That’s exactly the question. Nobody here believes anything you say. We all see you for what you are. We all know you’re completely full of shit, with regular detours into being a total asshole. Nothing you write is taken seriously. Every one of your points is dismissed and mocked. Correctly, I should mention, because you are, indeed, absolutely full of shit.
And yet here you are, bringing your pro-Russian propaganda and conspiracy nonsense to the thread, continuously dumping it into the discussion like you’re spooning dogshit into the punchbowl at a party. Precisely nobody is drinking from your punchbowl any more, but you nevertheless continuing ladling the feces into the fruit juice while everyone keeps their distance.
Maybe you’re a blithering idiot. Maybe you’re a masochist. Or maybe you think a massive escalation of Russian propaganda is the correct tactic for moving the needle of opinion in the face of wholesale dismissal; if only one word in a thousand is taken seriously, then by God you’ll write a million words to get that little sliver of a thousand into the conversation.
Is that what you’re doing? Are you attempting to throw your shoulder against the edifice of anti-Russian sentiment and trying to budge it by an inch or two, and regarding that as a success? What exactly are you trying to accomplish? If you’re just talking to yourself, then get a fucking blog. But you’re not. You’re talking to us. What do you think you’re going to achieve?
Because, buddy, all you’re really doing is repeatedly revealing yourself as a stupid shithead. Nobody here is fooled. Russia is committing an evil illegal act, period, full stop, and Ukraine is defending itself against Russia’s unjustified and unjustifiable invasion, period, full stop. Russian soldiers are war criminals and Putin is the mobster in chief. That’s it. The end.
I especially like the reply giving a detailed and reasoned analysis of your sources, and why these sources are incredibly poor.
Too bad you refuse to engage with this polite and educated response, and instead simply go with the “ha ha I trolled you” line.
Ah well, thanks to others in this thread, I learned some new things, so it’s all good.
My sources also include information from several of the sources you say are reliable. Also mainstream western media articles. Western military sources. They will also readily admit when they have made mistakes. They pretty much do what you say is important to do. They often use the term, take it with a grain of salt, when reporting Russian and Ukraine MoD figures and others. Saying one should wait for corroboration from multiple sources. As soon as the next day, they will make corrections. The reports have depth. Ranging from 30 minutes to 2 hours. They inform of political and economic effects that ripple out across the world.
Several of my sources also have the same videos on Youtube. I prefer Odysee for lack of commercials as well as more freedom of speech.
A snippet from WIKI regarding ISW. ISW was founded in response to the stagnation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, with core funding provided by a group of defense contractors; it continues to be supported by defense contractors as well as private donations.
I suspect the ISW is just biased for war in general.
Hmm state run BBC. I guess state run media must be trustworthy then. Such as RT?
I note information from these sources as well. I apply skepticism to all sources. There are biases all round.
To be fair, if one wants to hear pro-Russian commentators outside the Russian language, one is, by definition, going to have to go to some pretty scummy and disreputable sources.
You realize the only evidence we see in your posts is skepticism towards the “bias” in Western media reports and think tanks, right? You seem to have no issues whatsoever accepting the information / bias provided by Russian-aligned sources.
I would suspect the Institute for the Study of War IS biased toward war, since studying war / conflict is their raison d’etre. I’m not saying they APPROVE of war; just that studying it is their stock in trade.
I don’t have any issue with Odysee as a channel; it’s the content provider(s) in which you put your faith that concern me.
As an American, I have an innate distrust of any state-run media. However, my personal ranking of state media places a much higher level of trust on media in democratic states, rather than media in authoritarian or totalitarian states. Surely you understand the rationale there.
I don’t recall if you’ve ever shared what country you call home. If you’re accustomed to living in an authoritarian or totalitarian state, I can understand your willingness to accept those types of viewpoints.
Still, though … it’s frustrating to see the level of cognitive dissonance you display.
BBC is not state-run. It’s funded by what’s effectively a tax, but the only connection to the government is the law passed to provide the funding base.
I responded to one of his posts a while ago (last year?), saying his surname is one letter different from the surname of a guy I worked with decades ago. The coworker was of Croatian descent. Kedikat did not respond.
The general news source bias definitely represented in this thread is.
If it does not say Ukraine is winning, it is false and biased.
The facts do not reflect that Ukraine is winning. The facts are unbiased.
That is because the purpose of this thread is to debunk Russian propagandizing disinformation (usually spouted by one particular poster) and since Russia tends to dis-inform in the direction of Russia winning, that debunking will come in the from of evidence from legitimate news sources that Ukraine is winning. However if you still lurk in the MPSIMS Ukraine thread you will find many posts (example) that suggest a not so rosy view of Ukraine’s chances, these are not generally challenged because they also come from legitimate news sources, unlike your posts, which is why you were banned from posting in that thread.
Why you cannot trust official Russian sources: it is absolutely routine to fake evidence of successful operations. This isn’t looked down upon, unless you get caught doing it. In fact, your superiors will be pissed off if you don’t submit puffed up reports, because it will make them look bad that their units don’t have such rosy reports.
I often make a point of noting there are folks who post very good information here and on the other one. They often clarify things well. Have personal experience in the military. I often follow their links to sites. I regularly read the other thread. I have noted that I think it has improved. Still a lot of goofy zingers and such. They flog a good wise crack to death.
Even mainstream western media and sources are saying the situation is not good for Ukraine. For the reasons that my sources have been noting all along. Resource imbalance. At the early stages it was actually in Ukraine favour. But it has shifted very much the other way.
Who could possibly have imagined that the same kleptocracy which promoted submitting fake maintenance reports on work never done on vehicles and equipment in peacetime and false fuel consumption reports for exercises never conducted so that the fuel could be sold on the black market in peacetime would promote submitting fake after action reports of enemy losses to puff up how their unit looks in wartime? I mean who? It’s inconceivable!
Do you recall that Ukraine was rated the most corrupt country in Europe for many years? Was still very bad in 2022. Russia was still ranked worse than even Ukraine. But I suspect Ukraine military had its issues as well.
Hey dumbass, the difference between corruption in Ukraine and corruption in Russia is Ukrainians can actually acknowledge it, criticize it and demand it change without worrying about falling out of windows or being sent to penal colonies.
Want a demonstration of the difference between your sources which are a combination of Kremlin propaganda shills, flat out conspiracy nutjobs and the ultra-Z and things Ukrainians who are free to say what they want?
I’ve been watching him pretty much every day since the war 72-hour special military operation began. Is he biased in favor of wanting Ukraine to win? Of course he fucking is. Does he report on Ukrainian failures and Russian successes? Yes. Does he criticize corruption in his government without fear of arrest or falling out a window? Also yes.
Ooops, that’s actually 12th worst in the world. Russia ranks behind such bastions of freedom as Libya, Somalia and Afghanistan with a human rights score of 9. Ukraine is in the middle of the pack with a score of 5.8. (Norway leads with a score of 0.3)
Of course, Ukraine probably gets a boost for not invading its neighbors to gratify the ego of a mob boss.