation to the total content of your post, in this case 100%.

You can stop pretending, I doubt anyone here believes that you just found the article browsing Guardian's website and thought "hm, this sounds credible". You lifted this from whatever sewage you lift all your Kremlin talking points and thought that those western idiots in this thread would surely believe anything coming from their western media because obviously all western media works the same and does only what Biden tells it to do.

Hate to disappoint you, but this is so ludicrous outside of Putinstan that you're really wasting your time trying this cherry-picking shit over and over again. Just post links to Medvedev's drunk telegram posts and we'll at least know that you're being honest.



Actually i just browse news aggregator sites like news.google.com for keyword "Ukraine" and filter for last day to stay updated on the topic. But keep thinking that i'm an agent of Kremlin. It's interesting to watch your reaction when i point to western media pivoting, which is typically a precursor to political pivot.

Circling back to Nord Stream missed this one from few days back

Nord Stream Probe Hampered by Resistance From Poland

BERLIN—Polish officials have resisted cooperating with an international probe into the sabotage of the Nord Stream natural-gas pipelines and failed to disclose potentially crucial evidence, according to European investigators working on the case.
Those Polish officials have been slow to provide information and withheld key evidence about the alleged saboteurs’ movements on Polish soil, investigators said. They are now hoping the new government in Warsaw, which took office in December, will help shed light on the attack.

European investigators have long believed the attack was launched from Ukraine via Poland. But they say Warsaw’s failure to fully cooperate has made it hard to establish whether the attack happened with or without the former Polish government’s knowledge, according to senior officials.

Some senior European officials say they are considering approaching the office of Donald Tusk, Poland’s new prime minister, for help in investigating the biggest act of sabotage on the European continent since World War II.
...
The Nord Stream pipelines, connecting Russia to Germany underneath the Baltic Sea, were blown up in September 2022. This added pressure on Germany and others to make themselves independent from Russian fuel supplies.

Investigators haven’t offered evidence linking the Polish government to the explosions and say that even if some Polish officials were involved, it could have been without the knowledge of the political leadership. Yet they say efforts by Polish officials to hinder their investigation have made them increasingly suspicious of Warsaw’s role and motives.
...
Most Western security officials believe that a Ukrainian crew, operating with or without sanction from Kyiv, was behind the sabotage. Ukraine has denied any involvement.
...
An investigation by Germany, Denmark and Sweden has so far found that the pipeline was blown up by a crew of six, including deep-sea divers, traveling on a leisure yacht called Andromeda. On its voyage, Andromeda stopped in all three countries, as well as Poland, according to investigators. The boat, leased in Germany via a Polish company, contained traces of octagon, the same explosive that was found at the underwater blast sites, they said.
After mining parts of the pipelines, the crew docked in Poland’s Baltic port of Kołobrzeg, where they spent a full day, according to investigators who tracked the boat by analyzing its navigation system data, the crew’s mobile-phone communications, satellite imagery and witnesses’ accounts.

A port official suspicious about the five men and one woman, all of whom spoke a mixture of Russian and Ukrainian, alerted police. On Sept. 19, Poland’s border guard checked the identification of the crew, who produced European Union passports and were allowed to continue their trip, sailing back up north, where they laid the rest of the mines, investigators say.

Polish authorities didn’t share this information with European investigators until March 2023—and they only did so after being contacted by their German counterparts. Berlin was tipped off in January about the yacht’s stay in Poland by the Dutch military intelligence service, whose information came from someone in Ukraine.

A number of Polish agencies declined to share with European investigators footage of the suspects taken by CCTV cameras while the yacht was moored there, those investigators said. The investigators have established that the boat and its crew were exposed to security cameras throughout their stay in the port.
...
In one instance, Polish prosecutors told their European counterparts that no explosives were found on the Andromeda, although no forensic investigation had taken place. Yet the Polish internal security service told European investigators that the border guard officers who had checked the crew never boarded the boat, contradicting the prosecutor’s claim.

In one instance, Polish prosecutors told their European counterparts that no explosives were found on the Andromeda, although no forensic investigation had taken place. Yet the Polish internal security service told European investigators that the border guard officers who had checked the crew never boarded the boat, contradicting the prosecutor’s claim.

German investigators waited at least two months before obtaining a meeting with their Polish counterparts in mid-May last year, according to the European officials. They left the meeting with the impression that some Polish colleagues were unwilling or unable to cooperate.
...
In September, Stanislaw Zaryn, a senior Polish official then involved in overseeing Poland’s security services, dismissed the findings that the Andromeda crew was behind the sabotage, saying the crew had no military training and were merely tourists “looking for fun.”
Around the same time, Poland’s internal security service circulated with European investigators alleged intelligence that the Andromeda had links with Russian espionage, which they alleged was behind the attack. Some investigators said they considered this to be disinformation.
Zaryn, who left office following the election, said in a recent interview that any Polish involvement was unlikely as Russia was plausibly behind the sabotage.

