Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Mazza]

Belgium is talking about the previously planned decomission of all nuclear reactors by 2025 - read, planning to extend their lifecycle due to the energy crisis. Good, very good, hopefully others will follow.

Sadly, not quite all. Only the two most recent reactors will be kept running, the other 5 will close down in 2025. Instead, 2 new gas fueled power plants will be build (I wish I was making this up -_-)

[Draco-Onis]

I am not against those nations imposing their sanctions on us if that is what you are talking about

ROFLMAO those Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, Yemeni or (insert third world country we invaded here) sanctions are going to totally destroy the US economy /s

[Twdft]

He is wearing Ukrainian uniform, flag and all, with a gun. Does not matter if he is a merc or not at that point.



How to get press shot 101.



Tell me, what happens when a press car stops in viewing distance of enemy and someone in uniform and with a gun gets out.

If only there were a way to prevent the press' desire to have a soldier on board... you know like if the fucking enemy who could see a soldier getting out of a press car would not fucking be there to see it.

[Magnagarde]

Is it really so hard for you to believe that Putin wants reporters killed to try and keep the truth from being broadcast out of Ukraine and documenting the war crimes he is ordering the Russian military commit?

Every person with a relatively new phone is a journalist nowadays; reporters aren't as special as they used to be, especially when most of the visual nformation is passed on by amateur pursuers of the craft or civilians.

The press is being given too much importance. Putin knew what the media would say about him and one or a dozen American reporters in a warzone isn't going to change his or the world's perspective. On top of that, journalists are very often intelligence assets and on government payrolls to go for a specific narrative; Putin knows this best.

[Edge-]

On top of that, journalists are very often intelligence assets and on government payrolls to go for a specific narrative; Putin knows this best.

Citation needed*

[Magnagarde]

Citation needed*

If you need it, you're free to look for it on your own. The Yugoslav wars and the way they were reported on by some of its participants is your first lead.

[Magical Mudcrab]

If you need it, you're free to look for it on your own. The Yugoslav wars and the way they were reported on by some of its participants is your first lead.

Sounds a lot like talking out of your ass or blatantly lying when your response to a request for proof is "find it yourself".

[Magnagarde]

Sounds a lot like talking out of your ass or blatantly lying when your response to a request for proof is "find it yourself".

I'm not going to explain why the grass is green; it's all out there. It takes ten seconds to find historic evidence of press being used by intelligence services. There's hundreds of journalist intelligence assets working for Russia at this very moment, yet this somehow requires a "source".

If you think this is talking out of the ass or lying, then that's fine with me.

[Edge-]

I'm not going to explain why the grass is green; it's all out there.

This you? It's hard to have a discussion when the response to a question is "figure it out yourself".

[Magnagarde]

This you?

I'm everything you want me to be, but I won't insult myself by doing 10 seconds of searching on the internet to prove something to you because, quite frankly, you're not willing to do so either.

[Magical Mudcrab]

I'm not going to explain why the grass is green; it's all out there. There's thousands of intelligence asset press members working for Russia at this very moment, yet this somehow requires a "source".

If you think this is talking out of the ass or lying, then that's fine with me.

You're not saying the grass is green, you're saying that CNN and BBC war reporters are all secretly CIA and MI6 agents looking to undermine Russian interests. Either provide robust proofs of this point or don't mention it. You cannot assert something is true, demand other people look for evidence to support your point, and then act like you've done anything convincing.

[Edge-]

I'm everything you want me to be, but I won't insult myself by doing 10 seconds of searching on the internet to prove something to you because, quite frankly, you're not willing to do so either.

Well, I don't play chess with pigeons so I guess there's nowhere for this to go. That's unfortunate, I was genuinely curious to learn more.

[Magical Mudcrab]

I don't play chess with pigeons

You monster, pigeons love chess.

[Magnagarde]

You're not saying the grass is green, you're saying that CNN and BBC war reporters are all secretly CIA and MI6 agents looking to undermine Russian interests. Either provide robust proofs of this point or don't mention it. You cannot assert something is true, demand other people look for evidence to support your point, and then act like you've done anything convincing.

The New York Times wrote about the CIA using reporters, the news - all media within their reach - to influence public opinion and present their information; they did so in the 70s and 80s, when it was a high risk move to do so. There's a lot of evidence that Western journalists are intelligence assets. Snowden's documents prove that the NSA itself is embedded within almost every major news outlet in the West. I won't be quoting them; you have plenty of time to do so yourself.

You can pretend that journalists are there for the "truth alone" and for all we know they just might be, but you shouldn't be surprised if Putin doesn't care if one, a dozen or a hundred of them die because he employs his own press to do his bidding too.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, I don't play chess with pigeons so I guess there's nowhere for this to go. That's unfortunate, I was genuinely curious to learn more.

I'm sure a pigeon would find it a challenge.

[Magical Mudcrab]

I won't be downloading these for you and quoting them; you have plenty of time to do so yourself.

