Can we hold our own
A good question and disturbing.
Certainly too many fell for the voter fraud idiocy in the USA and too many for the Brexit bus in Britain.
As a hybrid offline and online war wages on in Ukraine, Viktor Zhora, who leads the country's cybersecurity agency, has had a front-row seat of it all. Zhora is the deputy chairman and chief digital transformation officer at Ukraine's state service of special communication and information protection. Cyber aggression from …
Whenever the real money-shot question is more about about defending or attacking arrogant entrenched institutional and constitutional incompetence, which has everything to do with inspiring and maintaining a vital air of foreign market confidence, ..... and currently you might like to ponder on the present UKGBNI choice for courses of action with regard to what its representative government bodies/civil service agencies and supposedly democratically elected Parliamentarians are mired in, and failing so spectacularly to resolve satisfactorily to the mutually beneficial greater benefit of all ...... that one simple wrong choice has always anyone’s oven ready solution cremated to a frazzle and rendered as nothing more useful or substantial than a light dusting of pixie dust, and by all manner of wonderfully novel ESPecial and indefensibly extreme EMPathetic means and memes nowadays, with all of these exotic and erotic places and spaces with 0days and vulnerabilities to impart and exploit, export/import to and fro their fail-safe secured harbours and launch sites within.
And because it would be grossly and criminally unfair to not express the correct answer to the question of whether we can hold our own in defence of the former against any of the latter, be hereby advised and assured, categorically and unambiguously, .... No, you cannot. It is not possible. Do not venture down that root route of self-harming perils delivering total annihilation exercising displays of ignominious defeat and abject terror and horror.
And now that that dire type of Red Weather Warning has been surely very clearly Registered for global sharing, can all be assured of what to expect and be prepared for, and who and/or what is to be found fully responsible and accountable and prosecutable for any and all subsequent losses/trials and tribulations/dodgy trails and mass capitulations, .... or otherwise as the case can be, ..... because of their thoughts and proposals for a course of future realised action and virtual engagement.
:-) Take care out there. IT is a Mined Mind Field which Suffers and Offers Entertainment and Exercise with Titanic Follies of Almighty Useful Fools Equipped with Vast Arrays of Blunted and Stunted Tools.
Yeah, Pelosi claiming Trump didn't win in 2016, Stacey Abrams claims in 2018 and all the pro-EU sheep that keep citing a bus that I haven't heard a single Leave supporter say was influential.
You could also have mentioned the Russia collusion hoax and a myriad of claims regarding COVID vaccinations.
Meanwhile Ukraine is doing an excellent job of managing its online presence, generating memes galore and easily skewering the Russian disinformation. But Ukraine isn't fighting against the massed forces of big tech and big media.
... Like the Ghost of Kiev?
Information is as much the fault of lazy people as it is malign governments. ALL governments put out propaganda (especially after the Smith-Munt act was partially repealed by Obama...)
If one parties propaganda is challenged by any other entity, it is mis dis or mal information.... If the propaganda is a State then you get https://www.cisa.gov/mdm
"These Kremlin-pushed false narratives ran the gamut from accusing Ukrainian "Nazis" of being the aggressors and committing war crimes in this conflict"
We just sweeping an 8 year civil war under the rug? How about 8 years of western reporters hand-wringing over the support for neonazis in ukraine? Hundreds of photos of Nazi insignia? Just gonna pretend that US Congress didn't ban funding for Azov in 2015 because of their national socialist doctrine? How about the ultranationalist National Corps Party, political wing of Azov battalion? The leader of that group from 2014-19, MP Andriy Biletsky, said that the mission of Ukraine is to "lead the white races of the world in a final crusade… against Semite-led Untermenschen"? This is honestly pretty disgusting, how the truth can be twisted for print...and why? What are you motives? Do you know you can condemn Russian aggression without resorting to propaganda in support of self-avowed national socialists? How come no one can accept the possibility that not every conflict is good vs bad?
Strange. I don't remember such "hand wringing reports." Perhaps I read real news, not "fake" news sites...
What I do remember is footage and reports of an illegal invasion and seizing of Crimea from Ukraine, ala Israel and Palestine, and similarly brushed aside by the Americans, who never really defend their vaunted "freedoms", but just use that as an excuse to seize oil fields and assets while "helping" foreign nations.
I mostly read mainstream newspapers, and I don't recall any particular hand-wringing. Azov neo-nazis made the news, and it's a topic that got discussed even during the war.
It's not front page news, and it shouldn't be. Banging on and on about a small minority of loud neo-nazis, something that plenty of Western countries also have, now that would have been propaganda - and of course Kremlin-influenced sources do bang on and on about them. But in reality, Azov couldn't even win a single seat in Parliament, not even by allying themselves with other nutjobs. They are worth looking into every now and then, but that's pretty much it.
Thinking for even a second that Azov justifies Russian claims, or that mainstream media is "hiding" Azov just because it's not on the front page, now that is falling for propaganda.
But in reality, Azov couldn't even win a single seat in Parliament, not even by allying themselves with other nutjobs. They are worth looking into every now and then, but that's pretty much it.
Why would they need to get elected? Sure, they tried, and the Ukrainian people said 'No!'. But that's the problem with democracy. You can just ignore it and get your people installed as governors, police chiefs, heads of departments etc. Or just act as 'bodyguards' for the president-
https://strategic-culture.org/news/2022/09/21/zelensky-quietly-deletes-photo-of-his-bodyguard-pro-hitler-patch/
A closer look at the R3ICH’s “Operator Skull” patch reveals an even more disturbing detail: a skeleton key displayed on the top right of the helmet is a clear reference to SS Division Leibstandarte, or Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler — Hitler’s personal bodyguard unit. The unit later evolved into a Panzer, or armored tank division and, like the Totenkopf, participated in several invasions throughout Europe and the Soviet Union.
There were rumors that Zelensky's backers told him in no uncertain terms that negotiating peace would lead to his death. Easily achieved if your potential executioners are your minders. Also please don't shoot the messenger. That website was the first one I found that had the photo still, and explains the significance of that badge. Zelensky's photo op in Izyum was widely publicised by MSM that wiki may regard as 'reliable sources', but now seems to have gone, or replaced by an altered version. That's perhaps significant in itself because as soon as people started asking 'why is that guy wearing an SS badge?', it vanished.
That's also somewhat true of Azov in general. Here's another example-
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/the-merciless-ukrainian-partisans-sowing-death-and-destruction-behind-enemy-lines/ar-AA138f3A
Ukraine's partisan fighters are behind many of Kyiv's most successful attacks on Russian territory including strikes deep in Crimea and assassinations of collaborating officials.
With a group of non-uniformed partisans standing in front of their wolfsangel flag. That's the SS Panzer Division Das Reich's insignia. And Azov, who also used the 'black sun' symbol on their patch. Ukraine attempted to explain away those as meaning something else, but the 'black sun' should be pretty obvious as it's the exact design taken from the floor in Wewelsburg, where Himmler bought a castle for the SS. The black sun and sunwheel are old symbols used throughout history, but like the swastika itself, was corrupted by the Nazis, and now neo-nazis. It's hard to explain away that specific version because it was designed for the SS, probably to exagerate the sig runes they loved so much. But it also became part of the ideology espoused by Wilhem Landig and his 'Landig Group', where it was used as a substitute for the swastika. Plus a bunch of other esoteric mumbo jumbo, like Thule etc.
