Ukraine

[yossie]

8 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

Correction: We got some nifty new drawings of submarines.

I was thinking Aussie is a quite wealthy country where tried to get normal submarines at the almost same price of US nuke boomers.

 

[rckymtn22]

Not sure why doesn't the Ukraine shut off the Russian oil/gas that goes through their country?.

[Trapper99]

6 minutes ago, rckymtn22 said:

Not sure why doesn't the Ukraine shut off the Russian oil/gas that goes through their country?.

I think they want Europe's help, not to piss them off by shutting off their gas. 

[Corylax18]

10 minutes ago, rckymtn22 said:

Not sure why doesn't the Ukraine shut off the Russian oil/gas that goes through their country?.

Because the vast majority of that gas is used and paid for by NATO countries. Is that who Ukraine wants to punish right now?

[riderpride]

55 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

nice one Fuzz. 

Our military prowess can be summed up as 

 

The legacy of General Monash lives on!

His direction along with Currie helped overcome the stalemate in France in WW! and the momentum carried them on to victory. Then again, it was 100 years ago, so what do I know?

Cheers

[NSXCIGAR]

4 hours ago, Corylax18 said:

OK. But we're really only looking at one side of the equation here. 

Can Europe (Germany) cut its Natural Gas usage by 1/3rd, over night? Can we just completely remove all of the iron ore, platinum, cobalt, etc. that they produce every year? Putin's got the world by the nuts right now, and he knows it. 

I think that's exactly Putin's ploy. How much will Germans care about the control of Luhansk & Donetsk after a year of no Russian energy? It'll be ok, Vlad, don't do it again but we're freezing over here. 

I believe Putin thinks he can undermine Kiev from his new Luhansk & Donetsk staging grounds. Now he can really control and fund separatist fighting. 

What's scary is that he could repeat this in the Baltics. All have a large population of "ethnic Russians" that could theoretically be carved out like Luhansk & Donetsk and used as a staging ground for separatist activity. 

[Trapper99]

3 minutes ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I think that's exactly Putin's ploy. How much will Germans care about the control of Luhansk & Donetsk after a year of no Russian energy? It'll be ok, Vlad, don't do it again but we're freezing over here. 

I believe Putin thinks he can undermine Kiev from his new Luhansk & Donetsk staging grounds. Now he can really control and fund separatist fighting. 

What's scary is that he could repeat this in the Baltics. All have a large population of "ethnic Russians" that could theoretically be carved out like Luhansk & Donetsk and used as a staging ground for separatist activity. 

Just the immediate threat of invasion is putting a strangle hold on the Ukrainian economy. My in laws still live in Ukraine, and last year was great for business, but now it’s bad. 

Also, Ukraine won’t call up the reserve forces for military preparation cause that effectively shuts the whole economy down.

[BrightonCorgi]

View points really depend on where you get your news and how you see the world. 

How many here are regular viewers of Russia Today cable channel?

[Corylax18]

6 minutes ago, BrightonCorgi said:

View points really depend on where you get your news and how you see the world. 

How many here are regular viewers of Russia Today cable channel?

Which RT? The American English version, the European English version? The Spanish version, the Mandarin Version, The French Version, The German one?

They have like a dozen youtube channels. I think most of us that know about it avoid it, I do because its pretty much pure propaganda. Pretty well veiled in many cases, but still Russian, state funded propaganda. Its like asking why more of us dont read "Granma" for our embargo related news. 

[BrightonCorgi]

1 hour ago, Corylax18 said:

Which RT? The American English version, the European English version? The Spanish version, the Mandarin Version, The French Version, The German one?

They have like a dozen youtube channels. I think most of us that know about it avoid it, I do because its pretty much pure propaganda. Pretty well veiled in many cases, but still Russian, state funded propaganda. Its like asking why more of us dont read "Granma" for our embargo related news. 

The European English TV channel is the one I watch; nothing on YouTube.  It's no more propaganda than any other US based news channel.  

I think I get the German one too, but don't browse the German channels beyond a couple of auto channels.

[ltte]

2 hours ago, Corylax18 said:

Which RT? The American English version, the European English version? The Spanish version, the Mandarin Version, The French Version, The German one?

They have like a dozen youtube channels. I think most of us that know about it avoid it, I do because its pretty much pure propaganda. Pretty well veiled in many cases, but still Russian, state funded propaganda. Its like asking why more of us dont read "Granma" for our embargo related news. 

Unlike countless main stream media that under corporate/governement/inteligence service control and the Voice of America (VOA) " that is a dynamic international multimedia broadcaster with service in only more than 40 languages."

I'm very biased on this subject (since I'm from Serbia) and I will not further  comment this issue.

Ltte

[Corylax18]

6 hours ago, BrightonCorgi said:

The European English TV channel is the one I watch; nothing on YouTube.  It's no more propaganda than any other US based news channel.  

I think I get the German one too, but don't browse the German channels beyond a couple of auto channels.

Yikes. I was hoping your first post was a joke, that went over my head. 

No part of RT is based in America, or anywhere but Moscow. Regardless of the platform, language or country that you consume their content in, its all 100% funded, created and distributed by the Russian government, for the Russian government. There is absolutely nothing legitimate about it, in any way shape or form. 

I wont defend the quality of US based news channels (their all pretty bad) but at least its independently produced crap. 

Have you done any research at all? I'm stunned at the naivete, especially on a Cuban Cigar related website, where discussion of government mis information happens regularly. 

RT has been described as a major propaganda outlet for the Russian government and its foreign policy.^[2] Academics, fact-checkers, and news reporters (including some current and former RT reporters) have identified RT as a purveyor of disinformation^[43] and conspiracy theories.^[49] UK media regulator Ofcom has repeatedly found RT to have breached its rules on impartiality, including multiple instances in which RT broadcast "materially misleading" content.^[56]

In 2012, RT's editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan compared the channel to the Russian Ministry of Defence.^[57] Referring to the Russo-Georgian War, she stated that it was "waging an information war, and with the entire Western world".^[16][58] In September 2017, RT America was ordered to register as a foreign agent with the United States Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.^[59] RT has been banned in Ukraine since 2014,^[60] and in Latvia^[61] and Lithuania^[62] since 2020.

 

4 hours ago, ltte said:

Unlike countless main stream media that under corporate/governement/inteligence service control and the Voice of America (VOA) " that is a dynamic international multimedia broadcaster with service in only more than 40 languages."

I'm very biased on this subject (since I'm from Serbia) and I will not further  comment this issue.

Ltte

I didnt understand your post. Can you elaborate?

[BEVOSREVENGE]

14 minutes ago, Corylax18 said:

I didnt understand your post. Can you elaborate?

Just guessing here but I think the implication was RT is no worse or better than VOA when it comes to pushing propaganda.

Seems like a fair take.  No doubt all media today needs to be consumed with critical eyes and ears.  

[Corylax18]

4 minutes ago, BEVOSREVENGE said:

Just guessing here but I think the implication was RT is no worse or better than VOA when it comes to pushing propaganda.

Seems like a fair take.  No doubt all media today needs to be consumed with critical eyes and ears.  

That makes sense, I get it now. And I agree, VOA should not be anyone's single source of news. Just like RT should not be anyone's single or even main source of news. 

But VOA is not the same as RT. It doesnt serve at the behest of any single party or leader, they require at least 2 independent sources of corroboration for everything they publish. VOA has also been shrinking rapidly over the last two decades as the internet has made it far easier to find information on what you. RT has been expanding the last 20 years. 

I totally understand the comparisons, but they are not the same. 

[BrightonCorgi]

1 hour ago, Corylax18 said:

 There is absolutely nothing legitimate about it, in any way shape or form. 

I wont defend the quality of US based news channels (their all pretty bad) but at least its independently produced crap.

How are you defining legitimate?  RT reports on the same national and international events.  How many hours of RT have you personally watched on TV?  Some footnotes from Wikipedia is hardly unbiased either.

Government is in cahoots with American media.  Quite obvious on how things "leaked" and talking points parroting Government talking points.  Doesn't matter if it's TV or social media.  Neither would exist or be as big as they are without the Governments approval and dictate.

[MrBirdman]

31 minutes ago, Bijan said:

I can't help but think back to the second Iraq war and the pro-Invasin bias in the US media

It was shameful - the entire establishment was and remains very hawkish. It sells weapons - we make them, other people use them. 

RT is a mouthpiece for the Russian state, but that doesn’t mean they’re always wrong. 

Very few people trust the media anymore - I don’t fully trust the NYT’s and I’m a subscriber. Everything must be read with a skeptical eye. I subscribe because they are better than any other national media. I also subscribe to my local papers, which I trust much more but which have limited national/international coverage. Cable news is completely worthless inforage-porn.

Most internet news comes from click-mills that don’t do journalism. They re-post (or concoct) stories that enrage and misinform because they get clicks. Outrage - real or manufactured, drives traffic. A close friend of mine runs social media for a major US media firm and said in 2020 AOC was his #1 click generator from right-wingers. It’s a big part of the great irony of the internet age: instant access to almost any information has made public discourse dumber than ever. 

[Cigar Surgeon]

Invading other countries is bad, mmmkay.

Using whataboutism to justify it is bad, mmmkay.

Don't invade other countres, mmmkay.

This PSA brought to you by a Canadian who has countrymen used as peacekeepers around the world. 

[El Presidente]

3 hours ago, Corylax18 said:

I didnt understand your post. Can you elaborate?

please don't 

[Bijan]

16 minutes ago, Cigar Surgeon said:

Using whataboutism to justify it is bad, mmmkay.

I think those of us engaging in that weren't defending the invasion, at least I wasn't. I was just comparing the poor quality of media worldwide.

But to answer the charge that hypocrisy is of no consequence, I would say that the accusation of whataboutism can be an instance of a similar type of fallacy, attacking the rebuttal as irrelevant, where it might be relevant.

And furthermore on a more abstract level I'd quote Matthew 7:1-3

 

7 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

² For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

³ And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

[Cigar Surgeon]

5 minutes ago, Bijan said:

I think those of us engaging in that weren't defending the invasion, at least I wasn't. I was just comparing the poor quality of media worldwide.

But to answer the charge that hypocrisy is of no consequence, I would say that the accusation of whataboutism can be an instance of a similar type of fallacy, attacking the rebuttal as irrelevant, where it might be relevant.

Whataboutism in this case is comparing the pending invasion of Ukraine by Russia to anything the US has done in the past. 

There is no justification for the invasion of Ukraine, and it doesn't matter how any media site decides to spin it for their political/corporate/alien overlords. 

[El Presidente]

5 minutes ago, Bijan said:

 

And furthermore on a more abstract level I'd quote Matthew 7:1-3

 

7 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

² For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

³ And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Really?

 

That is straight out of the "Despot" PR machine. 

It was one of Robert Mugabe's favourite defenses. 

[Bijan]

1 hour ago, El Presidente said:

Really?

 

That is straight out of the "Despot" PR machine. 

It was one of Robert Mugabe's favourite defenses. 

I don't mean it as to deflect from bad actions, which are still wrong, but one necessary response to whataboutism is to say, yes that's wrong we should have done  better and will do better, and this is wrong in the same way.

In any case it is an accepted principle no matter how morally repugnant. In the Nuremberg trials it was accepted that Nazi war criminals would not be tried for crimes that the allies had committed, so that it would not bring disrepute to the proceedings and make it look like the victors were simply punishing the losers.

 

1 hour ago, Cigar Surgeon said:

Whataboutism in this case is comparing the pending invasion of Ukraine by Russia to anything the US has done in the past. 

There is no justification for the invasion of Ukraine, and it doesn't matter how any media site decides to spin it for their political/corporate/alien overlords. 

Again from the perspective you are arguing from (invading other countries is objectively bad) this is 100% correct.

But I have heard the logic, we are the good guys, if we invade a country it's ok, but Russians are the bad guys, if they invade a country it's bad.

[Cigar Surgeon]

9 minutes ago, Bijan said:

I don't mean it as to deflect from bad actions, which are still wrong, but one necessary response to whataboutism is to say, yes that's wrong we should have done  better and will do better, and this is wrong in the same way.

Ah for the record that is not whataboutism. Whatboutism is 'well the US invaded Iraq and that was wrong' as a way of moving the narrative off the current event.

1 minute ago, Bijan said:

Again from the perspective you are arguing from (invading other countries is objectively bad) this is 100% correct.

But I have heard the logic, we are the good guys, if we invade a country it's ok, but Russians are the bad guys, if they invade a country it's bad.

For sure. And of course both are wrong. 

The UN has lofty goals but like the League of Nations before it, all the members are going to sit by wringing their hands as an invasion takes place. 

[Bijan]

1 minute ago, Cigar Surgeon said:

Ah for the record that is not whataboutism. Whatboutism is 'well the US invaded Iraq and that was wrong' as a way of moving the narrative off the current event.

Yes, but whataboutism is effective in large part because some people will not admit that the deflection was wrong too, or will even try and justify it.

Otherwise whataboutism is just shooting yourself in the foot. Because you're saying that this immoral action you are committing or about to commit is just like that previous immoral action someone else committed before.

[SpecialK]

3 hours ago, MrBirdman said:

 

 A close friend of mine runs social media for a major US media firm and said in 2020 AOC was his #1 click generator from right-wingers. It’s a big part of the great irony of the internet age: instant access to almost any information has made public discourse dumber than ever. 

It's because we all want to date her 😅