USSR invades Ukraine. (22 Viewers)
- Thread starter Alan Dugdales Moustache
- Start date
Otis
Well-Known Member
With a face like that, who could blame him.
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
I agree but the threat alone, however small , has had the desired effect. We're not going in.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Could wipe out their WW2 era armies in a few days
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
At the risk of being nuked ? Personally I don't think Russia would nuke anyone, but I think it's best the west arm Ukraine to the hilt, as well as bolster a the Baltic States, Poland etc.
Sadly I can't see Ukraine holding out in the east forever and I think the sheer volume of bombardment from Russia will win . What they will inherit is of their own making and God knows what they will do with it if Ukraine continues a geurilla war there.
The danger comes later if Russia annexes the Donbas in full. If they then decide to invade more of central Ukraine I fear we're entering a very dangerous period.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
If Ukraine is lost that’s an enormous amount of territory given up and if what’s happened so far is anything to go by the war crimes will be totally off the scale. He’ll then push on to Moldova just over the border and once he’s done there you’ve got Georgia with another pro Russian separatist regime.
If his obsolete armed forces are humiliated he can be brought to terms-full lifting of economic sanctions to start. The more he takes and the less we do the more emboldened he gets.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
More news coming out about Mariupol today, seems like it wasn't really reported properly at all.
Did anyone see much about this? I'm getting pretty tired of the media these days. They seem so lazy as well.
Did anyone see much about this? I'm getting pretty tired of the media these days. They seem so lazy as well.
What are you seeing?
jimmyhillsfanclub
Well-Known Member
I've not seen any new news since the "surrender" of the Steel plant a few days ago......and I can't see any specific updates on the MSM sites today.....
What have you seen or read thats happened, allegedly or otherwise, that has not been reported properly?
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
It looks like the whole city has fallen. I genuinely had no idea it had happened!
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
What have they reported inaccurately and dishonestly?
Personally I think the reporters in Ukraine deserve a lot of credit.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
Do you have any examples? I'm not sure what you're basing this on. Are you on the ground?
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
I'm just asking for examples of where the reporting has been inaccurate, as you claim it has been.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
Do you think the reporting on this war has been one sided towards Ukraine? Even a little bit? If you don't then it is largely irrelevant what I post, but I bet you can tell me a lot more about Ukraine than Russia, and that is not only because the latter is dishonest.
I would personally like to know more about what Russia are doing, and this isn't the media's focus. They seem quite happy to tell you that one of their soldier's have been jailed for war crimes, but don't really give a great deal of spotlight to the fact an entire Ukrainian city has been taken over by Russians. Of course, if you go looking for information you can generally find some stuff buried there, but it is naive to think there isn't a slant towards wanting to tell the world how great Ukraine are doing being pushed to the front of the headlines. Whilst I wish that was all entirely true, it isn't fully accurate or honest as I have said.
You're asking me for my opinions, but I thought we were dealing in matters of fact - I'm asking you specifically about your claims that certain reporting in Ukraine has been inaccurate. What were you referring to?
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
Facts about what? I think you have taken my original post and just run down an alleyway here. I am referring to the entire war, and I don't feel there has been an accurate level of reporting over the whole thing, mainly because everyone is so intent on wanting Ukraine to win (which as I said I understood). If you can find me a machine which can process every news article in the world and then give me the outcome, let me know and we can turn opinions into statistics and debate, but if you aren't going to answer my questions either then I think it is probably pointless to continue this discussion.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I just think he means give an example where reporting didn’t match reality.
Yeah, we don't need a machine, I'm just looking for one example where the reporting was inaccurate. Do you have any?
You're entitled to your opinion that media reporting of the war hasn't focused enough on what Russia is doing, or has "buried" news of Russian victories (I disagree completely with both). But even if I gave you the benefit of the doubt, I think it's grossly unfair to the journalists on the ground in Ukraine to call them lazy and dishonest. They're risking their lives to try and show the world what's going on - it's not a safe, or easy gig, it's not an exact science, and they will invariably get things wrong, or frame stories in ways you disagree with. But what's the alternative? You'd rather they all just go home instead?