So not a good look. And again, that presumably was recognised given if you click through the MSN link to the DM's article-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11331033/The-merciless-Ukrainian-partisans-sowing-death-destruction-enemy-lines.html
The flag has gone from the article, but is still in the video. People who lived in Mariupol know all about the death and destruction Azov sowed amongst 'collaborators', ie anyone who spoke Russian, or disagreed with Kiev's rule. But when Mariupol was under siege, these became 'heroes' that we were supposed to praise for their valiant defence of a steelwork's basement.
Sorry, but no. I do not cheer for nazis or neo-nazis because it's a rabid ideology that needs to be stamped on. Hard.
Ukraine eventually realised Azov's iconography was.. problematic, and gave Azov a makeover to remove their nazi insignia. It's a bit awkward to have your 'special' forces wearing that. But some still use it, either officially or unofficially like the 'partisans' are. But there are also historical parallels, eg the role of 'heroes' like Stepan Bandera, and the work of Ukraine's OUN, who performed similar 'anti-partisan' activities during WW2. Working with Germany, and executing Poles, Jews, and of course Russians. Bandera seems to be regarded as a 'hero' in the West of Ukraine, and a war criminal/nazi collaborator by the south and east.
Those differences of opinion between regions is one of the key reasons behind the civil war and the current conflict because many Ukrainians don't exactly agree with the idea of some far-right, ultra-nationalist Ukrainians. Hence their poor showing when they try to get elected. But they still have far too much power and influence. Pre-Russian invasion, the MSM used to report on Ukraine's far-right problems, now they seem to desperately deny them. And it's not just Azov, there's also Aidar, Kraken and more 'heroes' that seem to believe in the same ideology, and sport the same symbology.
And there's more-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashism
So Ruscism is a concept that will go into the history books, it will be in Wikipedia, it will be [studied] in classes
from a speech by Zelensky. He was right about it being in Wiki, but then anyone can create a wiki page, and edit it. But in Ukraine, it's a more socially acceptable way to justify being racist towards Russians. It's a little more civilised than referring to Russians as 'Orcs', because Tolkien wrote orcs as being subhumans. There was another chap during WW2 who had similar views about some races, and really hated Slavs. So much so that he murdered millions of them, sometimes with the help of Ukrainians.
But such is history and psychology. Amazon's made their Orcs white in their Bored of the RIngs. Sometimes psychology is used crudely. Like with Rashism/Ruscism. A state that's banning Russian language, literature and media to promote it's own version of Ukrainian nationalism is by no means 'facist'. Banning political parties, locking up political opponents and reporters is by no means facist, or authoritarian.
Except of course it is, but that's the problem with history and politics. Here in the UK, we still have neo-nazis and facists. One tends to get locked away for public safety by the police and security services, the other gets promoted by the MSM. So we have various anti-oil, meat and milk facists glueing themselves to roads, oil paintings or just throwing milk around like spoiled brats. They make demands to ban stuff, or just completely overhaul our political system and replace it with their own (or their leaders) extremely Marxist ideology. And much as in Ukraine, when they try to do the democracy thing, they do badly. So screw democracy, break out the superglue and selfie-sticks because they'll get publicity. Even though their political views are extremely authoritarian, making them the thing they claim to hate, ie facists.
So it's all a little strange. Our MSM promotes facism and ultra-nationalism when it's happening here and in Ukraine, but also whines about the dangers of 'extremism' in the US if anyone even things of voting for Trump, or the Republicans. Reality is probably very simple. We, ie our political elite just don't care what happens to Ukrainians given they're our proxy in our eternal fight against Russia. Our political elite have different priorities, like 'Net Zero'. So they make it illegal to buy oil & gas, even though our economies depend on it. It's a good thing, because it accelerates decarbonisation. We suffer, they don't. And the EU's going full retard.
Ursula von der Lyer just came out with a statement that having banned Russian resources from the EU, 'we' must now also stop the EU's dependence on China's resources. Yey! Slight snag. Between Russia and China, that's most of the world's raw resources, many of which we don't have in the EU. So France is saying 'Non!' to sanctioning Russian uranium, because they need it for their reactors. And Russia & China own or control much of the world's fuel rod production. Or there's useful stuff like titanium that Airbus wants. Or all those rare earths. So not entirely sure how Ursula expects the EU to become self-sufficient, without doing popular stuff like strip mining. Except as a result of Europe's industrial expansion and a few wars, Europe's already used up most of it's easily accessable strategic minerals.
But politicians rarely think through the implications of their demands. Well, at least until we have a 'winter of discontent' due to their insane policies, and they're removed. I wonder how many slightly used Prime Ministers we'll have ended up producing by the end of 2022? Sadly little economic benefit, other than for themselves, and they've produced an awful lot of economic harm that we'll be feeling for a few years yet.
Some uncomfortable facts there to be waged as errant nonsensical fiction, Jellied Eel, in an effort to create an untenable virtual reality distortion field ? Have an upvote for its generous sharing.
Yes, and a remote godsend for both the serious moron and easily led idiot alike, in all of their very strange guises ....... https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/soros-thornton-hawke-new-book-details-how-beijing-manipulated-western-elites ..... for who in their right mind plans not to trade top secrets in order to render conflict unlikely with the search for extra special and sensitive information for intelligence clearly provided as simple common sense for global general knowledge?
Some uncomfortable facts there to be waged as errant nonsensical fiction, Jellied Eel, in an effort to create an untenable virtual reality distortion field ? Have an upvote for its generous sharing.
The world is getting increasingly weird. Great example, again from the Bbc here-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63357393
And on Saturday a new directive from occupying Russian authorities was released, renewing its appeal for civilians to leave "immediately".
The transfer or deportation of civilians by an occupying power from occupied territory is considered a war crime. In September, the UN said there were already credible accusations of forced deportation of Ukrainian children from Russian-occupied areas.
First bit is a little confusing. Is it a 'directive', and order, or is it an appeal, or request? If Russia is asking, then it's presumably not forcibly transfering or deporting civilians from a war zone. Even if it is, should it be considered a 'war crime', when Kherson seems very likely to become the scene of some very intense fighting. I guess if Ukrainian civilians remain there, then they can become 'human shields', or killed by 'Russian artillery', because Ukraine will obviously not be using a lot of artillery against the fortifications Russia and previously Ukraine have built there.
Removing the civilians to reduce casualties should arguably be a good thing to any humanitarian, so why is it being considered a 'war crime'? Technically, it could be, especially if civilians aren't allowed to return once the dust has settled. Russia's apparently also being pretty generous, ie offering land and housing pretty much anywhere in Russia to civilians that are being evacuated. Which is in Russia's interests, especially as demographic drift has resulted in it's own population shifting to the bright lights of the big cities. In the past, it's offered free land in places like Siberia, and one thing Russia isn't short of is land.
It's also been, and will be a huge problem for any future Ukraine. It's been depopulating for years, and that's just accelerated. There's been interviews with Ukrainian refugees here in the UK talking about how they're looking for work. If they don't intend to return, Ukraine's lost even more of it's population and labour force at a time when it'll need a lot of reconstruction and has accumulated a lot of debt. That's less of a problem for the West because Ukraine will just get asset stripped when it defaults. So it'll end up in EU ownership, even if it's people see few of the benefits.
I do feel sorry for most Ukrainians given they've experienced some of what will come already, ie the forced removal of heating and energy subsidies to comply with EU policies raising their cost of living. Like in our own countries as a result of sanctions, things are only going to get worse thanks to our 'leaders'.