But hey no "facts" here, so must mean that Russia did it, but then now Poles are covering for Russia!?!?


Edi: Added the left out Wall Street Journal citation
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
January 16, 2024, 05:38:29 PM
You're just all kinds of confused here aren't you? Isn't bias pretty much the opposite of credibility? If you you know that Fox news is biased towards Trump so you adjust for their bias when reading their coverage that's cherry picking to you?

This makes no sense. Can tell by the percentage of loaded and otherwise idiotic questions with relation to the total content of your post, in this case 100%.

You can stop pretending, I doubt anyone here believes that you just found the article browsing Guardian's website and thought "hm, this sounds credible". You lifted this from whatever sewage you lift all your Kremlin talking points and thought that those western idiots in this thread would surely believe anything coming from their western media because obviously all western media works the same and does only what Biden tells it to do.

Hate to disappoint you, but this is so ludicrous outside of Putinstan that you're really wasting your time trying this cherry-picking shit over and over again. Just post links to Medvedev's drunk telegram posts and we'll at least know that you're being honest.

legendary
Activity: 2833
Merit: 1851
In order to dump coins one must have coins
January 16, 2024, 01:36:57 PM
This is a pretty silly argument, to the point of absurdity. Is the concept of media bias really totally alien to you? Do you honestly categorize media sources between totally credible and totally non-credible? If so please share with us which media sources you consider totally credible? (something telling me that you won't and just trolling as usual) Otherwise either state your counterarguments by citing some sources, or stop these silly attempts at derailing the conversation.

Where did I say that I categorize media as "totally credible" etc? Rhetorical question of course, because I didn't, you're just making this up as you always do.

Media can be biased. You are cherrypicking. Incredibly difficult concept to grasp but give it a shot: more than one of those statements can be true.


You're just all kinds of confused here aren't you? Isn't bias pretty much the opposite of credibility? If you you know that Fox news is biased towards Trump so you adjust for their bias when reading their coverage that's cherry picking to you?

That's the silliest thing I have heard from you... probably. No, you do not "correct for bias", you look at the facts - if there are any in the whole article, check these facts across sources and form YOUR own opinion about what it means. It will not work 100% of times and it will not ever work perfectly because you are rarely close enough to the original source but it is better than "correcting for bias" where you do not know how much of a bias they have introduced.

Seems to me you are confusing opinion and facts e.g. Ruzzia lost the equivalent to an AWACS yesterday and it costs 300 million. That seems to be a confirmed fact from a variety of sources. Anything not confirmed is an opinion: it being an "accident" a shot by Ruzzia's own airdefence, a shot by a Patriot or a crash or due to lack of maintenance.

Or something closer to your posting history: The Nordstream was blown up, fact. It was Ruzzia, US, a humpback whale, two Polish guys.... speculative, opinion.


And that's exactly how manipulation happens. I wish your concept of facts would be as straight forward as you put it out to be, better yet lets have the "bad" guy where all black and the "good" guy wear all white so everyone would know who's bad and who's good.
For example if we take your claim of Russia loosing their AWACS worth $300 mil as a fact, is it good or bad? On the surface in the vacuum of other details the impulse is to think that it's great news for Ukraine, but is it really? Do we know all of the facts about this situation, could you think of any other facts, conveniently not covered, which would possibly change your perception of the situation? Now i'm not a military expert but here are some minimal facts from top of my head that i could possibly effect the perception of the situation:
-how many missiles were in that valley to take it down? Each patriot costs $1MM-$4MM?
-according to Ukraine on the last RU attack only 8 missiles were destroyed and 20 "missed" their target out of the 40. By their own admission that means that 12 Russian missiles/drones hit their target in a day. What did they hit, how much was that damage? Could UA's low intercept ratio (70%) be because anti-air was pulled from defending infrastructure to hunt for Russian AWACS?
-how many attempts did it take to finally bring 1 AWACS down? War has been going on for almost two years now, how long have Ukraine been hunting for that AWACS? If such anti-air missile volleys have been going every week and it took hundreds of valleys during the war for one missile to finally hit the mark, doubt many would be excited about this
-Ukraine got 1 AWACS out of 8? in two years of war, and at the top of their anti-air defense supplies. So at this rate it would take another 14years of the same supply of anti-air defense systems to get the other 7? That is if Russia doesn't adjust their tactics?
-if Russia had 8 of these AWACSs how long does it take to build one? How many have RU built since the beginning of the war?
etc etc etc but all of these facts would be inconvenient for propaganda so why would  media cover that, when their roll is to drum up moral/support for their respective side? By leaving out some facts you're not technically lying, but can easily manipulate, and make people draw erroneous conclusions. a.k.a stop asking questions and clap with everybody else! Once again why i try not to discuss the daily events at the front and concentrate on the macro picture.

As far as Nordstream can you give us an example which "facts" could convince you that Ukraine was involved, or by definition there just couldn't be any? Is it all or nothing, black or white or there's a scale for evidence like "highly likely"? And do you believe you're objectively looking at this? Is the burden of proof to convince you that Russia blew up their own pipeline would be the same as to convince you that Ukraine blew up pipeline carrying Russian gas?
legendary
Activity: 2394
Merit: 1632
Do not die for Putin
January 16, 2024, 04:57:00 AM
This is a pretty silly argument, to the point of absurdity. Is the concept of media bias really totally alien to you? Do you honestly categorize media sources between totally credible and totally non-credible? If so please share with us which media sources you consider totally credible? (something telling me that you won't and just trolling as usual) Otherwise either state your counterarguments by citing some sources, or stop these silly attempts at derailing the conversation.

Where did I say that I categorize media as "totally credible" etc? Rhetorical question of course, because I didn't, you're just making this up as you always do.

Media can be biased. You are cherrypicking. Incredibly difficult concept to grasp but give it a shot: more than one of those statements can be true.


You're just all kinds of confused here aren't you? Isn't bias pretty much the opposite of credibility? If you you know that Fox news is biased towards Trump so you adjust for their bias when reading their coverage that's cherry picking to you?

That's the silliest thing I have heard from you... probably. No, you do not "correct for bias", you look at the facts - if there are any in the whole article, check these facts across sources and form YOUR own opinion about what it means. It will not work 100% of times and it will not ever work perfectly because you are rarely close enough to the original source but it is better than "correcting for bias" where you do not know how much of a bias they have introduced.

Seems to me you are confusing opinion and facts e.g. Ruzzia lost the equivalent to an AWACS yesterday and it costs 300 million. That seems to be a confirmed fact from a variety of sources. Anything not confirmed is an opinion: it being an "accident" a shot by Ruzzia's own airdefence, a shot by a Patriot or a crash or due to lack of maintenance.

Or something closer to your posting history: The Nordstream was blown up, fact. It was Ruzzia, US, a humpback whale, two Polish guys.... speculative, opinion.
legendary
Activity: 2833
Merit: 1851
In order to dump coins one must have coins
January 16, 2024, 12:45:38 AM
This is a pretty silly argument, to the point of absurdity. Is the concept of media bias really totally alien to you? Do you honestly categorize media sources between totally credible and totally non-credible? If so please share with us which media sources you consider totally credible? (something telling me that you won't and just trolling as usual) Otherwise either state your counterarguments by citing some sources, or stop these silly attempts at derailing the conversation.

Where did I say that I categorize media as "totally credible" etc? Rhetorical question of course, because I didn't, you're just making this up as you always do.

Media can be biased. You are cherrypicking. Incredibly difficult concept to grasp but give it a shot: more than one of those statements can be true.


You're just all kinds of confused here aren't you? Isn't bias pretty much the opposite of credibility? If you you know that Fox news is biased towards Trump so you adjust for their bias when reading their coverage that's cherry picking to you?
legendary
Activity: 2394
Merit: 1632
Do not die for Putin
January 15, 2024, 04:51:08 PM
It seems that Ukraine has downed an IL-22 and a A-50 EWC. These are seriously high value targets in the range of hundreds of millions. Ruzzia has only 30 of these.

Something out there is hunting Ruzzian planes and it seems to be hungry.
There were only 8 A-50 planes in service, but it doesn't means that all these planes is ready to fly. And loss of such plane isn't just about money, it would take years to build such plane from scratch and I'm not sure that current Russia is capable to do it.
Il-22 worked as command post, they managed to land it. But when you see how much damage from shrapnel it good, I doubt it's possible to repair it:
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1746872033185563018
Some Russian channels raised version of friendly fire, but I doubt about it. These planes almost from start of invasion were flying same route daily in Azov see triangle between Crimea, Berdyansk and Rostov, it's difficult to believe in such version. Now is question what Ukraine used to reach it, after all, distance to Berdyansk from front line is quite significant.

Hi, sorry yes it it is 12 IL from some sources IL is above 300M to make new, and the A-50 are effectively super-limited. It is not the first time that they are able to hit Berdyansk, but airborne targets in flight it relatively new.

Zelensky is speaking of a "weapon supplied by allies" that has helped on this task. I wonder what systems are there capable of the task other than the patriot. The PAC-2 has 160 km of range. A meteor shot from an F-16 has 200 KM, but there are no planes able to use it yet in Ukraine... in theory.
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 1375
Slava Ukraini!
January 15, 2024, 03:30:16 PM
It seems that Ukraine has downed an IL-22 and a A-50 EWC. These are seriously high value targets in the range of hundreds of millions. Ruzzia has only 30 of these.