We should all be cynical when it comes to war reporting, and you'd be a fool to hold up any war reporter's story as gospel. But if you want to start writing them all off as lazy, dishonest amateurs then there's only one group of people who that benefits, and it sure as shit isn't the ordinary people on the ground.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
Well you just confirmed my suspicions really. You have run down an alleyway on one comment I have made and gone all strawman argument. I have never said all journalists are lazy, and I have never said every single one of them in Ukraine aren't doing their jobs properly. I have pointed out that in my view the standard of journalism is slipping and that the picture we are getting here is not a true reflection of the entire war story. I think you are extremely naive if you think otherwise to be honest, but I am not even sure that is what we are arguing about as you are playing the man and not the ball.
You can look at Mariupol, you can look at war crimes committed by Ukrainian soldiers, you can look at individual battles taken in different locations, the fake ´ghostman´, or even the fluctuating (in some circumstances downwards) death figures, movements of the Russian forces, hardware owned or destroyed and the hyper-focus when it something on the Russian side. The list goes on, but again you know that. I suspect your experience with the CET has probably put you in the journalists union, but I don't think you are looking at the bigger picture here.
In your last paragraph you say we should be cynical when it comes to war reporting, but you have been demonstrating the complete opposite by trying to do everything this afternoon to defend the credibility of journalists without being open minded about what I am saying at all. I personally think it is therefore pointless to continue this discussion with you.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
The fog of war is a thing. But my knowledge Mariupol had fallen came from mainstream sources, so did my knowledge the ghost man wasn’t real (though I never saw anything claiming it definitely was), same with the death/losses figures.
On the other hand I’ve seen “independent media” claim a climate protest in Germany was proof of both covid andUkraine death tolls being faked, images from 2014 were from 2022 and other stuff.
On the other hand I’ve seen “independent media” claim a climate protest in Germany was proof of both covid andUkraine death tolls being faked, images from 2014 were from 2022 and other stuff.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
well when an evacuation is a surrender?
I thought I'd been pretty open to what you had to say, but sorry you feel otherwise. I don't think there's any conflict at all between urging people to be cynical about war reporting, while at the same time defending the media's credibility, as I have been doing.
Ultimately, I think broad brush statements like "they seem so lazy" about the media are complete rubbish, so no, I don't think it's a strawman argument at all to pull you up on that. If you have some kind of insight into the journalistic process on the ground in Ukraine that we should know about then I'm genuinely interested to hear about it, but otherwise your claims that things haven't been "properly reported" don't appear to be based on anything, other than what you've read online from people who are nowhere near.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Which really is all that was asked of ESB
SBAndy
Well-Known Member
That was obvious, and reported, a good few days (maybe even a week or two) ago. The Russians had control of everything but the steelworks. The steelworks was surrendered, ergo the Russians have conquered the city.
Nowt to do with misreporting. If you missed it that’s on you, not the journalists.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
I'm afraid I disagree wholeheartedly.
Yeah that was my understanding of the situation too.
duffer
Well-Known Member
I kind of get where ESB is here. I do follow it fairly closely and I did get the impression that the final surrender in Mariupol wasn't really explained in terms of the bigger picture.
That said, I've no general complaints about the journalism, I think it's inevitable that a certain amount of objectivity will be lost simply because of the horror that the Russian military has inflicted. The more detailed briefings always seem to play with a fairly straight bat in terms of overall progress, imho.
More than anything else, I just hope it can be resolved without thousands more civilians and soldiers dying. That though, still feels as though it's down to how long Putin wants to keep up the madness.
That said, I've no general complaints about the journalism, I think it's inevitable that a certain amount of objectivity will be lost simply because of the horror that the Russian military has inflicted. The more detailed briefings always seem to play with a fairly straight bat in terms of overall progress, imho.
More than anything else, I just hope it can be resolved without thousands more civilians and soldiers dying. That though, still feels as though it's down to how long Putin wants to keep up the madness.
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
I would say lazy is reporting something then adding a footnote that it can't be verified. Why not keep it hush until you know its fact or fiction?
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
So you're complaint is that you had no idea that Mariupol had fallen, then admit you don't follow mainstream news. So how was mainstream news supposed to inform you? Telepathy?
I agree that at all times, and especially during war, you have to be very careful of what is reported, but that isn't necessarily the fault of journalists. War zones are dangerous places, so their movements are likely to be heavily restricted and thus their access to information limited. How can they report on what the Russians are up to when the Russians are hardly going to go around telling everyone? Then you've got the spin each side wants to put on it. The steelworks for example - if official sources have told then it's an evacuation then they have to report that. If the Russians call it a surrender who to believe?