I also suspect the narrative is changing. More people are questioning the wisdom of pouring billions into Ukraine, and the consequences of our elite's decisions. That's being reflected in elections across Europe, will probably be in the US mid-terms, and protests are growing. So Ukraine will probably be quietly abandoned to deal with new threats. Cue Iran, now plastered over the news for 'supply drones', and being 'party to the conflict'. So the focus may shift there. Which will almost certainly result in a repeat of the Tanker Wars. Maybe some LNG tankers exploding. Very photo/telegenic. Also very profitable for US gas exporters, even if exporting gas and oil from the US raises their own domestic prices. That's capitalism at it's finest.
As for China, I guess it's patiently watching, probably laughing, and considering the appropriate time to bring Taiwan back into the fold. And with the West's weapons and POL stocks severely depleted, there probably won't be much we can do to stop that. It might delay the release of the next iPhone, but manufacturers have also been shifting production to places like Vietnam due to rising labor costs in Taiwan and China.
I also suspect the narrative is changing. More people are questioning the wisdom of pouring billions into Ukraine, and the consequences of our elite's decisions.
This is literally the message behind Russian propaganda. Give us Ukraine [now; and then some small eastern European nations when we've digested our current conquests] and we'll give you cheap energy, stop disrupting your economy, and stop deliberately trying to cause civil unrest in your country.
Russia is desperately hanging on in the eastern part of Ukraine and losing so badly that it's shoving anybody it can (including convicts) into the meat grinder in the hope that people like you will turn around and give Russia whatever it wants in exchange for cheap energy now, and a bigger war in the future when Russia is more ready for it.
Giving Russia what it wants would be insane, as would allowing Russia the Ukrainian arms industry to start building back up for taking it's next slice of Europe, unless your actual aim is to end with conscripting another generation in the west to send to die in some random village in the east of Europe that you probably couldn't find on a map. If the price of avoiding this is handing over weapons to the Ukrainians to use and higher energy prices for the next year or two then so be it.
As for China, I guess it's patiently watching, probably laughing, and considering the appropriate time to bring Taiwan back into the fold. And with the West's weapons and POL stocks severely depleted, there probably won't be much we can do to stop that.
China is doing anything but laughing as increasingly pissed off and critical comments about Russia indicate. They won't be invading Taiwan any time soon; and in any case the defining weapon of choice in that war will be anti ship missiles; which we aren't gifting to Ukraine in any serious quantity because the Russian fleet is hiding out of range since their flagship went down to an anti ship missile.
Also, our POL stocks are higher than they were at the start of the war; topping off Europe's gas reserves is the reason why gas prices have been so high and now reserves are pretty much full prices are now falling.
This is literally the message behind Russian propaganda. Give us Ukraine [now; and then some small eastern European nations when we've digested our current conquests] and we'll give you cheap energy, stop disrupting your economy, and stop deliberately trying to cause civil unrest in your country.
Alternatively, the message behind our propaganda is that if we don't sacrifice Ukrainians, we'll be next! Which rather overlooks the challenges Russia would have in invading a much more populated country like Poland. Or why it would want to in the first place. The thing people forget about Russia is it's fricking HUGE, full of useful natural resources, and very sparsely populated. It also has a law that the Russian military can't just go invading small defenceless countries at the whim of it's President. Unlike other nations. Sure, it kinda cheated a bit, hence the creation of Wagner as a way to intervene without breaking it's own laws. We do the same. We've also disrupted our own economy, and the economies of our allies. We decided to stop buying oil & gas from Russia, along with all the other sanctions that have backfired so spectacularly. We also deliberately cause civil unrest in other countries, as we did when we created the Ukraine coup in 2014, leading to the mess we're in now.
Russia is desperately hanging on in the eastern part of Ukraine and losing so badly that it's shoving anybody it can (including convicts) into the meat grinder
Alternatively, Russia is doing what it said it would, and working to demilitarise Ukraine. Russia has stated repeatedly that it's policy is to conserve it's own forces and equipment. Which it pretty much has to given it's so far committed very few troops to this venture. If it's successful in eliminating Ukraine's ability to wage war, it can take territory at it's leisure because Ukraine will no longer have the manpower to defend it. We were expected to cheer as Ukraine charged into the east, like a modern day Light Brigade. Sorry, not cheering here. Ukraine's been forced into extending it's supply lines, out of it's pre-prepared defences and sustained horrific losses. Much as it has been around Kherson. Russia has been conducting a war of attrittion that's resulting in thousands of dead Ukrainians.
The whole convict/conscript thing is also a bit of a meme. Wagner was recruiting from a military prison, and most of the new forces Russia's committing are reservists. So they're much the same as our TA, National Guard or general reservists. So people with previous military experience who have been called back into service. Again this is another problem for Ukraine. It's gone through 7 or 8 rounds of drafts. is out of reserves, and has been conscripting untrained people to send into their meat grinder. And again, the consequences of that policy have been brutal.
Giving Russia what it wants would be insane, as would allowing Russia the Ukrainian arms industry to start building back up for taking it's next slice of Europe, unless your actual aim is to end with conscripting another generation in the west to send to die in some random village in the east of Europe that you probably couldn't find on a map.
Snag with that idea is Russia knew it had pretty much lost access to Ukraine's arms industry in 2014. Or earlier, when Ukraine became independent. It may have assumed there would be trade, but it also became increasingly self-reliant. We, of course accelerated this with all the sanctions. We'll stop Russia by banning stuff we need! Ha! That'll show them! Except of course it didn't, because Putin invested in it's military capacity while we let ours run down. Oops. We've also run down our miltary budgets and reduced the manpower across all services, so the only option would be to conscript. But our militaries are struggling to recruit, or recruit candidates that are willing and able to fight. Being awake doesn't exactly match the characteristics needed to be an effective Para or Royal Marine.
...the defining weapon of choice in that war will be anti ship missiles; which we aren't gifting to Ukraine in any serious quantity because the Russian fleet is hiding out of range since their flagship went down to an anti ship missile.
Ukraine doesn't have a Navy, so Russia doesn't need to use anti-ship missiles in that conflict. Sure, the loss of the Moskva was a bit embarassing, but also predictable given the honking great tubes of exploding stuff hanging off it's sides. Taiwan would likely be different given Western anti-ship missiles need platforms to launch from, and China's been investing heavily in.. guess what?
Also, our POL stocks are higher than they were at the start of the war; topping off Europe's gas reserves is the reason why gas prices have been so high and now reserves are pretty much full prices are now falling.
POL stands for Petrol, Oil and Lubricants. All the stuff a military needs to run smoothly. The European 'gas' reserves are for methane, which the military doesn't really use. To produce fuel, oil, lubricants it does need, you need oil. Which our loony politicians are busily trying to ban because fossil fuel bad! Or an essential strategic resource. On which point, the US has been busily flogging off it's Strategic Reserve, oddly enough to China. That reserve was created to help the US win wars, not votes. Then again, it's becoming a bit redundant because if you can't refine oil into the fractions and distillates you need, what's the point hoarding it?
Honestly, are you managing to keep a straight face while writing this? I wouldn't be able to.
Simple really. Play poker, use botox, give yourself Bells Palsy. Or I read Supreme Court rulings for fun. There's an ancient tradition of teaching people how to debate. Consider both sides of an argument, argue them, let the audience decide who made the most compelling argument. Doesn't necessarily mean it's right, but did pretty much evolve into our judicial system. Or just politics. After all, they're regularly called on to lie with a straight face.
But it's like the article explains. Ukraine doesn't like anyone challenging it's narratives/propaganda. The Ghost of Kiev really was real. The heroes of Snake Island were resurrected. It lies, Russia lies, we lie. If we only allow one narrative, how or why would we expect to ever learn the truth? Minitruth declares that 97% of scientists have determined the Earth really is flat. Anyone who states otherwise will be taken away and shot, or sent to the nearest gulag. Which Russia kinda did at one point when a chap called Lysenko decided the science.
Anway.. The latest meme seems to involve dirty bombs. Someone should wipe them. With a cloth. I digress. So it's currently devolved into one of those childish playground debates, expect we normally don't let kids play with nukes. Dirty bombs aren't hard to make. Fake dirty bombs are even easier given Ukraine could just sprinkle some soil hauled in from Chernobyl, have some folks in NBC gear with dosimeters and you've got quick & dirty WMD attack. Then let the Screaming Eagles fly over the border and create a quick buffer zone.
Problem with Hollywood is it relies too much on repeat, ie this scenario would be too much like what happened in Syria with it's highly telegraphed 'chemical attack' red lines followed by staged chemical attacks. But people have short attention spans. Then again, Russia has repeatedly warned that Ukraine is not Syria, and a light infantry unit isn't likely to last long. But then we're back into the territory of having real nukes flying around.
For the angry thumbs. You support Ukraine. I get that. If you're between 18-50, of any gender, would you support being drafted and sent there to fight Russia?
There's an ancient tradition of teaching people how to debate. Consider both sides of an argument, argue them, let the audience decide who made the most compelling argument.
The thing is, Russia's concept of propaganda is to convince people that there is no such thing as truth. Their reaction to being caught in a situation that is definitely "black" is to claim that actually it's "white" and then try and exploit the grey fallacy to persuade you that the situation is a different shade of grey, and of course they are lying, but so is the other side and it's impossible to tell exactly what the situation actually is.
The situation actually is that Russia started a war of conquest with no provocation other than Ukraine was doing so well economically that it was worth plundering to reform the Soviet Union because might makes right.
Except that Russia has conclusively demonstrated that if might makes right, then they are neither mighty or right and that they are caught lying so frequently that if you weigh things with a filter of "this person has been caught lying 95 times; is this 96th statement likely to be true?" then you come to the conclusion that Russian propaganda isn't worth reading because it deliberately bears no relationship to actual reality and tries to mentally tie you up in knots.
If you're between 18-50, of any gender, would you support being drafted and sent there to fight Russia?
The general point and purpose of giving Ukraine the weapons to defend themselves from the Russians is so that they'll use them and we won't have any cause to end up using them ourselves.
And looking at how Russia has run out of T90's, T80's, T72's on the frontline and is now fielding T62's and WW2 equipment stocks, it appears to be working rather effectively.
The thing is, Russia's concept of propaganda is to convince people that there is no such thing as truth.
No, that's the Bbc's job. See for example-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63383605
That two separate points on the same pipeline have been damaged in ways that are consistent with sabotage points to occupying Russian forces deliberately cutting off the water supply to Mykolaiv.
The BBC shared its evidence with experts to assess the legality of such a move.
A UN expert, speaking anonymously because of having no authorisation to talk publicly on the subject, says the Mykolaiv water pipeline would be classified within the specially protected category of "objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population" under international humanitarian law, making any sabotage of it illegal.
The evidence appears to suggest that yes, it was blown up. There doesn't appear to be any evidence who blew it up. The Bbc does helpfully steer the viewer to the conclusion that sabotaging water supplies might be illegal. But wait, what's this?
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-ukraine-blocking-water-supply-crimea-european-lawsuit-2021-07-22/
It said Ukraine had blocked the North Crimean Canal, which supplies fresh water to Crimea, and has been described as a potential flashpoint between Moscow and Kyiv.
And..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Crimean_Canal
After the Maidan revolution and the subsequent Russian annexation of Crimea, Ukrainian authorities greatly cut the volume of water flowing into Crimea via the canal, citing a huge outstanding debt on water supplies owed by the peninsula.[5] This included a semi-secret project organized by presidential aide Andriy Senchenkoto that built a dam across the entire canal south of Kalanchak, about 10 miles (16 km) north of the Crimean border, which began a severe water crisis in Crimea [uk].[6] The reduction caused the peninsula's agricultural harvest which is heavily dependent on irrigation to fail in 2014
And then in I think the first week of the current conflict, Russia seized control of the canal, blew the dam and restored the water supply to Crimea. But the Bbc does appear to have confirmed that Ukraine's previous hydrological warfare probably was, in fact illegal. Not to mention one of the reasons Russia gave for it's own regime change operation.
Propaganda is, by it's very nature, one-sided reporting. The Bbc, by it's very nature is supposed to be 'neutral', not Minitruth. So again a credibility thing. The Bbc is the UK's state broadcaster. It's supposed to be a 'reliable source'. When it stops being that, what's the impact on it's reputation, or the reputation of the UK in general?
And looking at how Russia has run out of T90's, T80's, T72's on the frontline and is now fielding T62's and WW2 equipment stocks, it appears to be working rather effectively.
Has it? There appear to have been a lot of videos showing those tanks on rail cars heading in the general direction of Ukraine's border still. Russia had a LOT of tanks. At the outset, so did Ukraine. It had enough to sell a bunch to S.Sudan and got a little embarrassed when pirates hijacked a ship carrying a bunch. It used to build 'Russian' tanks around Kharkiv, a point overlooked during the post-2014 unpleasentness when 'Russian T-72s' were spotted in Ukraine. They were also very easy to spot parked up and rusting at Ukraine's tank works.
Now, Ukraine has far fewer tanks and the number is reducing by the day. I think it was Slovakia that was sending them T-55's, enough to last about a week at the previous tempo. Sure, Russia has been using T-62s, but mostly in an assault gun role, ie mobile artillery. But our 'experts' have assured us that Russia ran out of equipment back in March.
The situation actually is that Russia started a war of conquest with no provocation other than Ukraine was doing so well economically that it was worth plundering to reform the Soviet Union because might makes right.
I think you're demonstrating the dangers of crude propaganda. There's an awful lot of economic data that shows the exact opposite, and it's economy and corruption levels had pretty much been in free-fall since the 2014 coup. A situation not entirely helped by EU and IMF policy post 2014. But that's the way the world sadly works. It was lured by the bright lights and deep pockets of the EU. It discovered that pivoting in the direction of Brussels meant it lost it's main trading partner, and was never going to get full and unfettered access to the EU market. So it learned about EU agricultural policies and quotas as an example, or the way removing subsidies from it's energy impacted it's population.
And of course the situation for typical Ukrainian citizens has got much, much worse since then. The elite are doing just fine. The billions being poured into Ukraine with no accountability are ending up... somewhere.
And Russia & China own or control much of the world's fuel rod production.
No, it's just that Russia produces fuel rods for far, far less than anybody else can make them for so most people bought from them.
My personal suspicion is that they have been simply turning the 6k nuclear weapons the soviet union had into fuel by processing highly enriched uranium downwards into a lower fuel grade and selling the result, which would account for being able to make fuel rods cheaper than anybody else can processing "upwards" from lower to higher grade uranium.
Either way, it's not of any great significance, as they cease to be a trusted supplier then other people will get the work. It's not that we can't do the job, it's simply that they are cheaper and the market tends to go for the cheap option.