Something out there is hunting Ruzzian planes and it seems to be hungry.
There were only 8 A-50 planes in service, but it doesn't means that all these planes is ready to fly. And loss of such plane isn't just about money, it would take years to build such plane from scratch and I'm not sure that current Russia is capable to do it.
Il-22 worked as command post, they managed to land it. But when you see how much damage from shrapnel it good, I doubt it's possible to repair it:
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1746872033185563018
Some Russian channels raised version of friendly fire, but I doubt about it. These planes almost from start of invasion were flying same route daily in Azov see triangle between Crimea, Berdyansk and Rostov, it's difficult to believe in such version. Now is question what Ukraine used to reach it, after all, distance to Berdyansk from front line is quite significant.
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
January 15, 2024, 07:32:23 AM
This is a pretty silly argument, to the point of absurdity. Is the concept of media bias really totally alien to you? Do you honestly categorize media sources between totally credible and totally non-credible? If so please share with us which media sources you consider totally credible? (something telling me that you won't and just trolling as usual) Otherwise either state your counterarguments by citing some sources, or stop these silly attempts at derailing the conversation.

Where did I say that I categorize media as "totally credible" etc? Rhetorical question of course, because I didn't, you're just making this up as you always do.

Media can be biased. You are cherrypicking. Incredibly difficult concept to grasp but give it a shot: more than one of those statements can be true.
newbie
Activity: 24
Merit: 6
January 15, 2024, 03:51:31 AM
I am surprised there haven't been any threads opened about this yet.

In recent months, Russia has massed hundreds of thousands of troops and other military equipment on the Russia-Ukraine border. It is well known that Russia wants Ukraine to be part of its county, however Russian dictator, President Putin, has claimed that the troop mass is part of a training exercise.

The US and NATO allies are sending military equipment to Ukraine to help repeal an attack, and there is some talk about possibly sending troops to the region.

Update 2/18/22:
It appears there may have been some kind of false flag operation in Dumbas, Ukraine, an area controlled by a separatist group, today, possibly involving an alleged bombing of the car belonging to the leader of the separatist group. It is possible this is part of some kind of false flag operation to create a pretext for an invasion.

President Biden today said he believes Putin has made the decision to invade and will start an invasion in the coming days.


Update 2/21/22:
It appears an invasion has begun


Update 2/23/22:
It appears there are some kind of bombings in Kiev, the capital of Ukraine

We've been 2 years into this conflict and the fog of war and propaganda has greatly distorted facts and realities,boundaries between peace and morality is steadily and rapidly eroding
The western powers want to dictate terms and conditions for a conflict they clearly started or should I say clearly helped to stoke the flames

Historically,Russia has always suffered invasions spanning from the Napoleonic wars to the world wars,she has always wanted a secure border and peaceful and economic relations with Europe and the west,one which positively impacts the world
For decades especially after the cold war(another attempt to undermine the soviets now Russia by the west),the Russians have pursued trade and security cooperations with Europe and the west,projects like the nordstream and numerous other infrastructural and defense projects eg OSCE(organization for security and cooperation in Europe) in an attempt to bolster trade and development and regional stability in Europe yet all have been interpreted as a threat to western hegemony and influence in the region

The conflict in Ukraine or at least the latest iteration of it is to all intents and purposes fueled by NATO expansion among other reasons like surrounding Russia,turning the black sea which has historically been Russia's sphere of influence into a NATO lake,weakening of Russia all of which have clearly been articulated by USA and western globalist elite and that begs the question WHY??
Why did the west undertake such a disastrous project in Europe

In the initial phase of the conflict many were and probably still are being misled to believe that NATO and western support which is short of sending troops is an effort to support democracy,sovereignty and is a moral obligation and one wonders where the morality lies in Ukrainian albeit western sponsored and backed shelling of the eastern regions of Ukraine(ethnic Russian speaking) since 2014,where the support for democracy was in the maidan coup in 2014 in which civilians were killed en masse and the eagerness of the western powers to recognise the illegitimate government formed thereafter and no support for the ousted democratically elected government.In the face of such glaring hypocrisy the west has no moral justification to put forward such arguements suffice to say the rhetoric has been laid bare for all to see

The foreign policy of the USA and their western allies especially with regards to this conflict had been an utter catastrophe, one which has global ramifications like the hike in oil prices as a result of sanctions on Russia which produces a substantial amount of global oil,agricultural produce hikes,hike in cost of fertilizer,natural gas and other natural resource
Simply put the west has shot itself in the foot and by extension the rest of the world

As is the norm with the USA,instead of pushing for negotiations they push for escalations,the only calls for negotiations have come from Russia 3 times all of which has  been sabotaged by the west

It is painfully obvious that this conflict will end in negotiations and on Russian terms so why has the west subjected Ukraine to utter destruction only to achieve the same objectives set by the Russians which could have been achieved in the first days of the conflict through negotiations
legendary
Activity: 2394
Merit: 1632
Do not die for Putin
January 14, 2024, 05:32:02 PM
It seems that Ukraine has downed an IL-22 and a A-50 EWC. These are seriously high value targets in the range of hundreds of millions. Ruzzia has only 30 of these.

Something out there is hunting Ruzzian planes and it seems to be hungry.


This is a pretty silly argument, to the point of absurdity. Is the concept of media bias really totally alien to you? Do you honestly categorize media sources between totally credible and totally non-credible? If so please share with us which media sources you consider totally credible? (something telling me that you won't and just trolling as usual) Otherwise either state your counterarguments by citing some sources, or stop these silly attempts at derailing the conversation,
The point is that you choosing which of e.g. Guardian's or any other "western" media articles are credible or not is pretty much a textbook definition of cherry picking. Regardless of any convoluted rationalizations you're making up

For me credibility is at least about facts. If the media or article is stating facts that have not happened, providing data that is dubious or simply false under the pretence that is actually fully accurate then is simply not credible and it is not journalism but disinformation . A different matter is the opinion - the interpretation or conceptualisation of the facts in a gnostical framework.

Most of the articles here are 95% opinion. e.g. "Nazis support Ukraine because the leader of group XYZ says so". The leader saying so is most likely a fact. How real that is merely an opinion - most likely it is just for the gallery.

The fact that the founder of Wagner has swastikas tattooed is a fact, as it is a fact that Putin does use that group so you can say Putin recruits Nazis and it is true. It does not mean everyone in the Ruzzian army is a Nazi or they are used extensively.

The problem here is that some posters tend to think that the opinion given by a newspaper e.g. NYT are facts or are pretending that these are factual truths.
jr. member
Activity: 65
Merit: 1
January 14, 2024, 03:23:39 PM

This is a pretty silly argument, to the point of absurdity. Is the concept of media bias really totally alien to you? Do you honestly categorize media sources between totally credible and totally non-credible? If so please share with us which media sources you consider totally credible? (something telling me that you won't and just trolling as usual) Otherwise either state your counterarguments by citing some sources, or stop these silly attempts at derailing the conversation,
The point is that you choosing which of e.g. Guardian's or any other "western" media articles are credible or not is pretty much a textbook definition of cherry picking. Regardless of any convoluted rationalizations you're making up
legendary
Activity: 2833
Merit: 1851
In order to dump coins one must have coins
January 14, 2024, 02:45:10 PM
Low or no air defense to cover critical infrastructure (in the largest country in Europe besides Russia), with no prospects of increase against growing Russian missile production, and with Russia on the offensive at the front. But sure you can pretend that i'm just cherry picking, and that western news coverage has not pivoted and coverage is just the same as before. Denial is always an option, but as always at your peril.

What does this have to do with your neo-nazi fetish?

The point is that you choosing which of e.g. Guardian's or any other "western" media articles are credible or not is pretty much a textbook definition of cherry picking. Regardless of any convoluted rationalizations you're making up.

Seems like you have a fetish for making up my fetishes  Huh
 
This is a pretty silly argument, to the point of absurdity. Is the concept of media bias really totally alien to you? Do you honestly categorize media sources between totally credible and totally non-credible? If so please share with us which media sources you consider totally credible? (something telling me that you won't and just trolling as usual) Otherwise either state your counterarguments by citing some sources, or stop these silly attempts at derailing the conversation.
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
January 13, 2024, 08:26:16 PM
Low or no air defense to cover critical infrastructure (in the largest country in Europe besides Russia), with no prospects of increase against growing Russian missile production, and with Russia on the offensive at the front. But sure you can pretend that i'm just cherry picking, and that western news coverage has not pivoted and coverage is just the same as before. Denial is always an option, but as always at your peril.

What does this have to do with your neo-nazi fetish?

The point is that you choosing which of e.g. Guardian's or any other "western" media articles are credible or not is pretty much a textbook definition of cherry picking. Regardless of any convoluted rationalizations you're making up.
legendary
Activity: 2833
Merit: 1851
In order to dump coins one must have coins
January 13, 2024, 03:50:18 PM
Low or no air defense to cover critical infrastructure (in the largest country in Europe besides Russia), with no prospects of increase against growing Russian missile production, and with Russia on the offensive at the front. But sure you can pretend that i'm just cherry picking, and that western news coverage has not pivoted and coverage is just the same as before. Denial is always an option, but as always at your peril.

RE ramping production from Ruzzia, hat is not what your "sources say", that is your making.Ruzzian production of missiles and use of them is evidently lower than last year in which there was a continuous destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure. Not the case this year.

Ruzzia at this point is using shells for North Korea (you may ask for view of their "effectiveness" and "user safety"), Iran and their own production. It is obvious Ruzzia alone cannot keep up with the rate they need to keep the pressure on Ukraine.

The NYT has been consistently publishing smear  articles about Ukraine as of late. None of what is says is unknown nor for that matter known in sufficient detail as to make a judgement of the situation. I have no doubt that Ukraine needs the West to free the aid promised, but if you want to speak of the front...

- Avdiivka, well, it is embarrassing for Ruzzia dude. They are Throwing everything they got and still unable to take it.
- Yes the fight near Kupiansk has not stopped. Ruzzia got nothing, but yes, the fight has not sttoped nor the loses.
- Vulhedar direction... well, Ruzzia has stopped trying pretty much...
- RE Chasiv Yar, sure the article says there are attacks in that direction. As there are in most directions, with plenty of rusty crap left behind to nearly no effect.

BTW, it seems that Putin's fund have started to be seized effectively - not frozen, but seized. No more "playing nice".






Last Friday's attack has been described by Ukrainian officials as the worst aerial strike of the war, involving 158 missiles and drones and a death toll of at least 39 people.

On Tuesday, Russia followed that attack with more than 130 missiles, 10 of which were Kinzhal missiles, and drones.
...
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Tuesday that since last Friday, the Russians have lobbed about 500 missiles and drones at his country.

The sheer number of weapons used is consistent with warnings from Ukrainian officials that Russia had been amassing weapons for larger air assaults and raises questions about both its stockpiles and production capabilities.
...
The sheer number of weapons used is consistent with warnings from Ukrainian officials that Russia had been amassing weapons for larger air assaults and raises questions about both its stockpiles and production capabilities.

Two things are happening. One, Russia has mobilized its defense industry for war-time production, an effort Western officials recently admitted they underestimated, and two, certain nations, such as North Korea and Iran, have partnered closely with Russia, supporting its war efforts.

Experts have previously assessed that Russia has upped its production of long-range munitions, among other weapons and systems.

"For Russia, the supply of strike munitions is increasing. In October 2022 Russia was producing approximately 40 long-range missiles a month. Now it is producing over 100 a month, and this is supplemented by large numbers of Geran-2 UAVs," Jack Watling, a land warfare expert at the Royal United Services Institute, wrote in an October report.

Justin Bronk, a fellow RUSI expert, recently made a similar assessment, noting that "Russia has now transitioned its economy onto a war footing."

"For much of the year, Russian forces in Ukraine have been suffering from significant shortages of vehicles, weapons and above all ammunition," he wrote in December. "However, from a low point in the spring, Russia's military supply situation has been steadily improving."
...
the Ministry noted, adding that "Russian planners almost certainly recognize the growing importance of relative defense industrial capacity as they prepare for a long war."

And this is before yesterdays attack, and from the western sources so adjust for bias appropriately. Of course Russia is also trying to procure more missiles from anywhere it can. But hey if you want to believe that Russia is not ramping missile production, you're free to do so, i heard some "sources" even say that Russia will run out...soon.
 

According to the calculations of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, russia has exhausted about 50.7% of its missile arsenal.
only that's back from 23 Nov. 2022

RE movement at the front, all i know is that the consensus from all sides is that Ukraine is now on defensive
legendary
Activity: 2394
Merit: 1632
Do not die for Putin
January 13, 2024, 02:54:41 PM
Hmmm, i see, let me try explaining it to you a different way. I do not consider positive news from either side about itself as credible, as i do not consider negative news about the opponent from either side as credible. Logical no? Let me give you an example, Russian sources saying that Russia was withdrawing from Kherson (with whatever positive spin they tried to put on it) was credible and groundbreaking. Russia sources talking about some Russian supersoldier that single-handedly defeated battalions of Ukrainian soldiers, or how happy RU mobilized soldiers are that they're on the front lines are not so credible.  And this works the other way, The Guardian claiming that Russian economy is about to collapse, how RU military is just so demoralized, Putin is terminally ill/already dead/clone/Hilter/Nazi is not so credible, The Guarding covering US neo-Nazis leaving Ukraine in credible. Each side will exaggerate news positive to them, but will reluctantly cover and will try to soften negative news by trying to put some positive spin on it.



Ukraine suffered a large Russian missile attack in the early hours of Saturday, while its air defences were able to down a far lower proportion of them than usual.

According to Ukraine's air force, Russia launched 37 missiles and three drones. Eight missiles were downed, it said in a statement on social media.

The air force's spokesperson said earlier this week that Ukraine was now suffering from a deficit of air defence missiles. It was not immediately clear whether this or any other factor was the reason for the low hit rate.

Russia Regains Upper Hand in Ukraine’s East as Kyiv’s Troops Struggle

Ukrainians are weary, short of ammunition and outnumbered, and their prospects look bleak. “We can stop them for now, but who knows,” one soldier said. “Tomorrow or the next day, maybe we can’t stop them.”
...
Ukraine’s military prospects are looking bleak. Western military aid is no longer assured at the same levels as years past. Ukraine’s summer counteroffensive in the south, where Jaeger was wounded days after it began, is over, having failed to meet any of its objectives.

And now, Russian troops are on the attack, especially in the country’s east. The town of Marinka has all but fallen. Avdiivka is being slowly encircled. A push on Chasiv Yar, near Bakhmut, is expected. Farther north, outside Kupiansk, the fighting has barely slowed since the fall.

The joke among Ukrainian troops goes like this: The Russian army is not good or bad. It is just long. The Kremlin has more of everything: more men, ammunition and vehicles. And they are not stopping despite their mounting numbers of wounded and dead.
...
“Today we had two shells, but some days we don’t have any in these positions,” said the crew’s commander, who goes by the call sign Monk. “The last time we fired was four days ago, and that was only five shells.”
...
“I have two tanks, but only five shells,” said Italian, as he walked through a denuded tree line splintered by shelling about 500 yards from Russian positions in the Luhansk region. “It’s a bad situation now, especially in Avdiivka and Kupiansk.”

This ammunition imbalance has been felt across much of the more than 600-mile front line, Ukrainian soldiers said. The Russian units are in a position similar to the summer of 2022, where they can simply wear down a Ukrainian position until Kyiv’s forces run out of ordnance. But unlike that summer, there is no longer a frantic scramble in Western capitals to arm and re-equip Ukraine’s troops.

And unlike that summer, drones have assumed a much larger presence in the arsenal of both sides — especially the FPV racing drones affixed with explosives and used like remote-controlled missiles.
...
Outside Avdiivka, where Russian forces are concentrating much of their forces in the east, the rumble of artillery on one recent afternoon was almost nonstop. It was a soundtrack not heard since the war’s earlier months, when Russian paramilitary forces assaulted Bakhmut, eventually capturing it.
...
Washington’s suggestion for Ukraine to go on the defensive in 2024 will mean little if Kyiv does not have the ammunition or people to defend what territory it currently holds, analysts have said.

Low or no air defense to cover critical infrastructure (in the largest country in Europe besides Russia), with no prospects of increase against growing Russian missile production, and with Russia on the offensive at the front. But sure you can pretend that i'm just cherry picking, and that western news coverage has not pivoted and coverage is just the same as before. Denial is always an option, but as always at your peril.

RE ramping production from Ruzzia, hat is not what your "sources say", that is your making.Ruzzian production of missiles and use of them is evidently lower than last year in which there was a continuous destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure. Not the case this year.

Ruzzia at this point is using shells for North Korea (you may ask for view of their "effectiveness" and "user safety"), Iran and their own production. It is obvious Ruzzia alone cannot keep up with the rate they need to keep the pressure on Ukraine.

The NYT has been consistently publishing smear  articles about Ukraine as of late. None of what is says is unknown nor for that matter known in sufficient detail as to make a judgement of the situation. I have no doubt that Ukraine needs the West to free the aid promised, but if you want to speak of the front...

- Avdiivka, well, it is embarrassing for Ruzzia dude. They are Throwing everything they got and still unable to take it.
- Yes the fight near Kupiansk has not stopped. Ruzzia got nothing, but yes, the fight has not sttoped nor the loses.
- Vulhedar direction... well, Ruzzia has stopped trying pretty much...
- RE Chasiv Yar, sure the article says there are attacks in that direction. As there are in most directions, with plenty of rusty crap left behind to nearly no effect.

BTW, it seems that Putin's fund have started to be seized effectively - not frozen, but seized. No more "playing nice".



legendary
Activity: 2833
Merit: 1851
In order to dump coins one must have coins
January 13, 2024, 02:25:41 PM
Hmmm, i see, let me try explaining it to you a different way. I do not consider positive news from either side about itself as credible, as i do not consider negative news about the opponent from either side as credible. Logical no? Let me give you an example, Russian sources saying that Russia was withdrawing from Kherson (with whatever positive spin they tried to put on it) was credible and groundbreaking. Russia sources talking about some Russian supersoldier that single-handedly defeated battalions of Ukrainian soldiers, or how happy RU mobilized soldiers are that they're on the front lines are not so credible.  And this works the other way, The Guardian claiming that Russian economy is about to collapse, how RU military is just so demoralized, Putin is terminally ill/already dead/clone/Hilter/Nazi is not so credible, The Guarding covering US neo-Nazis leaving Ukraine in credible. Each side will exaggerate news positive to them, but will reluctantly cover and will try to soften negative news by trying to put some positive spin on it.



Ukraine suffered a large Russian missile attack in the early hours of Saturday, while its air defences were able to down a far lower proportion of them than usual.

According to Ukraine's air force, Russia launched 37 missiles and three drones. Eight missiles were downed, it said in a statement on social media.

The air force's spokesperson said earlier this week that Ukraine was now suffering from a deficit of air defence missiles. It was not immediately clear whether this or any other factor was the reason for the low hit rate.

Russia Regains Upper Hand in Ukraine’s East as Kyiv’s Troops Struggle

Ukrainians are weary, short of ammunition and outnumbered, and their prospects look bleak. “We can stop them for now, but who knows,” one soldier said. “Tomorrow or the next day, maybe we can’t stop them.”
...
Ukraine’s military prospects are looking bleak. Western military aid is no longer assured at the same levels as years past. Ukraine’s summer counteroffensive in the south, where Jaeger was wounded days after it began, is over, having failed to meet any of its objectives.

And now, Russian troops are on the attack, especially in the country’s east. The town of Marinka has all but fallen. Avdiivka is being slowly encircled. A push on Chasiv Yar, near Bakhmut, is expected. Farther north, outside Kupiansk, the fighting has barely slowed since the fall.

The joke among Ukrainian troops goes like this: The Russian army is not good or bad. It is just long. The Kremlin has more of everything: more men, ammunition and vehicles. And they are not stopping despite their mounting numbers of wounded and dead.
...
“Today we had two shells, but some days we don’t have any in these positions,” said the crew’s commander, who goes by the call sign Monk. “The last time we fired was four days ago, and that was only five shells.”
...
“I have two tanks, but only five shells,” said Italian, as he walked through a denuded tree line splintered by shelling about 500 yards from Russian positions in the Luhansk region. “It’s a bad situation now, especially in Avdiivka and Kupiansk.”

This ammunition imbalance has been felt across much of the more than 600-mile front line, Ukrainian soldiers said. The Russian units are in a position similar to the summer of 2022, where they can simply wear down a Ukrainian position until Kyiv’s forces run out of ordnance. But unlike that summer, there is no longer a frantic scramble in Western capitals to arm and re-equip Ukraine’s troops.

And unlike that summer, drones have assumed a much larger presence in the arsenal of both sides — especially the FPV racing drones affixed with explosives and used like remote-controlled missiles.
...
Outside Avdiivka, where Russian forces are concentrating much of their forces in the east, the rumble of artillery on one recent afternoon was almost nonstop. It was a soundtrack not heard since the war’s earlier months, when Russian paramilitary forces assaulted Bakhmut, eventually capturing it.
...
Washington’s suggestion for Ukraine to go on the defensive in 2024 will mean little if Kyiv does not have the ammunition or people to defend what territory it currently holds, analysts have said.

Low or no air defense to cover critical infrastructure (in the largest country in Europe besides Russia), with no prospects of increase against growing Russian missile production, and with Russia on the offensive at the front. But sure you can pretend that i'm just cherry picking, and that western news coverage has not pivoted and coverage is just the same as before. Denial is always an option, but as always at your peril.
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 1375
Slava Ukraini!
January 13, 2024, 02:01:37 PM
Remember when more than year ago Russia were spreading narrative that Europe is going to freeze without Russian gas in winter? Well, it didn't happened, but now something similar happening in various parts of Russia:
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-cold-heating/32770198.html
https://theins.ru/news/268286
282 houses in Liptesk stays without heating, -30°C tonight. Karma is bitch.

Our town has welcomed around 500 Ukrainian refugees and they all seem to be nice people unlike most of the fake refugees that came from parts of Africa. Both Ukrainian and Russian people should leave their countries en masse and let the glorious leaders on both sides and their families fight each other to the death and go back when they are finished.
There is one difference between Ukrainian and African refugess. First one is really running away from war, second one is mostly just searching for better life and want to live from benefits. Though, significant part of Ukrainians belongs to second category too.
But how you can imagine almost all people of Ukraine and Russia leaving their countries? It's impossible.
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
January 12, 2024, 06:00:42 PM
Hmmm, i see, let me try explaining it to you a different way. I do not consider positive news from either side about itself as credible, as i do not consider negative news about the opponent from either side as credible. Logical no? Let me give you an example, Russian sources saying that Russia was withdrawing from Kherson (with whatever positive spin they tried to put on it) was credible and groundbreaking. Russia sources talking about some Russian supersoldier that single-handedly defeated battalions of Ukrainian soldiers, or how happy RU mobilized soldiers are that they're on the front lines are not so credible.  And this works the other way, The Guardian claiming that Russian economy is about to collapse, how RU military is just so demoralized, Putin is terminally ill/already dead/clone/Hilter/Nazi is not so credible, The Guarding covering US neo-Nazis leaving Ukraine in credible. Each side will exaggerate news positive to them, but will reluctantly cover and will try to soften negative news by trying to put some positive spin on it.

Pages:
Jump to: