- Joined
- Jun 27, 2019
The kill to injured ratio is strange, normally you would see alot more injured then dead people.
-
Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.
UA-RU | DISCUSSIONS
- Thread starter Araxen
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2022
Since this is being made personal and you are clearly ignorant of what I believe or don't believe, I am going to choose to ignore you and the propaganda you continue to spew. I quoted a news article that can easily be backed up by most military analysist. I can not help it if you and the one you quoted have no clue about what you are talking about. All I have seen is the same old Ukraine has no chance, Russia is just holding back, just wait until they declare war and then the gloves are off. It is the same dead Russian horse you keep beating on. I showed you what any one of 10 different sites I looked at all said a declaration of war would mean. If you can not accept what people who analyze this stuff for a living are saying, that is your problem. Show me your sources that say Russia is doing great and if they had declared war it would have been over a month ago. Please, I would really be interested in seeing that source so long as it is not Russia media sponsored. I have seen their analysis of this "special operation". But hey, keep mischaracterizing my stance or beliefs. You have nothing to offer in return other than insults. Since you quoted and supported the other poster, maybe you can come up with a list of "approved sources" that are not propaganda. Because right now any source ( and there are hundreds) that counters whatever nonsense that poster is talking about is considered propaganda. Please, as I aske that person.....show us your sources and tell us how things actually are. Until that time, I chose to just ignore you.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2022
I find it hilarious that you think a declaration of war means that the West just stops supplying arms and equipment to Ukraine. Why? What would change from what is happening now. We are supplying Ukraine arms and equipment that is currently killing 10s of thousands of Russian soldiers and destroying hundreds and thousands of Russian vehicles. Our intelligence is picking Russian assets off daily. If they declare war does Russia suddenly care and take it personal? What in the world are you talking about? We supplied arms and equipment to the Allies during the early parts of WW2....after Germany declared their war. We were not at war with Germany at that time. We didn't stop supplying. Why would the West stop now if Russia declared war? What added danger would exist. Russia is the aggressor and would have to worry about drawing other countries into this war. That would spell their doom. Putin knows this. I already know how you are going to answer this. So I know this is pointless. You are going to babble some nonsense and then tell me and others to do our homework and stop reading propaganda. The same thing being said over and over. Again, I implore you site sources of anything you are saying so that I, or anyone else, may possibly get an understanding of what it is you are trying to say. Until then, keep living the dream.Another wrong prediction in time frame reference to above.And very limited details as far as consequences for support to Ukraine. But hey each to their own. Those that limit themselves to printed articles of propaganda will never truly educate themselves on true and real potential possibilities. Eg. Declaration of war not only means conscription possibilities and unlimited force projection. It also means what no-one wants to talk about. Western weapons suppliers not only being cut off but now risking direct confrontation of threat to Russia itself. No one mentioned this because no-one wants to talk about the complications, risks and possibilities should this be declared. And there is a more extensive list of issues. Of which I'm only going to give 1 basic example. As a declared war between those two means no-one can help without much higher risk. As Ukraine is not nato this means individual countries will need to risk nato alliance or their own country to provide support as any would clearly be seen as a legitimate intervention against Russia. = War with Russia. Now should everyone realise this risk, and stop support with same reason no-one has done anything but supply Ukraine with weapons simply because they don't want ww3. You do the maths. Ukraine success so far is probably at best 50/50 . Solely because without Western support this probably wouldn't be an issue by now. Most of Russian loss comes from Western support and military toys. Without that this wouldn't be what it is now. That's an appetizer of my point. No more courses available until you pay your own way in knowledge by studying your own questions and opinions. I gave a taste of different scenario possibility that was judged as what he did. Those who see that are completely wrong. He did nothing near that because he couldn't under current situation.
Anyway like I have repeatedly said, we all have different opinions, some from propaganda, some from media posts, some from lack of knowledge etcetc. Each to their own. Unless you look at things in detail across the board without biase, and with knowledge and common sense , you'll always risk being incorrect and or clueless. All the best
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
What did Nazi Military analysts say? What do Ukraine Military analysts currently say? What did roman military analysts say? What do a lot of informed people typically say when their way of life gets attacked? What happens when a republican attacks dem policy or vice versa? We seen it with Donald trump, now bided, and past Obama.
No matter who feeds you information, they'll be bias in support of a group or side no matter what. That's like me telling you right now that I don't have a bias for Russia in the current situation as an American because they are being hit with a lot of propaganda in which the Ukrainians are doing under the same pretext. The role of anything on the internet is typically to make money or spread awareness for a cause. I'm saying right now if none of us cared for a topic or wished to propose our influence we wouldn't even post about much of the Ukrainian shit. This same topic sprawls through many of the other discussions here such as the gun debates, the Christianity in schools debates and anything else. Users within the website hold ideals closer and further and it's really hard to push an individual off of a basis as seen in the covid-19 "Vaccine bad" propaganda...it shows that even when the world's medical professionals come into a singular theater people won't agree with it educated or uneducated.
When you have a split theater it will always be multiple groups perpetuating bullshit to garner people on their side...the whole special operation stuff to be is bs...obviously: I can't sit here and say it's anything short of war or an attack on an independent country. Can I say that I don't like the attack on an independent nation, no because my morals and beliefs and education to this point don't point to me feeling... "bad" for the ongoing situation. Are kids dying and it's wrong..yes..are old people getting killed and it's wrong, yes... If chemical weapons are used am I going to change my stance a good bit more, yeah likely because it's against my personally developed belief system.
For a conflict to be a conflict there has to be 2 people who did wrong or didn't want to negotiate to a point of halting the problem or defending yourself from the problem and hopefully winning. That's like me hunting as a caveman in a bountiful land full of deer and such, and someone else or a whole tribe comes to tell me to backoff the land or I'm going to get my stuff beat in with a rock. What do I do? Should I fight a tribe of 5 people when I'm 1 person and I have no technological advantage or any advantage? Should I backup and go talk to some local tribes and expose where the land is and try to garner help in the realm of giving up some of my possible "food" so I can still garner claim instead of losing out and having to search again? What if the first group that told me to backoff tells me I can hunt 1 animal a day on their "new ground" because they were nice enough to even offer that...is it my choice to fight for it or no?
Russia states what they want, Ukraine denies; Ukraine seeks assistance from outside nations that somewhat agree with it and they arm Ukraine to fight their own war because nobody has any major stake to the point of provoking them to get involved physically. The same exact thing goes on in academia and trust me...it's sick because some of the projects I and many others like are put on the backburner for projects that are deemed lesser by some individuals in the community; though, the projects are deemed higher by officials with a higher level or..."Influence" than us small guys. It's just like real world conflict.
Nobody is ignoring your statements we are skeptical for your provided postings because it's negating a lot of what's going on in return for a more bias point of view... Once again hopefully this one doesn't piss a bunch of people off but I'm sure any of us that have a education in a field or workplace or situation...especially us in academics or in federal workplaces. Ethics are important, but people within fields that require ethics will skew and remove information that doesn't follow the agenda and this works really really actively within federal jobs and US academics. You'll have your Intelligence Analysts, Cyber-Security Experts....Diplomatic staff, Lead-Researcher, Lead Developer, Lead...anything basically attempt to write up presentations that present what they want, they'll redact or outright neglect to present information that may hurt their case if they have a close enough tie to a situation, project, operation because they'll benefit a lot more from not presenting the information: how do they profit you may ask? Influence, money, a secured job for blank more years as an operation/research project/situation goes on. The wider you can infect people to believe in what you perpetuate the more secure you are within an Agency, Diplomatic Compound, Research Role, High ranking position in a company.
(p1/p2)
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
@Rhazaghul The attack isn't on you directly, we support two polar opposite beliefs and there is nothing wrong with it, but you can't expect someone to standby as you attack or vocalize opposition to a system, it just happens to be I stand with a few of the members who believe a lot of what's coming out of Ukraine and fed to us is propaganda because it benefits people who wish to keep control or stay relevant. I'm a democrat, but It's like the Donald trump election rig, or the Biden election rig, or Obama election rig situations...or even that they are bad presidents/people even though we don't see a majority of what they have to do on a day to day. Your definition and our definitions of propaganda is different likely because we came from different backgrounds, work fields, education. Can I say without a doubt that RT is propaganda, most of the time it is...but it's news appeasing their people, Same for CNN, FOX, MSNBC. You have to combine and try to get your own story, and once again...American news will present American bias news painting us as a victims or our allies as a victims: RT/Sputnik does the Same for Russia, and BBC does it for Brittan.
It's all of us getting thrown back into Nazi Germany and constantly believing everything out news sources say on how "we are winning the war" until the day we get bombed on the homeland...or how it was right to kill ethnic peoples because they are a "parasite". Since we won the war (America) we know that it was wrong and same for many other countries, but if Germany would have won...god forbid.. It would have been considered right because news is meant to appease their demographic.
I don't believe anything is wrong with you or what you believe in Rhaz, but it's not what some or even I believe in because once again..this is western media projecting this..so can I say 100% without a doubt that I believe it..no..can I say the same with Russian news, no..Israeli..no.. You combine all of the countries even though propaganda is projected through them, that's what members of the community of "OSINT" do. They don't just say..BBC..FOX.BBC..FOX.FOX...MSNBC. They say RT..BBC.ISRALIE...CNN...SPUTNIK OH boy they all link together so I'll read between the lines and try to find out what really happened..oh no China post made a posting, oh my view just changed a little and I garnered so information that wasn't said. Unless you're there and you witness it for yourself you're likely to not have the real story till someone who was really there speaks under the radar. Sure you can use some of what state media says, and independently funded media have...but each one is going to have something to project to garner money, and some of them will leak documents like the pentagon papers to get money..or even the Pandora papers and such.
End of statement:
Leaks and Pleasing your demographic bring money. Going against your demographic and or not using the proper technique such as injection theory or playing victim doesn't create anger which won't sell.
Look at any major news source aka RT, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, CSPAN, BBC, NYT, Harretz, Reuters... After any situation between their home nations or nations they are field with they'll play the victim card for themselves/the nation. If the political spectrum is attacked in which the source aligns with, they'll respond with an attack with the same attitude or attempting to do the same and undermined the opponents political spectrum.
Take the extremes of SNOWDEN... ASSANGE....9/11...Arab Spring...the war in afgan....The pipeline cancelation...(most) school shootings when Fox and Cnn take blows.
(p2/p2)
It's all of us getting thrown back into Nazi Germany and constantly believing everything out news sources say on how "we are winning the war" until the day we get bombed on the homeland...or how it was right to kill ethnic peoples because they are a "parasite". Since we won the war (America) we know that it was wrong and same for many other countries, but if Germany would have won...god forbid.. It would have been considered right because news is meant to appease their demographic.
I don't believe anything is wrong with you or what you believe in Rhaz, but it's not what some or even I believe in because once again..this is western media projecting this..so can I say 100% without a doubt that I believe it..no..can I say the same with Russian news, no..Israeli..no.. You combine all of the countries even though propaganda is projected through them, that's what members of the community of "OSINT" do. They don't just say..BBC..FOX.BBC..FOX.FOX...MSNBC. They say RT..BBC.ISRALIE...CNN...SPUTNIK OH boy they all link together so I'll read between the lines and try to find out what really happened..oh no China post made a posting, oh my view just changed a little and I garnered so information that wasn't said. Unless you're there and you witness it for yourself you're likely to not have the real story till someone who was really there speaks under the radar. Sure you can use some of what state media says, and independently funded media have...but each one is going to have something to project to garner money, and some of them will leak documents like the pentagon papers to get money..or even the Pandora papers and such.
End of statement:
Leaks and Pleasing your demographic bring money. Going against your demographic and or not using the proper technique such as injection theory or playing victim doesn't create anger which won't sell.
Look at any major news source aka RT, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, CSPAN, BBC, NYT, Harretz, Reuters... After any situation between their home nations or nations they are field with they'll play the victim card for themselves/the nation. If the political spectrum is attacked in which the source aligns with, they'll respond with an attack with the same attitude or attempting to do the same and undermined the opponents political spectrum.
Take the extremes of SNOWDEN... ASSANGE....9/11...Arab Spring...the war in afgan....The pipeline cancelation...(most) school shootings when Fox and Cnn take blows.
(p2/p2)
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2016
I for one don't believe a thing that comes out of any main stream media outlet. Even factual information is sanitised and repackaged to suit what ever narrative is being spun.
The west has become saturated by certain ideologies that seek to undermine those things that said ideologies deem incompatible or counter narrative. That is to say that any type of objective, fact-based dialogue becomes impossible; and instead of communication based factual information being promulgated and openly talked about, dialogue and debate is driven by subjective, emotive diatribe that nullifies openness and freedom of thought, and often leads to certain sections of society being maligned and side-lined which is not conducive to a functioning democracy.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
I agree with you that nothing that comes from a mainstream is 100% true, I believe some of what is said is true, but it's spun to fit into a narrative that sells to the demographic they target. factual information can be presented with the negatives being cut off as explained in the prior and it becomes a point where "both sides are right" to some level because both sides will attempt to hide the bad side till someone educated comes into the cut. Then when that educated person speaks, 9/10 they are attacked by both or one side to silence them because it's easier than admitting there are problems in everyday politics, situations, and life....we can see this just by how people try to paint politics as black and white, or laws as black or white based off a perfect world mentality, but they won't let the opposition do the same...soo..yeah.
If you look at America's mixing pot basically you can carry ideology into the next generation, but it's hard when you have little to no basis starting out, so groups will mix with other groups in an alliance to create more of a chance for their stuff in the mixing pot to appear or happen.. Look at LGBTQIA+ They are a group that holds a good bit of ability in the mixing pot, but we see we went from normal gay rights, to trans rights, now we are soon going to go to young trans rights, and soon probably asexual awareness and all of this stuff, but we can take the LGBTQIA+ as a great example of how groups align together and slowly branch once the major group garners enough of a say...so then the smaller group tries to take majorities within that major group to project what they want. First it was Gay rights, now it's trans rights..and what's going to come next? likely something with asexual/pansexual or such. The same thing happens in both republican and democratic parties and even small communities.
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2016
Just another facet of the divide and rule tactics used by all ruling elites throughout the ages.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
Yeah, especially since if you are culturally fit, you'll project the culturally fit idea and welll...it'll take up more of the mixing pot.
Guest
Guest
Nothing more to talk about then is there
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
Not till the next development happens.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2015
Like how someone else tweeted, there's been red lines before. Obviously want to make the US admin reconsider.
Russia TV Says U.S. 'Crossing a Red Line' by Supplying Ukraine With MLRS
Olga Skabayeva said on 60 Minutes that the U.S. supply of the weapons would "provoke a very harsh response" from Moscow.www.newsweek.com
Guest
Guest
What exactly does culturally fit mean ‘socially acceptable, accepted opinions, right think?
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
It is simple to advocate for any military strategy, when you don't have to address the consequences. In the case of Ukraine, the elephant in the room that no one can/will discuss is a credible number of civilian casualities of the cruel and merciless Russian invasion. In normal times, you would use this to demonstrate how wrong Russia is. But somehow Ukraine can't get this information for this vital military information. Why?
Regardless of what the UN reports, there is no way there are "merely" 4,000 dead civilians in Ukraine. Tragically, the number may be horrifically higher; we all know that the number has to be at least 20,000. In Mariupol alone, the mayor has said there were between 10,000-20,000 dead.
Over 10,000 civilians killed in Mariupol siege, mayor says
The mayor of the Ukrainian port city of Mariupol says that more than 10,000 civilians have died in the Russian siege of his city and that the full death toll could surpass twice that number.
www.pbs.org
UN itself indicates their own statistics are not reflective of the actual death toll. Three months of war later, in this 21st century, and Zelenskyy doesn't know the civilian death toll? Yes, he does. They just don't want the public to know. Why? Because they know if the truth was out - the world would be demanding a cease-fire - and a negotiated settlement. Try raising funds for more war , if there are 20,000, 50,000, or God Forbid 100,000 dead.
And now nearly 15,000,000 refugees/IDPs in a of nation of 43,000,000 (34%) with the geographic size about the size of France or USA's Texas. (In USA, 34% of the population as refugees/IDPs, would be 115,000,000.)
Many Ukraine cities are destroyed, over a third of the country is homeless, and untold thousands are dead. But President Zelenskyy is making "daily televised reports on the war effort" in Kyiv. I think bravery to seek a cease-fire would be much more courageous. Remember in WWII, there were no U.N. peacekeeping forces, there was no U.N. or model to protect countries under invasion that didn't require military escalation. We are not living in 1941. WWII-based scenarios and solutions are of a past world.
In all of life, you have to pick your battles. With people, countries, lives. Having Ukraine destroyed over the Donbas region is unbalanced decision making, not only by the Russian invaders, but also by those who would encourage elderly women to create Molotov cocktails. At some point in life, you need to find the courage to compromise.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
There are a lot of missile attacks by the Russian invaders, which probably are killiing most of the casualties. But the UN itself says that the numbers are under-reported. It is some type of thing that UN worked out with the Ukraine government to give the illusion they are tracking it. It is really easy to advocate for militarism, when you don't have civilian death tolls. So they have given the UN this data as a form of IW.
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2017
They've said it about a dozen times now, hard to take them seriously.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
Socially acceptable is based off what a country's culture or a state or even community seems as acceptable..
Let's say that umm.... If you live in a majority democratic city it won't be okay to say stuff such as the f word to refer to gay people, and it may not be socially acceptable to own a gun. Meanwhile, in a republican based city it may be okay to say the f word to refer to gay people and it's socially accepted and even applauded to own a gun.
Society and social groups have sanctions in a negative and positive way. Like if you are American and you eat standing up in a establishment like high class dining or Applebee's and such, people will look at you weird and people will generally ask why you aren't sitting because that's a cultural norm (though there are some people who may not do it, the majority will do it because it's weird and not following the pre conceived rules.
So let's step back and make it wider again. We as people in a community have ideals established onto is by peers and authority which are enforced by sanctions be them positive or negative, negative to remove or classify someone as a deviant or stop them from the action...or posivite which promotes and applauds it.
If you as an American went to let's say the middle east you'd experience culture shock because you likely haven't learned the norms or culture standards in that country, it's like a foreigner here in America doing something different or not to our standards it's going to turn heads or make some people try to sanction it negatively.
Now from my personal experience (which I believe was a one off event, but I don't know the middle east that well). I was at a five guys and there was a man who was primarily Arabic speaking and he was referring to a black employee. The Arabic man says " hey n word can I please have some help" He didn't know what he did wrong at the time but all the employees looked angry, and when they did basically he apologized and said in his culture it was different and the employees had to explain why it was a bad word here in America...though that is a definition of culture shock which is a form of a socially acceptable behavior. He didn't understand you should say the n word in America..the er one...meanwhile it was okay for him where he was originally from.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2017
- Location
- Perth Western Australia
Interesting.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2017
- Location
- Perth Western Australia
Sorry struggle doing this stuff incase it isn't working please forgive me and someone else might have luck.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2017
- Location
- Perth Western Australia
- Status