My personal suspicion is that they have been simply turning the 6k nuclear weapons the soviet union had into fuel by processing highly enriched uranium downwards into a lower fuel grade and selling the result,
No need to be suspicious. That's been done ever since SALT and the reductions in warheads. So those have steadily been reprocessed into fuel rods. More of that could be done given we've collectively got waaay more warheads left to end the world several times over.
Either way, it's not of any great significance, as they cease to be a trusted supplier then other people will get the work. It's not that we can't do the job, it's simply that they are cheaper and the market tends to go for the cheap option.
Ah, well, few snags with that. Like having uranium processing and/or enriching facilities. They're stonkingly expensive and tightly regulated, and potentially need things like breeder reactors. The UK had a plan to be a world leader in this space, but then one G.Brown Esq flogged it off, along with our gold reserves. It's not like coal where we can just shovel uranium out of the ground and chuck it into a reactor. Plus there's getting hold of the uranium itself given deposits are limited. Plus the US flogged off some of it's capability when Hilary Clinton approved the sale of Uranium-1 to.. err.. Russia. Of course that can be seized back, but the bigger problem is overcoming the decades of anti-nuclear propaganda, and the time it'll take to create a friendly nuclear fuel supply chain. It's also an area where switching tech to using Thorium instead would help ease proliferation concerns, and thorium's more widely available.
The Wagner Group (Russian: Группа Вагнера, romanized: Gruppa Vagnera), also known as PMC Wagner, ChVK Wagner,or CHVK Vagner is a Russian paramilitary organization. It is variously described as a private military company (PMC), a network of mercenaries, or a de facto private army of Russian President Vladimir Putin.Officially the group does not exist. While the Wagner Group itself is not ideologically driven,various elements of Wagner have been linked to neo-Nazis and far-right extremists [...]Various elements of Wagner have been linked to white supremacist and neo-Nazi far-right extremists, such as Wagner's openly far-right and neo-Nazi Rusich unit,and Wagner members have left neo-Nazi graffiti on the battlefield [...] The Wagner Group includes a contingent known as Rusich, or Task Force Rusich, referred to as a "sabotage and assault reconnaissance group", which has been fighting as part of the Russian separatist forces in eastern Ukraine.[Rusich are described as a far-right extremist or neo-Nazi unit,and their logo features a Slavic swastika.
== Bring us Dabbsy back! ==
Citation needed!
But you've combined whataboutery with propaganda, and potentially unreliable sources. Have you actually read the TSC report? If not, perhaps you should because it covers this problem on both Ukrainian and Russian sides-
https://thesoufancenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/TSC-Special-Report_Ukraine_April-2022.pdf
Also dunno why 'gaslighting' has become a thing when we're out of gas, and it's bad anyway.
Wagner Group raping and robbing in the CAR (BBC):
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-59699350
Wagner Group subsidiary Rusich openly ordering the torture and murder of Ukrainian POWs and civilians (Guardian):
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/02/pro-kremlin-neo-nazi-militia-inciting-torture-murder-ukrainian-prisoners
Wagner Group mercenaries using neo-Nazi graffiti and wearing SS emblems on their uniforms (Time):
https://time.com/6180611/white-power-mercenaries-fighting-the-lost-cause/
Meanwhile, you've got a "special report" from a Gitmo torturer. Don't talk to me about "unreliable sources".
Wagner Group subsidiary Rusich openly ordering the torture and murder of Ukrainian POWs and civilians (Guardian):
Uhuh-
A message on Rusich’s Telegram channel sent on 22 September advocates the “destruction of prisoners on the spot”.
There is absolutely no way that the message could be propaganda. No possibly way someone could have hacked an account and posted a message. That never happens with social media. Perhaps the Grauniad just got trolled, again? But there have been more credible reports of PoW's being executed on both sides. It's the media only promotes one. Even when the nutjobs doing it take videos and selfies. Again it's an evidence and credibility thing.
Wagner Group mercenaries using neo-Nazi graffiti and wearing SS emblems on their uniforms (Time):
Hmm..
Before they retreated from Tripoli, the mercenaries laid landmines and booby-traps, including hand-grenades with triplines, in civilian homes in the suburb of Ain Zara.
Hand grenade booby traps have been done pretty much since we invented hand grenades..
Landmines are banned weapons under international convention, and directly targeting civilians is a war crime.
Time's expert journalists probably haven't read the Ottawa Treaty, aka Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction. Or might be unaware that neither Russia nor the US are signatories. Ukraine is, which makes the presence of PFM-1 mines in and around Donetsk city rather curious. Probably Russia scattering them over the people they're meant to be protecting. Couldn't possibly be Ukraine. Also mines and boobytraps don't directly target civilians. Which is why we want to ban them on account of their indiscriminate nature.
But the Wagner operatives left more than boobytraps. They also spray-painted swastikas and SS lightning bolts as graffiti wherever they went. Nazi symbols are popular among the mercenaries
On both sides. Which is the problem. Who's neo-nazis graffiteed the walls? Especially as there's photos that pre-date this conflict from places like Mariupol. The Time article doesn't really provide anything that resembles evidence, and also relies on very similar claims to the ones made in TSC's report. But again this is a problem with the news. Insert a meme, watch it spread, wait for it to appear on wiki as a 'reliable source' and hope nobody looks too closely at where it originated.
Meanwhile, you've got a "special report" from a Gitmo torturer
Not sure what you mean. Presumably some prisoner who was detained in Gitmo? After all, we'd never torture anyone, that's something Russia would do. If you mean the article I linked that showed Zelensky's bodyguard sporting a deaths head, I said it was the first link I found that still had that image. Feel free to cite a source you think more reliable, if you can find one. Finding the 'operator' badge is more easy, although you probably don't want to go down that rabbit hole.
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, and our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of…. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind. .... Edward Bernays's "Propaganda" [1928]
And there has been almost a century to further refine and master, and now digitally remaster, that deep and dark art ....... and most folk haven't a clue about any of it and what it has done and can do, and even less about how it is stealthily done to avoid its prevention and would now be doing with immunity and impunity in ACTive and alienating fields of invisible forces and intangible sources in competition with and/or opposition to each other ...... although that also is something which has been long enough well enough known in certain majestic royal and ancient and postmodern circles .....
"There are powers at work in this country about which we have no knowledge.”
Quite whether that very particular and peculiar royal intelligence deficit persists to exist and insist on being a current presence for future generation in future generations is a leading question rightly most uncomfortable with an honest answering, for all the very best of right and proper great reasons.
"We took a lot of lessons from cyber aggression for the last eight years,""
Ok, and when are you starting to pay license fees for copying these things ?
First thing to die in every war is truth. Every side involved can be found to spout lies, propaganda or utter nonsense, be it fictitional WMD in iraq,"washing machine chips" as the new Do-it-all weapons tech or made up chlorine gas attacks in syria.
If you are soooo concerned about critical infrastructure, why is it still connected to the internet ? This generates the impression that profits/cost savings matter more than functional security.
If you are sooo concerned about fake news why do you keep producing such media manure yourself ?
Educate your citizens to be critical thinkers, not dumbed down media consuments and fake news are no real issue anymore. But maybe thats unwanted because the "good" fakenews (like https://fragdenstaat.de/dokumente/4123-wie-wir-covid-19-unter-kontrolle-bekommen/) would also be reduced in effectivity.
Every side involved can be found to spout lies, propaganda or utter nonsense, be it fictitional WMD in iraq,"washing machine chips" as the new Do-it-all weapons tech or made up chlorine gas attacks in syria.
I suspect there's some truth in the 'washing machine' meme. So the Tu-22m first flew in 1969. This pre-dated the Sinclair ZX81 by a few years. It's armed with missiles like Kh-22, which was predated it, being introduced in 1962. It was updated with better guidance, range and datalinks in the '70s, and a replacement Kh-32 introduced in the '90s.
I mentioned previously that the Bbc showed a 'sophisticated' TI DSP chip recovered by Ukraine, apparently used in a Russian missile. Sure, it was the state-of-the-art DSP back in the early '90s. I had to sign an export control doc when I bought a dev kit so I could do some experiments with crypto and signal processing as a student. DSPs can be handy for things like ECC after all.
But obviously technology has moved on a LOT since then. So now I strongly suspect you could do everything you need to do for a Kh-22 using components found in Raspberry Pi's, smart phones, or SOCs used in home appliances, or many cheap gizmos. It's just cheaper to use a SOC or a standard microcontroller than develop and produce your own IC. But given Russia's been sanctioned since 2014 and before, it's been developing it's own industry. It produces it's own semiconductors. Sure, those may not be as good as 'our' 5nm or smaller fab plants, but they probably don't need to be.
There's also the 'Iranian drone' meme. Russia can produce 5th gen fighters and space station parts, yet we're meant to believe it can't produce what's essentially a souped-up RC aircraft. Err.. right. That's also one of those genies that's out of the bottle given the popularity of drones, and even DIY/open-source drone development projects. We also know that terrorists know how to make these, given DIY drones have been used against Syrian and Russian airbases in the past.
Plus there's video games. I amuse myself with this game-
https://store.steampowered.com/app/268650/From_the_Depths/
Build your own ships, subs, planes, tanks and curious constructions. But it's a fun engineering sandbox. It even goes as far as having PID controllers, and programmable blocks you can add to missiles and torpedos. It simulates basic missiles, and anti-missiles, and you can change/improve default behaviour. So making more efficient interceptors can be done with <100 lines of Python. It may just be a video game, but the maths and physics behind it are real. Mostly. But the point being is it's not that difficult to take those concepts and bring them into the real-world, as DIY drone builders do now.
> calls for global anti-fake news fight
Come on, fake news are this century's defining feature, all pretense to honesty and truth (old definition) has long ago been dropped.
Everyone now openly adheres to the new definition of truth ("whatever suits me"). Nowadays everything is an "opinion", everybody is entitled to one, and they are all equal and valid. You can't criticize flat-earthers or creationists unless you're an insensitive oppressive intolerant (dozen other negative adjectives) racist. Remember, their "opinion" is as valuable and precious as yours!
It's a propagandist's paradise, you don't even have to pretend, or cover up, just boldly deny inconvenient evidence: Everything is but an opinion, and yours is just as valid.
Everything is but an opinion, and yours is just as valid. .... ThatOne
Just as valid maybe, ThatOne, however, ..... although nowadays it may very well not be as the vital past case was ..... to have it Main Stream Media realised required you to have privileged access to dodgy ponzi type friends or acquaintances with more than just a little excess to excuse and exercise itself in a big club and you ain't in it
It is much more interesting and intellectually engaging to ponder on there being a vibrant rising challenge to present traditional orthodoxies rather than making/accepting erroneous assumptions that future battles are predictably indicatively lost whenever so much evidence abounds in the ether to the contrary.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
nonsense. It's always Open Season on creationists by everyone. They actually believe in a real reality, unaffected by opinions of observer. It's one subject authorities and wannbe experts agree on. Perhaps this indicates something about disinformation campaigns run over centuries ?
All opinions are equally valid only if it fits one thing most people can't see. The culture they live in. Real dissent is mocked as it always has been. < Irony tag here. > IMHO, The growth of conspiracy theorists is a reflection of general disbelief of any statement.</Irony> They have always existed due to the hunger some have for allegedly "secret knowledge".
On a practical note, the consequences are threatening for any cohesive political system that does not involve lawfare and oppression. If a political entity cannot reasonably trust, it can only disintegrate. All spin doctors are doctors of cultural death.
> If a political entity cannot reasonably trust, it can only disintegrate.
Yes and no. After all politics are one of the most eager purveyors of "fake news", but the trust issue doesn't apply to them since, as with all religions, their followers will believe anything the official dogma claims, even against indisputable proof to the contrary.
There are of course the rare (usually aged) cynics who won't "believe" anymore, but they are a minority and don't really make any difference. Politicians will still have enough rabid zealots to stay in power.
When Russia invades a country, it is an "illegal" invasion? But when the United States makes a hobby of invading countries, toppling governments it determines are too free and democratic it somehow is given a pass?
Hypocrisy is looming big in the Ukraine, as the U.S. is again backing Right-wing fanatics. Only this time using someone else troops.
Well it's why it's called "whataboutism".
"Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresses a counter-accusation. From a logical and argumentative point of view it is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin 'you too', term for a counter-accusation), which is a subtype of the ad-hominem argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Should I now assume you feel that if the USA has made bad things Putin is fully free to do so too.
And we should all chime in with - "yes well you see, also the Americans...".
I'd like to add that the (now) infamous Russian whataboutism always comes up when they have no argument to support their stand, but can't and won't admit they're simply wrong. So, in a pathetic attempt they desperately try to come up with something to support their view. Pathetic, because we all recognize it from the past, a typical sanbox 'argument'. And the Russian reflection is always typical of children's: you either call the other kids 'freak / cripple / whatever' - or they strike in frustration.
When Russia invades a country, it is an "illegal" invasion? But when the United States makes a hobby of invading countries, toppling governments it determines are too free and democratic it somehow is given a pass?Hypocrisy is looming big in the Ukraine, as the U.S. is again backing Right-wing fanatics. Only this time using someone else troops. ... ITS Retired
Should I now assume you feel that if the USA has made bad things Putin is fully free to do so too. ..... Lars
Lars, Hi,
Neglecting to answer those few initial obviously very uncomfortable and unpalatable questions from ITS Retired, and instead preferring to introduce a distracting red herring and straw man, does not help disguise the rank hypocrisy of inept Great and Greater IntelAIgent Game players on open politically incorrect display today in these days of some extremely strange and surreal and weird and wonderful and wired and wild happenings.
And as it is next to impossibly hard to dodge a speeding bullet whenever one is worthily correctly targeted for deadly impact, it doesn't need one to be an Einstein to suspect one knows what is bound to happen next to such worthily correctly aimed at targets in ACTive near-future real-time places and spaces.
Should I now assume you feel that if the USA has made bad things Putin is fully free to do so too.
Yep. Whataboutery is a lazy argument. More important are the laws, and perception. So here's a thing-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Tanf_(U.S._military_base)
The government of Syria deems the U.S. military presence in al-Tanf illegal and "considers the presence of Turkish and US troops on its territory as an aggression and demands immediate and unconditional withdrawal of foreign forces from its territory."
So from one perspective, the US illegaly occupied the sovereign territory of Syria and conveniently controls the oil-rich part of it. The US claims it's occupation is legal. There were also other issues around Syria, like the whole regime change issue, much as there have been in Ukraine.
Then of course there's Yugoslavia. You won't find that on a map anymore because we regime changed the whole country, and broke it up. That created Kosovo, and this-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo#After_declaration_of_independence
On 8 October 2008, the UN General Assembly resolved, on a proposal by Serbia, to ask the International Court of Justice to render an advisory opinion on the legality of Kosovo's declaration of independence. The advisory opinion, which is not binding over decisions by states to recognise or not recognise Kosovo, was rendered on 22 July 2010, holding that Kosovo's declaration of independence was not in violation either of general principles of international law, which do not prohibit unilateral declarations of independence, nor of specific international law – in particular UNSCR 1244 – which did not define the final status process nor reserve the outcome to a decision of the Security Council.
which is much like the Crimea situation.
So it's not 'whataboutery' sometimes, it's about reality, and the rule of law. Law usually requires equality and consistency. If applied unequally, it isn't really justice, so what's the point? Or what's the point of the UN? There are 5 permanent members of the Security Council, 3 generally aligned (US, UK, France) and 2 that aren't always, Russia and China. The UN was established with the noble aims of preventing wars, but sadly hasn't. Largely thanks to those Security Council members.
The reality is a lot of geopolitics. Nations are supposed to act in their own interests. Democratic nations are supposed to act in the interests of their electors. Politicians are supposed to protect and serve the interests of the people who elect them. What's the point of democracy, if politicians stop doing that? But there's also the usual thing of nations forming treaties, alliances, or just deciding sometimes that acting together is a good thing. Germany invaded Poland and France, that triggered treaties the UK had with those countries, and we had a bit of a war. Once the dust settled, the victors redrew the map of Europe (and other parts of the world), setting the scene for future conflicts and unrest.
But the reality is still obeying and observing the rule of law. If it's ok for us to interfere in other countries elections, it's hypocritical to complain when other countries do the same thing. If we invade, or just incite regime change, why is it bad when other countries do the same thing? In a humanitarian sense, the answer should be obvious. A lot of innocent people tend to end up dead, maimed, displaced or otherwise inconvenienced. The UN was supposed to prevent that kind of thing, not be used to encourage it. It's much the same with 'war crimes'. They're defined in international laws and treaties that nations have signed up to.
The idea of those is generally good. Prevent attrocities, protect civilians, make conflicts civilised. Which again is a nice idea, but only if nations follow those laws. We complain that Russia's targeted Ukraine's power infrastructure, This is apparently a 'war crime'. But-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphite_bomb
The graphite bomb was first used against Iraq in the Gulf War (1990–1991), knocking out 85% of the electrical supply. Similarly, the BLU-114/B "Soft-Bomb" graphite bomb was used by NATO against Serbia in May 1999, disabling 70% of that country's power grid. After initial success in disabling Serbian electric power systems, the electric supply was restored in less than 24 hours. The BLU-114/B was again used a few days later to counter Serbian efforts to restore damage caused by the initial attack. In the later stage of Operation Allied Force, NATO's air forces used conventional bombs and rockets to target power highlines and transformer stations.
So when is it OK to attack power infrastructure? Again, if laws are applied inconsistently, then what's the point? It becomes lawfare backing up warfare instead of justice. Which is much the same as other cries of 'war crimes!'. When we lob artillery, bombs or missiles in the general direction of the enemy, innocents inevitably die. When Russia does this, it's a war crime. When Ukraine's been doing it since 2014, it's not. Or the media quietly ignores it.
But that's politics for you. Ukraine is demanding we only report their version of the news, which is propaganda. Some of us expect the news to be impartial, especially from the Bbc. That's legally obligated to be impartial/neutral under it's Charter, yet it's reporting of the conflct has been incredibly biased, and arguably has been operating illegally. Actually testng that in law would require the Bbc to be prosecuted, but when the state broadcaster is closely aligned with the state's policy, that's unlikely to happen.
So the Bbc, and other MSM outlets cease to be 'news' providers, and instead become propaganda outlets. George Orwell warned about that. Minitruth broadcasts fake news, and denounces news as fake. Which is where the wider problem of deciding, denouncing or censoring news as 'fake' comes in. Sure, you can drive or control the narrative for a while, but over time it just further damages trust and credibility in what could be considered 'reliable sources'.
That really isn't a good thing for healthy, democratic societies.
if the USA has made bad things Putin is fully free to do so too
yes, that's what "rule of law" means. Or "jurisprudence". If someone is allowed to do something, then everyone is allowed the same things. So it's actually the US and UK that destroyed the legal world order with their attack on Irak in 2003.
Under the UN Charter and international law, invading another country s illegal. So yes, Russia's invasion of Ukraine is illegal. A great many countries around the world , the UK included, have done bad and illegal things in the past, for which the leaders responsible should be thoroughly ashamed. But just because one country did A Bad Thing in the past doesn't make it OK for another country to do A Bad Thing now.
It irritates me that people still come up with this stupid "what about what America has done?" as if everyone approves of what America has done - newsflash - we do not. I for one have criticised the USA many a time, including in comments in El Reg. It is my considered opinion that the USA, as a nation, is too damned full of itself and signally fails to live up to the claims it makes about itself far too much of the time.
The USA has indeed had a history of subverting and toppling democratically elected governments in other countries if the elected government wasn't to their liking, which is utterly wrong and hypocritical. One of the things that I VERY much hope the current awful situation in Ukraine drills into the mindset of the populace of the USA is that if it doesnt play by its own rules (ie: let the people decide in a free and fair democratic election), let alone those of international law, then its credibility will obviously suffer.
Russia though has had an abysmal history of being a bad neighbour to just about every country on its borders, because it has had a horribly long run of bad autocratic leaders that didn't value the lives of Russians, let alone those of any other country. When the Soviet Union collapsed, for a few years, I thought "great - now the Russian people can elect themselves a better government!" - and what have they ended up with? A narcissistic, lying, genocidal mafioso turd called Putin.
Were or even ARE there neo-nazis in Ukraine? Well, I'd be surprised if not, because there are neo-nazi arseholes in most if not all countries in the world. But their numbers are so small that they have no real clout. Was or has Ukraine banned the Russian language? No. Has the Ukrainian government persecuted those born in Russia or that speak Russian? No. Is the Zelensky government a nazi one? Absolutely not - nazis are anti-democracy, and Europe wouldn't go to such lengths to support a neonazi regime, doing so would be like cattle supporting the introduction of a wolf to their herd.
Putin and co, now - oh my. THEY are neo-nazis. Fascist - might is right is their creed. Except that they are also so corrupt that they didnt put the effort in on their armed forces to enable it to be able to back up threats of its use. It's clear that Putin thinks like the leader of a criminal gang that just putting weapons in the hands of conscripts is all you need to scare the neighbours. Trouble is, an armed rabble can be beaten by a much smaller profesional fighting force, the more so if the professionals have high morale and the rabble do not.
Ask yourself - if Russias claims about Ukraine were true, why did it not bring them to the attention of the UN, so that the UN could investigate and if need be send a multinational peacekeeping force in? If eastern regions of Ukraine had truly wanted independence or to join Russia they had plenty of time to campaign for it before Russia invaded But there wasnt any support for such.
Russia has made some absurd claims about its upholding the UN Charter and Western nations not doing so. And yt, Russia invaded Ukraine, and held rferenda in a warzone - - bth breaches of the UN Charter. Russia has even broken Russian law , in that Putin now claims that Ukraine is not a real country, despite Russia having recognised Ukraine as a sovereign nation when it acquired independence according to the laws of the Russian Federation. The Russian leadership has lied continually and inconsistently to the point that if they said that the sky is blue and clouds are grey and white, I'd check just to make sure they weren't lying. Propaganda is one thing, but Russia has sunk to new and cringeworthily amteurish depths with ts propaganda in ths war (something else Putin's regie is incompetent at).
Finally, Russia has commited many thousands of war crimes in Ukraine, for which there is irrefutable evidence. Last I heard, only 2 cases of war crimes committed by Ukrainians have come to light according to the UN team looking for evidence of such crimes no matter who committed them. And NATO? NATO is a purely defensive alliance, an attack against one member is an attack against all. NATO hasn't been attacked, so NATO forces aren't getting involved. Nothing in the NATO treaty prevents member nations from supplying arms to friendly countries though. And yet Putin and co whine about that. If they didnt want to get defeated on the battlefield, they should have gone to war with a well-equipped professional fighting force. They didn't so they've lost, but simply havent the balls to admit it, hence the ongoing "goodwill gestures" of the Russians departing more and more areas of Ukraine which they illeglly invaded and occupied. Oh yeah - Russia would do well to never mention nukes ever again, lest it find out what professional armed forces can do when provoked.
as if everyone approves of what America has done - newsflash - we do not.
any proof of that ? Thought not. Until the UK drags Tony Blair to a court for crimes against humanity, the entire UK is complicit with those war crimes, and cannot now accuse another country of the same felony.
So: FIRST bring Tony Blair to the international court in La Haage, and THEN can you make statements about illegal invasions. Until then, Russia's invasion of Ukraine is LEGAL according to UK law.
You can never know "all the facts" even on your own side, let alone on both, so that's a recipe for Chamberlain levels of appeasement and inaction.
The west tried that with Putin, and he learned that he was able to do what he wants without any real consequences. If he'd been able to walk in to Ukraine and set up a puppet government like the one he has in Belarus, does anyone believe that Ukraine would be the end of his ambitions? He's openly talked fondly of the days of the USSR, and wanting to reconstitute it.
Would we be better off if this was fought on Polish soil 5 years from now, pulling the US, UK and rest of the EU directly into the battle? That is, unless Putin's stooge in the US returned to power and was able to fulfill his master's mission of breaking up NATO before then.
I can see the fake news info war has made its way to this sleepy Internet backwater as well. Helpfully marked with distinctive handles to aid identification though. ..... Anonymous Coward
El Reg, a sleepy Internet backwater ????? Now there's a novelty only the seriously misinformed and severely undereducated would proffer.
And that also identifies you as one of the new intakes of Anonymous Coward, AC.
Take care the revolving resolving doors inside this sleepy Internet backwater don't hit you whilst travelling through and knock you out and for six and head over heels on your way out of its myriad doozy stealthy compartmentalisations.
Soviet Union/Russian Federation disinformation is nothing new. You have to understand the Russian mindset - "vranyo" is a long established, accepted, well understood Russian practice and as such, lying, (as we understand it and deprecate it), is not viewed in the same way by the Russian mindset. Fortunately it is easily detected if the speaker is visible - if his lips are moving than he is almost certainly lying and the higher up the command chain you go, the more likely that is to be true.
- and lost (almost) everywhere else, at least where it matters.
on the subject: Zhoras statements are just empty farts, same as any public platititudes (generally pedalled by politicians), that we must 'strive for a fairer society', 'fight against injustice / racism / aggression / climate change / oppression / discrimination / deforestration / defenestration (last one doesn't apply to Russia of course) / etc.
It'd be _vaguely_ interesting to get to the bottom (sorry, no pun unintended) as to why he farted. Was it because he had to say something in public and what do you say other than bleedig obvious, or was it meant to be a usual, not-very-subtle suggestion: give us more money.
And now, because I dare to criticise a Ukrainian in the course of a just war, etc, etc., I'm proud to have signed up to the Kremlin-troll pay-roll brigade.
Overall, I would much rather see a _genuine_ evaluation of whether it's _really_ possible to combat mis-information, because all I've heard about it, in the course of several years is that no, you can't, fakes can not be effectively fought against, because it takes little time to come up with a fake (and they don't need to be sophisticated, to 'work', so you can keep producing them, effectively flooding the infosphere), while it takes a huge amount of time and effort (thus money) to repair the damage, and even then the chances of success are limited, because once spread, you can't target the full fake audience. One failed example of such 'war on fakes' would be a radio programme on one of the Ukrainian radio statations, where they prepare a list of Russian fakes of the day, and the only way they 'combat' them is by deriding them as 'fake! And this one - an obvious fake! And this one too, all fakes! Trouble is, when you deny one claim, by claiming something else, it only works on your own infobubble, but then, it only serves some of the purpose, i.e. to re-assure your core audience your / their cause is just. Those with an opposite view won't even listen, and those who have doubts, still go away unconvinced, because you substitute one empty claim with another empty claim.
... and lost (almost) everywhere else
yes, this is rarely said, that in most of the world this war hardly registers on the radar, and where it does the people are quite happy the self-righteous "West " gets a bleeding nose. And they also make fun of the self-inflicted damage to cut us off from cheap Russian gaz while buying expensive fracking gaz from the US, which is obviously pulling the strings from behind
In any dispute -- in fact in just about every political situation -- you have groups putting out their point of view. We all know that. What's not a good idea is to believe that 'our' group doesn't spread disinformation but 'they' do.
Even this article's headline is a typical example of how this works. It builds on presuppositions that have been carefully ingrained in us.
In case you've not noticed it information from UA is tightly controlled. In fact just recently a US military person commented that they have might tighter 'operational security' than the Russians which they use to their advantage. We in the US learned from the Vietnam war that its not a good idea to give journalists free access to the conflict, we need to tightly control and curate any information being given out for security and also to curate public opinion, hence the use of embedded journalists. The result is often disinformation, the impression planted in the public mind of the country and the conflict often bears little resemblance to the actual place and events. It would be naive to think that the same thing isn't happening in Ukraine, especially as we don't actually see very much hard information (and all too often the same recycled photographs).
Precisely, martinusher, quite so.
Therefore, then logically and beyond any question of reasonable doubt, nothing is as it would popularly seem, and the realities one presumes oneself to be living in are remotely, relatively anonymously constructed, media delivered, fake existences ....... and it is not absolutely necessary for such exercises and perceptions management programs and projects to be in extremis and in exclusive elite executive command and control to be almightily effective and attractive and addictive at one one end of the NEUKlearer HyperRadioProACTive IT spectrum or mightily disruptive and destructively chaotic and depressive at the other end ‽ .
And .... to not realise nor accept that as a matter of true and honest universal fact has one condemning oneself to be energised as nothing more powerful or important than an expendable pawn to be considered for roadkill to that and/or those who do realise and accept and would continually script it with stealthy instruction sets for puppeteers to follow and render their thoughts shared in relatively secure and safe secret spaces today as proxy actions and decisions for resulting planned future outcomes tomorrow ..... with that modus operandi/vivendi cycle exercised every day, time and time again, in excelsis and to XSSXXXX.
Who/What does that for/to you today, with you following their plans for tomorrow in a bleak future land and seescape?
A global fight on fake news - well, not really global, more targeted at the populations of any supporting yet government, or in other words predominantly Westerners (given the majority of the global population doesn't care) - which is really business as usual because most of the media content being offered has already been heavily manipulated to appeal to the prejudices of the audience, hence why we have multiple "news" providers managing to produce dynamically opposing narratives for the same story.