This is the crux of the problem. You can assert everything you want, but if you aren't able to provide relevant examples from sources, you're not going to be convincing. It's fine if you think that this is the case, but pushing the burden of proof off yourself and onto others is basically an immediate forfeit in any discussion. If you don't provide sources, people will believe you're lying (esp. with the "look for it yourself" retort). No one is going to go our of their way to try and make your argument for you.

[Edge-]

This is the crux of the problem. You can assert everything you want, but if you aren't able to provide relevant examples from sources, you're not going to be convincing. It's fine if you think that this is the case, but pushing the burden of proof off yourself and onto others is basically an immediate forfeit in any discussion. If you don't provide sources, people will believe you're lying (esp. with the "look for it yourself" retort). No one is going to go our of their way to try and make your argument for you.

There were absolutely efforts in the 70's, I was just wondering about more recent efforts. He cites Snowden, but I don't recall those in the Snowden docs.

Though amusing to cite Snowden now given his complete and total silence on the war in Ukraine. Suddenly, he's found something he's willing to shut the fuck up about. Curious!

[Gaidax]

The amazing discovery of news outlets being a two way intelligence supplier and narrative pusher directly or indirectly influenced by the interested parties of influence.

This absolutely does not mean that everything is fake news, but it's also not 100% crystal clear and objective either. To the credit of the West, however, at least they are trying to be, where as in Russia it's just straight up read the script.

[Magnagarde]

There were absolutely efforts in the 70's, I was just wondering about more recent efforts. He cites Snowden, but I don't recall those in the Snowden docs.

Though amusing to cite Snowden now given his complete and total silence on the war in Ukraine. Suddenly, he's found something he's willing to shut the fuck up about. Curious!

They're obviously all over Ukraine too, but the Russians have made it too easy for everyone involved to present the truth about Russian aggression, which is why the only directive an intelligence asset needs now in Ukraine is the following: take pictures and speak the truth, it is everywhere around you. You want hard evidence about one of the reporters on the ground right now? We both will perhaps have it in a couple of decades when this settles down, provided it does settle down, just like it was the case with every crysis that happened before.

To address the Snowden bit; to pretend that the entire journalist trade changed within 10 years, while the same actors remain on the stage, is to feign ignorance for the sake of pretending that I'm wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

The amazing discovery of news outlets being a two way intelligence supplier and narrative pusher directly or indirectly influenced by the interested parties of influence.

This absolutely does not mean that everything is fake news, but it's also not 100% crystal clear and objective either. To the credit of the West, however, at least they are trying to be, where as in Russia it's just straight up read the script.

I personally have never said that the news about the aggression on Ukraine are fake(what worth would saying that even have when there's so much evidence pointing to the contrary?), but I did write that many journalists and many members of the press are intelligence assets and that Putin sees the foreign press as nothing more and nothing less than one of these assets. The importance of the warzone press has diminished in the past decade however, what with all the available technology at the disposal of ordinary civilian bystanders.

[Magical Mudcrab]

There were absolutely efforts in the 70's, I was just wondering about more recent efforts. He cites Snowden, but I don't recall those in the Snowden docs.

Though amusing to cite Snowden now given his complete and total silence on the war in Ukraine. Suddenly, he's found something he's willing to shut the fuck up about. Curious!

To clarify, I'm not saying that it would shock me to find intelligence agencies running operations in the media during the height of the Cold War, but there's so many degrees of separation between that and what was being claimed, which implies that the problem is persistent in the modern day:

On top of that, journalists are very often intelligence assets and on government payrolls to go for a specific narrative; Putin knows this best.

A very loose chain of proofs that need to be given are:
- The problem has a historical basis.
- The problem has persisted since the Cold War (i.e.: post-90's).
- The problem has persisted and involved multiple, disparate nations and their news organizations.
- The problem is so widespread in the modern day in the West that there is reasonable cause to think that war reporters are intelligence assets.

We've not even established the first link in that oversimplified chain due to lack of sources, so I'm less inclined to be charitable and even consider the rest until adequate sources are provided.

[Gaidax]

I personally have never said that the news about the aggression on Ukraine are fake(what worth would that have when there's so much evidence pointing to the contrary?), but I did write that many journalists and many members of the press are intelligence assets and that Putin sees the foreign press as nothing more and nothing less than one of these assets.

They aren't, but as you said - in this case the thing works itself. You don't need to make shit up - it is as it appears to be.

It's not a justification of war vs made up WMDs that got pushed hard.

I do find it cute that some think that narrative is something that's left completely unattended free for all.

- - - Updated - - -

A very loose chain of proofs that need to be given are:
- The problem has a historical basis.
- The problem has persisted since the Cold War (i.e.: post-90's).
- The problem has persisted and involved multiple, disparate nations and their news organizations.
- The problem is so widespread in the modern day in the West that there is reasonable cause to think that war reporters are intelligence assets.

We've not even established the first link in that oversimplified chain due to lack of sources, so I'm less inclined to be charitable and even consider the rest until adequate sources are provided.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...te-house-spin/

There's your historical basis and somewhat recent too.

The narrative was drummed up by US and got swallowed hook line and sinker by media of the time and spread far and wide... then the dust settled and realization came much of it was BS. But it was too late already, the job was done.