• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

UA-RU | DISCUSSIONS

Status
Not open for further replies.
lcurle said:
No matter if you are Russian, American, Korean, Chinese etc... In today's world ALL news media is 100% controlled by the government or corporations pushing the narrative. The problem is every news station worldwide wants to be the first to break a news story so they report it without fact-checking or verifying the sources. I would like to see war correspondence on the ground reporting on the UA/RU conflict to get first-hand video. There are a couple of Russians in Belgorod filming and posting the air defense tests to debunk Russia's claims they are being attacked. This site and other OSINT sites are suffering the same feed lag coming from on the ground. I am glad to start seeing helmet cams from both sides circulating the best they can.
Click to expand...
Yessir!
 
intel-bank said:
Literally no. The russian government has been cracking down on free media since at least 1919.
Click to expand...
More than likely, in saying that aren't we lucky our governments haven't done the same thing and our mainstream media sources are so trusting and reliable to give us the information that we want to hear instead of the information we don't need to know.? Yet? Personally I have tried to question abc news when they have call in available on radio , and I'm as gentle as possible to try and ask a question or give an opinion, but as they ask what you would like to say before patching you through, if it challenges the narrative I constantly am told it might not happen due to numbers and time limit or sorry we have ran out of time even though they take the time to listen to your statement? A perfect example of a so called trusted media source that controls public opinions on air and supports the narrative with little challenge giving the propaganda more effectiveness. Now when someone does get through where the opinion is not desirable they constantly say sorry that is all the time we have so other callers can get a chance. Those that support the narrative can talk for longer.
In saying this compared to say skynews and smaller media sources, these are more open to both sides of views and allow panels with different opinions to air themselves without constraints unless getting heated being much more constructive,open ,honest and fair. They also announce facts about alot of issues the public should know about in all areas that are restricted or not aired on mainstream due to government narrative. So what's your opinion on smaller media sources reports? Should they still be allowed to operate? Or do you agree with Russia or China or any other country that has or wants full control over media reporting or atleast some control.? Wikileaks? Obviously I don't condone military secrets and security information being made public but in saying that corruption in government, politicians and their personal and professional corruption or law breaches, as well as industrial sectors eg. Mining companies Tech sector eg. Communication- phone companies the list goes on and on. The public have the right to know . Journalists also complain about what they have to say how to say it and their restrictions on what can be used and what can't. When really the people have the right to know, as that is more informative for them to have more options, opinions and news unrestricted gives them the chance to try and be heard leaving opportunity for a fairer system and population control over issues that affect them.
Feel free . In reality your not.
 
In saying all I say is being pragmatic as I am , my old man is proud of me but informs me our kind are nearing extinction 🤣😂🤣 he is war vet himself. As much as I'm humbled by that classification I did inform him yes I am but with that =🤕 sore head as you feel like your beating it against a brick wall most of the time and the only joy is that odd occasion you get through to someone to be little more open to possibilities and opinions and practicality. You know to reduce chances of POP.
🤣😂🤣😂🤞🤝👍
 
72 hour rule eliminates most false reporting. If other diverse sources don’t pick the story up with 2nd or 3rd person/data then it is alleged. Doesn’t matter if it’s cnn rt fox dw or even a Twitter post. There will be conformations (not echo chamber reporting or retweets to support or it’s probably not accurate.

Beyond that simply recognize and don’t accept opinion as news.

And beyond that you pick a side and don’t try to claim you haven’t because biases are universal.
 
SamHoarderBridges said:
I mean i know they're the enemy but gotta remember they have every right to be inform on nuclear attack preparedness as much as we do.
Click to expand...
That a given, the implication of the tweet was that they they were some new warning being given to people along the boarder to prepare themselves for an escalation.
The bulletin was for several different types of emergencies most of which were naturally occurring disasters.
Not a specific bulletin for what to do in a nuclear war because there is an imminent nuclear threat.
 
SamHoarderBridges said:
I mean i know they're the enemy but gotta remember they have every right to be inform on nuclear attack preparedness as much as we do.
Click to expand...
I was pointing this out so as to put it into perspective. Meaning that these pamphlets are not something new and this is being done at the last minute in preparation for an imminent attack.
 
Seriously said:
That a given, the implication of the tweet was that they they were some new warning being given to people along the boarder to prepare themselves for an escalation.
The bulletin was for several different types of emergencies most of which were naturally occurring disasters.
Not a specific bulletin for what to do in a nuclear war because there is an imminent nuclear threat.
Click to expand...
Unless it’s a nuclear tsunami that spawns a sharknado.
 
DarkNoon said:
Well proportional is not something that comes to mind. What's the antonym of proportional? 😅😞
Click to expand...
I never subscribed to "proportional response". I am a beleiver in "massive, overwhelming response". The enemy can't hit you back if he is on the ground, unconscious.
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
What do you think Russia would do if France lobbed a nuke onto their territory?
Click to expand...
It’s just a statement of policy
If Russia were to actually use one nuke on a low population center I wouldn’t necessarily advocate responding back with a nuke.
continue on the war as is.
Improve air defense.
Make the use of a nuke a hollow bitter pill for them to have to swallow.
Russia was just overwhelmingly condemned in the UN for the invasion.
They would be seen as a criminal state.

Russia and Russian apologist are hoping talks of nuclear Armageddon will stall western support for Ukraine.
With the goal of salvaging something from their war.
But it’s not working, Nato nations are still unwavering, as are the Nordic states the baltics and many of the Slavic states.
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
What do you think Russia would do if France lobbed a nuke onto their territory?
Click to expand...
The whole point of nukes is as a deterrent. If you come out and remove the deterrent you have given Russia the green light to use a nuke in Ukraine which will inevitably lead to France forcing their citizens to the bomb shelters while they conduct conventional strikes. Pandora’s box is already open.
 
TruthandJustice said:
The whole point of nukes is as a deterrent. If you come out and remove the deterrent you have given Russia the green light to use a nuke in Ukraine which will inevitably lead to France forcing their citizens to the bomb shelters while they conduct conventional strikes. Pandora’s box is already open.
Click to expand...
The bottom line is there was no reason or benefit for him to say this. There will still be panic in Europe even if the target is Ukraine.
 

Russia May Have Lost Almost Half The Troops Putin Amassed For Ukraine Invasion: Report​


www.ibtimes.com.au

Russia May Have Lost Almost Half The Troops Putin Amassed For Ukraine Invasion: Report

Reports say Russia may have suffered irretrievable losses of over 90,000 soldiers, including those who have been killed, missing, wounded and deserted.
www.ibtimes.com.au www.ibtimes.com.au

And all this time I thought UA’s total of Russian KIA was “optimistic”
It’s currently ~64K
Guess not.
These are EPIC lose percentages. With the end of massed infantry charges against firearms, this is unbelievably incompetent for a world power. Any power.
“They just keep coming the same old style…”
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom