User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:15:07 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Guess we found the 88. lol “Trust Us” - adl So obvious, so desperate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:17:18 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: lol “Trust Us” - adl So obvious, so desperate. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Guess we found the 88. lol “Trust Us” - adl So obvious, so desperate. Nobody suggested anything of the sort. Not one person here says we should "just trust". It's very telling that the only way you think you can win is by construction of a strawman. Again, you'd benefit greatly from a basic logic course. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:19:01 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nobody suggested anything of the sort. Not one person here says we should "just trust". It's very telling that the only way you think you can win is by construction of a strawman. Again, you'd benefit greatly from a basic logic course. You’ve been begging everyone to trust your twitter bros. Stop projecting |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:21:36 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You’ve been begging everyone to trust your twitter bros. Stop projecting Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Nobody suggested anything of the sort. Not one person here says we should "just trust". It's very telling that the only way you think you can win is by construction of a strawman. Again, you'd benefit greatly from a basic logic course. You’ve been begging everyone to trust your twitter bros. Stop projecting I'll ignore the red herring. Feel free to suggest an alternative. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:23:41 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You’ve been begging everyone to trust your twitter bros. Stop projecting Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Nobody suggested anything of the sort. Not one person here says we should "just trust". It's very telling that the only way you think you can win is by construction of a strawman. Again, you'd benefit greatly from a basic logic course. You’ve been begging everyone to trust your twitter bros. Stop projecting Wrong again. Stop being obtuse. Google "strawman fallacy" it might help you stop embarrassing yourself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:27:38 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wrong again. Stop being obtuse. Google "strawman fallacy" it might help you stop embarrassing yourself. So you aren’t relying on a 1500 page thread made up former mil intelligence analyzing osint from twitter and other sources? Also you strawman anybody who doesn’t agree with you, stop being a hypocrite. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:44:10 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So you aren’t relying on a 1500 page thread made up former mil intelligence analyzing osint from twitter and other sources? Also you strawman anybody who doesn’t agree with you, stop being a hypocrite. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Wrong again. Stop being obtuse. Google "strawman fallacy" it might help you stop embarrassing yourself. So you aren’t relying on a 1500 page thread made up former mil intelligence analyzing osint from twitter and other sources? Also you strawman anybody who doesn’t agree with you, stop being a hypocrite. No, I strawman everyone who refuses to engage the actual argument and instead constructs a bullshit argument of "OSINT bros on Twitter". You have ZERO evidence to back up your opinion. You cannot engage our argument, because you know you will lose. So instead you construct one you can- namely "twitter isn't reliable". Fucking weak and pathetic. You also obviously missed the part about the military forum. You are taking bits and pieces of an argument because you can't defeat the entirely of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 6:20:27 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, I strawman everyone who refuses to engage the actual argument and instead constructs a bullshit argument of "OSINT bros on Twitter". You have ZERO evidence to back up your opinion. You cannot engage our argument, because you know you will lose. So instead you construct one you can- namely "twitter isn't reliable". Fucking weak and pathetic. You also obviously missed the part about the military forum. You are taking bits and pieces of an argument because you can't defeat the entirely of it. You’re projecting again. I question the sources and validity of your “evidence” and you’re sperging out, that’s the synopsis of this whole thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 6:23:07 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You’re projecting again. I question the validity of your “evidence” and you’re sperging out, that’s the synopsis of this whole thread. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: No, I strawman everyone who refuses to engage the actual argument and instead constructs a bullshit argument of "OSINT bros on Twitter". You have ZERO evidence to back up your opinion. You cannot engage our argument, because you know you will lose. So instead you construct one you can- namely "twitter isn't reliable". Fucking weak and pathetic. You also obviously missed the part about the military forum. You are taking bits and pieces of an argument because you can't defeat the entirely of it. You’re projecting again. I question the validity of your “evidence” and you’re sperging out, that’s the synopsis of this whole thread. Do you know what projecting means? You have yet to provide anything even remotely close to a coherent argument, instead you cry about twitter and as usual, when one is losing an argument, saying things like "sperging out". I've laid out my argument clearly and concisely multiple times. You've just embarrassed yourself with logical fallacies and weak ad hominems. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 6:29:45 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do you know what projecting means? You have yet to provide anything even remotely close to a coherent argument, instead you cry about twitter and as usual, when one is losing an argument, saying things like "sperging out". I've laid out my argument clearly and concisely multiple times. You've just embarrassed yourself with logical fallacies and weak ad hominems. False, you refuse to listen. My argument has been much like the others in this thread who are skeptical of your “intel” that is in lockstep with the lying western press. Any other sources one points to and you claim Russian shill. Pretty convenient. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 6:34:01 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: False, you refuse to listen. My argument has been much like the others in this thread who are skeptical of your “intel” that is in lockstep with the lying western press. Any other sources one points to and you claim Russian shill. Pretty convenient. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Do you know what projecting means? You have yet to provide anything even remotely close to a coherent argument, instead you cry about twitter and as usual, when one is losing an argument, saying things like "sperging out". I've laid out my argument clearly and concisely multiple times. You've just embarrassed yourself with logical fallacies and weak ad hominems. False, you refuse to listen. My argument has been much like the others in this thread who are skeptical of your “intel” that is in lockstep with the lying western press. Any other sources one points to and you claim Russian shill. Pretty convenient. Wrong, you keep misrepresenting the argument. Your argument is silly. Like kindergarten silly. "my intel" is in "lockstep" with the MSM therefore it's false. It's absurd. I've laid out with one particular example why, with a little effort, you can often come to reasonable conclusions- Bucha is the best example. You're response is the equivalent of "nuh uh, I don't believe it!". You have yet to attack the ACTUAL information coming out, because you KNOW you can't. RT is LITERALLY state run Russian media, so yes, RT shills for Russia. It's not that difficult of a concept. Shame you can't grasp it. ETA Hell I've even posted a RUSSIAN source saying they don't believe UKR is a nation or a people, and you all have conveniently ignored it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 6:43:09 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wrong, you keep misrepresenting the argument. Your argument is silly. Like kindergarten silly. "my intel" is in "lockstep" with the MSM therefore it's false. It's absurd. I've laid out with one particular example why, with a little effort, you can often come to reasonable conclusions- Bucha is the best example. You're response is the equivalent of "nuh uh, I don't believe it!". You have yet to attack the ACTUAL information coming out, because you KNOW you can't. RT is LITERALLY state run Russian media, so yes, RT shills for Russia. It's not that difficult of a concept. Shame you can't grasp it. ETA Hell I've even posted a RUSSIAN source saying they don't believe UKR is a nation or a people, and you all have conveniently ignored it. Nah Saul, just because I am skeptical of your intel, doesn’t make what you’re peddling gospel. Don’t think anyone has questioned whether or not RT is state run propaganda. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 6:46:19 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nah Saul, just because I am skeptical of your intel, doesn’t make what you’re peddling gospel. Don’t think anyone has questioned whether or not RT is state run propaganda. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Wrong, you keep misrepresenting the argument. Your argument is silly. Like kindergarten silly. "my intel" is in "lockstep" with the MSM therefore it's false. It's absurd. I've laid out with one particular example why, with a little effort, you can often come to reasonable conclusions- Bucha is the best example. You're response is the equivalent of "nuh uh, I don't believe it!". You have yet to attack the ACTUAL information coming out, because you KNOW you can't. RT is LITERALLY state run Russian media, so yes, RT shills for Russia. It's not that difficult of a concept. Shame you can't grasp it. ETA Hell I've even posted a RUSSIAN source saying they don't believe UKR is a nation or a people, and you all have conveniently ignored it. Nah Saul, just because I am skeptical of your intel, doesn’t make what you’re peddling gospel. Don’t think anyone has questioned whether or not RT is state run propaganda. And as I've said, you've never attacked the intel itself, you've only provided "witty" remarks about twitter and OSINT bros. You've not provided any sources yourself either. So you've failed all the way around. Now why don't you go sit in the corner and think about what you've done if you're not going to attack the intel itself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 7:00:47 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And as I've said, you've never attacked the intel itself, you've only provided "witty" remarks about twitter and OSINT bros. You've not provided any sources yourself either. So you've failed all the way around. Now why don't you go sit in the corner and think about what you've done if you're not going to attack the intel itself. Why wouldn’t the mayor mention atrocities when he proclaimed they were liberated on the 31st? Just asking questions Saul…..okay now your turn to sperg….go! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 7:06:44 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why wouldn’t the mayor mention atrocities when he proclaimed they were liberated on the 31st? Just asking questions Saul…..okay now your turn to sperg….go! Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: And as I've said, you've never attacked the intel itself, you've only provided "witty" remarks about twitter and OSINT bros. You've not provided any sources yourself either. So you've failed all the way around. Now why don't you go sit in the corner and think about what you've done if you're not going to attack the intel itself. Why wouldn’t the mayor mention atrocities when he proclaimed they were liberated on the 31st? Just asking questions Saul…..okay now your turn to sperg….go! Saul? sperg? lmao. Talk about projecting. Well, you made an attempt to shoot down the intel. I'd guess because he wanted to gather some of the evidence himself before saying anything, but I don't know. Do you really somehow think it proves something either way? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 7:26:48 PM EDT
[#16]
The sperg is strong, but not where it thinks it is.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 7:28:01 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Of course I did. I know exactly what it says. They're basically saying they can neither confirm nor deny. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Didn't even read it did you Of course I did. I know exactly what it says. They're basically saying they can neither confirm nor deny. About that…
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 7:33:09 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: About that
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Didn't even read it did you Of course I did. I know exactly what it says. They're basically saying they can neither confirm nor deny. About that
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 7:37:35 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just heard that. They've been scooping up all of the comms coming from those cheap Baofengs. I'm betting they can link up those conversations to units and probably individual soldiers. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Didn't even read it did you Of course I did. I know exactly what it says. They're basically saying they can neither confirm nor deny. About that
That should be a cautionary tale for other interests, but that's a discussion for another thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 8:58:26 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: About that…
Jake Tapper and CNN with a short article that says nothing? I'm sold. That's all the evidence I need. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 9:25:02 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Jake Tapper and CNN with a short article that says nothing? I'm sold. That's all the evidence I need. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: About that…
Jake Tapper and CNN with a short article that says nothing? I'm sold. That's all the evidence I need. That's one of 100 pieces of information that would lead a normal person to reach the obvious conclusion. That ALONE is meaningless. You guys all like to look at ONE piece of information at a time and pretend the rest don't exist. Take bets on whether his tweet comes true? (hint- OSINT guys already have a pretty good idea what units did it). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 9:49:04 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's one of 100 pieces of information that would lead a normal person to reach the obvious conclusion. That ALONE is meaningless. You guys all like to look at ONE piece of information at a time and pretend the rest don't exist. Take bets on whether his tweet comes true? (hint- OSINT guys already have a pretty good idea what units did it). Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: About that
Jake Tapper and CNN with a short article that says nothing? I'm sold. That's all the evidence I need. That's one of 100 pieces of information that would lead a normal person to reach the obvious conclusion. That ALONE is meaningless. You guys all like to look at ONE piece of information at a time and pretend the rest don't exist. Take bets on whether his tweet comes true? (hint- OSINT guys already have a pretty good idea what units did it). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 10:14:20 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Those Rivet Joints aren't flying along the border looking at Ukraine through binoculars. That Rivet joint slurped up everything I'm sure. I personally have recorded Russian comms from that area(still get a chuckle out of the plight of Yug95  ). The EOB that was created out of those transmissions helped build a picture of what forces were northwest of Kyiv and in what condition, in realtime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 10:38:41 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That Rivet joint slurped up everything I'm sure. I personally have recorded Russian comms from that area(still get a chuckle out of the plight of Yug95 ). The EOB that was created out of those transmissions helped build a picture of what forces were northwest of Kyiv and in what condition, in realtime. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Those Rivet Joints aren't flying along the border looking at Ukraine through binoculars. That Rivet joint slurped up everything I'm sure. I personally have recorded Russian comms from that area(still get a chuckle out of the plight of Yug95 ). The EOB that was created out of those transmissions helped build a picture of what forces were northwest of Kyiv and in what condition, in realtime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 10:48:27 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's really cool. How did you receive them? SDRs in the region. I posted a small taste in the ham forum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 11:07:56 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: SDRs in the region. I posted a small taste in the ham forum. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That's really cool. How did you receive them? SDRs in the region. I posted a small taste in the ham forum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 11:10:34 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bucha is a false flag probably committed by Ukraine to pin on the Russians. Ukraine does this to get more involvement from the west because they are really losing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 11:34:40 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Bucha is a false flag probably committed by Ukraine to pin on the Russians. Ukraine does this to get more involvement from the west because they are really losing. "I reject reality and insert my own" Lol. There's ZERO evidence of this. It also makes no sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 11:49:24 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Bucha is a false flag probably committed by Ukraine to pin on the Russians. Ukraine does this to get more involvement from the west because they are really losing. You believe that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 12:26:05 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Because its ridiculously stupid for the leader of one country to try and meddle in the internal legal affairs of another sovereign country, particularly when you are using blackmail to do it. You are essentially asking the leader of that other country to cede part of their sovereignty to the United States in exchange for military aid that is largely designed to help the donor country. Had he done what Trump would have requested, he would have been attacked as an American puppet. Yet, Zelensky does not seem to mind that Ukraine has been widely used as a money laundry machine. Did he take any measures to stop it? It also appears that the "investigation" got similar results as the congressional hearings in DC. Also, despite the US' politicians' kids getting bribes from Russia does not seem to categorize as "Russian collusion", eh? Quoted: Trump wanted an investigation reopened after it was concluded. Zelenskyy apparently isn’t a puppet and said it was closed. It appears that Zelensky isn't Trump's puppet. About not being a puppet is a different story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 12:37:17 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yet, Zelensky does not seem to mind that Ukraine has been widely used as a money laundry machine. Did he take any measures to stop it? It also appears that the "investigation" got similar results as the congressional hearings in DC. Also, despite the US' politicians' kids getting bribes from Russia does not seem to categorize as "Russian collusion", eh? It appears that Zelensky isn't Trump's puppet. About not being a puppet is a different story. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Because its ridiculously stupid for the leader of one country to try and meddle in the internal legal affairs of another sovereign country, particularly when you are using blackmail to do it. You are essentially asking the leader of that other country to cede part of their sovereignty to the United States in exchange for military aid that is largely designed to help the donor country. Had he done what Trump would have requested, he would have been attacked as an American puppet. Yet, Zelensky does not seem to mind that Ukraine has been widely used as a money laundry machine. Did he take any measures to stop it? It also appears that the "investigation" got similar results as the congressional hearings in DC. Also, despite the US' politicians' kids getting bribes from Russia does not seem to categorize as "Russian collusion", eh? Quoted: Trump wanted an investigation reopened after it was concluded. Zelenskyy apparently isn’t a puppet and said it was closed. It appears that Zelensky isn't Trump's puppet. About not being a puppet is a different story. None of which is relevant when discussing the war, and what's "really happening". |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 12:46:19 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Roland's response notwithstanding, your continued use of "free Ukraine! narrative" is pointedly dismissive. We're using the term "Russian propaganda" in a literal sense in that people are, deliberately or otherwise, taking stances and repeating talking points that directly align with Russian statements or interests. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I thought about who touches the information. In RT's case, since it belongs to the Russian state, any information will pass by a censor's desk at some point, if not multiple times, between someone writing it and it being published. In the satellite imagery case, who touched that data between the photos/videos were taken and then they reached the intended audience? So, I think we are all talking about chain of custody. And, because of that, "regular dudes on the street" have to swallow any bs that's spit on them? Gee, wouldn't it be nice if there were mechanisms by which to validate information without relying on official sources? Definitely. And that's what we are discussing here. And just because sometimes there's no agreement about the information credibility, it does not mean that is it "Russian talking points" as some try to imply. If it's RT, it's literally Russian talking points. Dancing around it or glossing over that fact doesn't make it go away. You have been told a 100% truth that this is the most well documented conflict in history and you are making an active choice to ignore a wealth of high confidence OSINT work in favor of headlines that line up with what you choose to believe. If you go back, no one is questioning that RT is the Russian side, or propaganda. What is being questioned is the information presented to the American public, which also comes from very questionable sources. Therefore, as OP suggested, using RT to help figuring out where the truth really is might not be a bad idea. I haven't gone to that website yet but might take a look. The truth will be hidden somewhere between what the MSM and its cohorts have been vomiting and what Russia and China have been spitting. The difficult part is filtering the useful stuff from the trash. You are crafting a strawman from a false dichotomy that the only sources of information available are MSM and whatever its positional antithesis might be. You should not do that. I used "MSM and cohorts" as a general descriptive. I agree there are many more sources in between the two extremes. The big problem is how to find them. Even in this very website it is not easy to figure out what is real and what is not, mostly when there's a group hellbent on painting anyone and anything that do not flow with "free Ukraine!" narrative as "Russian propaganda". I read a couple posts talking about threads that try to impartially discuss what's going on using intelligence and military expertise. Where are they? Some that were started to discuss the backstage of that war were quickly trashed by that nonsensical discussion. Those threads aren't anywhere you can get at them because the torrent of idiocy in GD drove them elsewhere where there are better noise filters and better contributors. GD should probably take a break to ponder that dynamic. So, that leaves only GD, which will keep doing its "GD thing" to discuss this, since the filtered threads aren't accessible to everyone. And, for the obvious reasons, the discussions will keep going all over template. What makes me curious is why some members, usually the same ones, tend to show up in the threads that try to discuss the whys and other issues that do not go with the official "free Ukraine!" narrative and trash them with "Russian propaganda", "Putin lovers", etc. and nothing useful to contribute. That males those members no different than those fanatical leftists and just show a desperation to hide the actual truth. Let alone that their credibility is already trashed. However, for me, the worst part is that all this only diverts the attention from much worse things happening at home and if they are not fixed ASAP the US will go the same way of Ukraine, if not worse. This may come as something of a shock, but people might actually get trashed with "Russian propaganda" when they are echoing actual Russian talking points. What is "Russian propaganda"? Suddenly, the media, politicians, and even some once-reputable government agencies that lie through their teeth are telling the truth (i.e. "free Ukraine!" narrative). I once even got a member telling me that "soros was doing a good thing now by going against Putin". So, can I say that "Putin is doing a good thing for going against soros"? The latter is currently a much bigger problem for the US than the first, as well as several of the US politicians backing Ukraine. Furthermore, a many people once criticizing and censoring others because of "Russian collusion" ended-up exposed as the ones doing it. I suspect you may be overthinking the problem if you are struggling with a definition of Russian propaganda. Just want to set expectations and terms & definitions since it appears that anything that goes against the "free Ukraine!" narrative is labeled as "Russian propaganda".  Roland's response notwithstanding, your continued use of "free Ukraine! narrative" is pointedly dismissive. We're using the term "Russian propaganda" in a literal sense in that people are, deliberately or otherwise, taking stances and repeating talking points that directly align with Russian statements or interests. This is a very vague and broad definition. Using the same metrics, one can also say that the "free Ukraine!" narrative uses MSM and typical leftist talking points, which are also based in lies as the Russian's. Furthermore, as I also compared before, if aligning with the gang (e.g. soros, hillary, pedo Joe, etc.) that is promoting the invasion in the US' southern border is OK because it's "convenient" ("enemy of my enemy..."), then one can use the same argument that Russia is an ally by convenience, since it's against that gang (assuming it really is - jury still out). After all, the southern border invasion is a much more pressing issue for the Americans. However, I do not agree with partnerships with the devil. And I also do not see anyone here defending Putin or Russia. Therefore, if, by coincidence, it matches some "Russian talking points", it just shows that the "free Ukraine!" talking points being questioned are bs and do not hold water to a point that a simple "Russian talking point" easily challenges them. Sun Tzu is a real thing and ignoring or censoring opposing views usually lead to bad results. The Russian's Keystone Cops performance in this war, if really happening, could have been caused by Putin only keeping "yes men" on his side, which is typical of autocrats. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 12:47:53 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Zelenksy didn't reopen the investigation because it would have revealed the Kolomoisky, Zelensky and Biden ties. Biden got the original investigator, Shokin, fired. Zelensky is a puppet for Kolomoisky, US is now sanctioning Kolomoisky to put pressure on Zelensky to cover up sleepy joe's connection. Kolomoisky is behind Azov battalion that fought Russian separatists..... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Trump wanted an investigation reopened after it was concluded. Zelenskyy apparently isn’t a puppet and said it was closed. Zelenksy didn't reopen the investigation because it would have revealed the Kolomoisky, Zelensky and Biden ties. Biden got the original investigator, Shokin, fired. Zelensky is a puppet for Kolomoisky, US is now sanctioning Kolomoisky to put pressure on Zelensky to cover up sleepy joe's connection. Kolomoisky is behind Azov battalion that fought Russian separatists..... Considering the actors, that's a much more likely scenario. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 1:03:03 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is a very vague and broad definition. Using the same metrics, one can also say that the "free Ukraine!" narrative uses MSM and typical leftist talking points, which are also based in lies as the Russian's. Furthermore, as I also compared before, if aligning with the gang (e.g. soros, hillary, pedo Joe, etc.) that is promoting the invasion in the US' southern border is OK because it's "convenient" ("enemy of my enemy..."), then one can use the same argument that Russia is an ally by convenience, since it's against that gang (assuming it really is - jury still out). After all, the southern border invasion is a much more pressing issue for the Americans. However, I do not agree with partnerships with the devil. And I also do not see anyone here defending Putin or Russia. Therefore, if, by coincidence, it matches some "Russian talking points", it just shows that the "free Ukraine!" talking points being questioned are bs and do not hold water to a point that a simple "Russian talking point" easily challenges them. Sun Tzu is a real thing and ignoring or censoring opposing views usually lead to bad results. The Russian's Keystone Cops performance in this war, if really happening, could have been caused by Putin only keeping "yes men" on his side, which is typical of autocrats. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I thought about who touches the information. In RT's case, since it belongs to the Russian state, any information will pass by a censor's desk at some point, if not multiple times, between someone writing it and it being published. In the satellite imagery case, who touched that data between the photos/videos were taken and then they reached the intended audience? So, I think we are all talking about chain of custody. And, because of that, "regular dudes on the street" have to swallow any bs that's spit on them? Gee, wouldn't it be nice if there were mechanisms by which to validate information without relying on official sources? Definitely. And that's what we are discussing here. And just because sometimes there's no agreement about the information credibility, it does not mean that is it "Russian talking points" as some try to imply. If it's RT, it's literally Russian talking points. Dancing around it or glossing over that fact doesn't make it go away. You have been told a 100% truth that this is the most well documented conflict in history and you are making an active choice to ignore a wealth of high confidence OSINT work in favor of headlines that line up with what you choose to believe. If you go back, no one is questioning that RT is the Russian side, or propaganda. What is being questioned is the information presented to the American public, which also comes from very questionable sources. Therefore, as OP suggested, using RT to help figuring out where the truth really is might not be a bad idea. I haven't gone to that website yet but might take a look. The truth will be hidden somewhere between what the MSM and its cohorts have been vomiting and what Russia and China have been spitting. The difficult part is filtering the useful stuff from the trash. You are crafting a strawman from a false dichotomy that the only sources of information available are MSM and whatever its positional antithesis might be. You should not do that. I used "MSM and cohorts" as a general descriptive. I agree there are many more sources in between the two extremes. The big problem is how to find them. Even in this very website it is not easy to figure out what is real and what is not, mostly when there's a group hellbent on painting anyone and anything that do not flow with "free Ukraine!" narrative as "Russian propaganda". I read a couple posts talking about threads that try to impartially discuss what's going on using intelligence and military expertise. Where are they? Some that were started to discuss the backstage of that war were quickly trashed by that nonsensical discussion. Those threads aren't anywhere you can get at them because the torrent of idiocy in GD drove them elsewhere where there are better noise filters and better contributors. GD should probably take a break to ponder that dynamic. So, that leaves only GD, which will keep doing its "GD thing" to discuss this, since the filtered threads aren't accessible to everyone. And, for the obvious reasons, the discussions will keep going all over template. What makes me curious is why some members, usually the same ones, tend to show up in the threads that try to discuss the whys and other issues that do not go with the official "free Ukraine!" narrative and trash them with "Russian propaganda", "Putin lovers", etc. and nothing useful to contribute. That males those members no different than those fanatical leftists and just show a desperation to hide the actual truth. Let alone that their credibility is already trashed. However, for me, the worst part is that all this only diverts the attention from much worse things happening at home and if they are not fixed ASAP the US will go the same way of Ukraine, if not worse. This may come as something of a shock, but people might actually get trashed with "Russian propaganda" when they are echoing actual Russian talking points. What is "Russian propaganda"? Suddenly, the media, politicians, and even some once-reputable government agencies that lie through their teeth are telling the truth (i.e. "free Ukraine!" narrative). I once even got a member telling me that "soros was doing a good thing now by going against Putin". So, can I say that "Putin is doing a good thing for going against soros"? The latter is currently a much bigger problem for the US than the first, as well as several of the US politicians backing Ukraine. Furthermore, a many people once criticizing and censoring others because of "Russian collusion" ended-up exposed as the ones doing it. I suspect you may be overthinking the problem if you are struggling with a definition of Russian propaganda. Just want to set expectations and terms & definitions since it appears that anything that goes against the "free Ukraine!" narrative is labeled as "Russian propaganda". Roland's response notwithstanding, your continued use of "free Ukraine! narrative" is pointedly dismissive. We're using the term "Russian propaganda" in a literal sense in that people are, deliberately or otherwise, taking stances and repeating talking points that directly align with Russian statements or interests. This is a very vague and broad definition. Using the same metrics, one can also say that the "free Ukraine!" narrative uses MSM and typical leftist talking points, which are also based in lies as the Russian's. Furthermore, as I also compared before, if aligning with the gang (e.g. soros, hillary, pedo Joe, etc.) that is promoting the invasion in the US' southern border is OK because it's "convenient" ("enemy of my enemy..."), then one can use the same argument that Russia is an ally by convenience, since it's against that gang (assuming it really is - jury still out). After all, the southern border invasion is a much more pressing issue for the Americans. However, I do not agree with partnerships with the devil. And I also do not see anyone here defending Putin or Russia. Therefore, if, by coincidence, it matches some "Russian talking points", it just shows that the "free Ukraine!" talking points being questioned are bs and do not hold water to a point that a simple "Russian talking point" easily challenges them. Sun Tzu is a real thing and ignoring or censoring opposing views usually lead to bad results. The Russian's Keystone Cops performance in this war, if really happening, could have been caused by Putin only keeping "yes men" on his side, which is typical of autocrats. Lmao, you guys are a riot. If you're view point happens to coincide with Russias is coincidence, but if anyone happens to agree with Soros or the MSM it's a partnership with the devil. Seriously, is this satire? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 6:27:24 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is a very vague and broad definition. Using the same metrics, one can also say that the "free Ukraine!" narrative uses MSM and typical leftist talking points, which are also based in lies as the Russian's. Furthermore, as I also compared before, if aligning with the gang (e.g. soros, hillary, pedo Joe, etc.) that is promoting the invasion in the US' southern border is OK because it's "convenient" ("enemy of my enemy..."), then one can use the same argument that Russia is an ally by convenience, since it's against that gang (assuming it really is - jury still out). After all, the southern border invasion is a much more pressing issue for the Americans. However, I do not agree with partnerships with the devil. And I also do not see anyone here defending Putin or Russia. Therefore, if, by coincidence, it matches some "Russian talking points", it just shows that the "free Ukraine!" talking points being questioned are bs and do not hold water to a point that a simple "Russian talking point" easily challenges them. Sun Tzu is a real thing and ignoring or censoring opposing views usually lead to bad results. The Russian's Keystone Cops performance in this war, if really happening, could have been caused by Putin only keeping "yes men" on his side, which is typical of autocrats. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I thought about who touches the information. In RT's case, since it belongs to the Russian state, any information will pass by a censor's desk at some point, if not multiple times, between someone writing it and it being published. In the satellite imagery case, who touched that data between the photos/videos were taken and then they reached the intended audience? So, I think we are all talking about chain of custody. And, because of that, "regular dudes on the street" have to swallow any bs that's spit on them? Gee, wouldn't it be nice if there were mechanisms by which to validate information without relying on official sources? Definitely. And that's what we are discussing here. And just because sometimes there's no agreement about the information credibility, it does not mean that is it "Russian talking points" as some try to imply. If it's RT, it's literally Russian talking points. Dancing around it or glossing over that fact doesn't make it go away. You have been told a 100% truth that this is the most well documented conflict in history and you are making an active choice to ignore a wealth of high confidence OSINT work in favor of headlines that line up with what you choose to believe. If you go back, no one is questioning that RT is the Russian side, or propaganda. What is being questioned is the information presented to the American public, which also comes from very questionable sources. Therefore, as OP suggested, using RT to help figuring out where the truth really is might not be a bad idea. I haven't gone to that website yet but might take a look. The truth will be hidden somewhere between what the MSM and its cohorts have been vomiting and what Russia and China have been spitting. The difficult part is filtering the useful stuff from the trash. You are crafting a strawman from a false dichotomy that the only sources of information available are MSM and whatever its positional antithesis might be. You should not do that. I used "MSM and cohorts" as a general descriptive. I agree there are many more sources in between the two extremes. The big problem is how to find them. Even in this very website it is not easy to figure out what is real and what is not, mostly when there's a group hellbent on painting anyone and anything that do not flow with "free Ukraine!" narrative as "Russian propaganda". I read a couple posts talking about threads that try to impartially discuss what's going on using intelligence and military expertise. Where are they? Some that were started to discuss the backstage of that war were quickly trashed by that nonsensical discussion. Those threads aren't anywhere you can get at them because the torrent of idiocy in GD drove them elsewhere where there are better noise filters and better contributors. GD should probably take a break to ponder that dynamic. So, that leaves only GD, which will keep doing its "GD thing" to discuss this, since the filtered threads aren't accessible to everyone. And, for the obvious reasons, the discussions will keep going all over template. What makes me curious is why some members, usually the same ones, tend to show up in the threads that try to discuss the whys and other issues that do not go with the official "free Ukraine!" narrative and trash them with "Russian propaganda", "Putin lovers", etc. and nothing useful to contribute. That males those members no different than those fanatical leftists and just show a desperation to hide the actual truth. Let alone that their credibility is already trashed. However, for me, the worst part is that all this only diverts the attention from much worse things happening at home and if they are not fixed ASAP the US will go the same way of Ukraine, if not worse. This may come as something of a shock, but people might actually get trashed with "Russian propaganda" when they are echoing actual Russian talking points. What is "Russian propaganda"? Suddenly, the media, politicians, and even some once-reputable government agencies that lie through their teeth are telling the truth (i.e. "free Ukraine!" narrative). I once even got a member telling me that "soros was doing a good thing now by going against Putin". So, can I say that "Putin is doing a good thing for going against soros"? The latter is currently a much bigger problem for the US than the first, as well as several of the US politicians backing Ukraine. Furthermore, a many people once criticizing and censoring others because of "Russian collusion" ended-up exposed as the ones doing it. I suspect you may be overthinking the problem if you are struggling with a definition of Russian propaganda. Just want to set expectations and terms & definitions since it appears that anything that goes against the "free Ukraine!" narrative is labeled as "Russian propaganda". Roland's response notwithstanding, your continued use of "free Ukraine! narrative" is pointedly dismissive. We're using the term "Russian propaganda" in a literal sense in that people are, deliberately or otherwise, taking stances and repeating talking points that directly align with Russian statements or interests. This is a very vague and broad definition. Using the same metrics, one can also say that the "free Ukraine!" narrative uses MSM and typical leftist talking points, which are also based in lies as the Russian's. Furthermore, as I also compared before, if aligning with the gang (e.g. soros, hillary, pedo Joe, etc.) that is promoting the invasion in the US' southern border is OK because it's "convenient" ("enemy of my enemy..."), then one can use the same argument that Russia is an ally by convenience, since it's against that gang (assuming it really is - jury still out). After all, the southern border invasion is a much more pressing issue for the Americans. However, I do not agree with partnerships with the devil. And I also do not see anyone here defending Putin or Russia. Therefore, if, by coincidence, it matches some "Russian talking points", it just shows that the "free Ukraine!" talking points being questioned are bs and do not hold water to a point that a simple "Russian talking point" easily challenges them. Sun Tzu is a real thing and ignoring or censoring opposing views usually lead to bad results. The Russian's Keystone Cops performance in this war, if really happening, could have been caused by Putin only keeping "yes men" on his side, which is typical of autocrats. That's a lot of non sequitur to justify ignoring that the people that you are talking about haven't once cited MSM as a source. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 7:30:14 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yet, Zelensky does not seem to mind that Ukraine has been widely used as a money laundry machine. Did he take any measures to stop it? It also appears that the "investigation" got similar results as the congressional hearings in DC. Also, despite the US' politicians' kids getting bribes from Russia does not seem to categorize as "Russian collusion", eh? It appears that Zelensky isn't Trump's puppet. About not being a puppet is a different story. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Because its ridiculously stupid for the leader of one country to try and meddle in the internal legal affairs of another sovereign country, particularly when you are using blackmail to do it. You are essentially asking the leader of that other country to cede part of their sovereignty to the United States in exchange for military aid that is largely designed to help the donor country. Had he done what Trump would have requested, he would have been attacked as an American puppet. Yet, Zelensky does not seem to mind that Ukraine has been widely used as a money laundry machine. Did he take any measures to stop it? It also appears that the "investigation" got similar results as the congressional hearings in DC. Also, despite the US' politicians' kids getting bribes from Russia does not seem to categorize as "Russian collusion", eh? Quoted: Trump wanted an investigation reopened after it was concluded. Zelenskyy apparently isn't a puppet and said it was closed. It appears that Zelensky isn't Trump's puppet. About not being a puppet is a different story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 7:38:12 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Zelensky's entire reason for being president was fighting corruption. One of his first actions as president was gutting the Ukrainian version of the Department of Justice and replacing the corrupt prosecutors that were not investigating corruption. Another huge part of his efforts has been exposing the level of Russian government influence and interference within Ukraine, which is another reason why Russia chose to invade. He was costing them both power and money. Had the Russians not started banging the war drum last year and shifting his focus substantially, I'm sure that he would have made even more progress. https://theweek.com/russo-ukrainian-war/1011528/zelensky-nationalizes-tv-news-and-restricts-opposition-parties A real paragon of virtue, that one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 8:27:06 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://theweek.com/russo-ukrainian-war/1011528/zelensky-nationalizes-tv-news-and-restricts-opposition-parties A real paragon of virtue, that one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 8:33:38 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: At this point I'm quite sure Russian troops invaded Ukrainian soil. Everything else, I am leery to believe, and unwilling to make any particular claims abut what has or has not happened. Ask me again in 20 years. Maybe we'll know then. Fog of War is real, and in full effect right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 8:40:03 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Zelensky's entire reason for being president was fighting corruption. One of his first actions as president was gutting the Ukrainian version of the Department of Justice and replacing the corrupt prosecutors that were not investigating corruption. Another huge part of his efforts has been exposing the level of Russian government influence and interference within Ukraine, which is another reason why Russia chose to invade. He was costing them both power and money. Had the Russians not started banging the war drum last year and shifting his focus substantially, I'm sure that he would have made even more progress. satire. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 8:57:11 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He's in the middle of a war. We also effectively nationalized the news media during WW2, and we also outlawed the communist party during the Cold War and vetted anyone else hat was going to work for the government to make sure they weren't a member. This is what we call rationalizing. Hey, who said this? Most of these people are unable to see the hypocrisy of establishing an impossible burden of proof and standard of objectivity when the source is telling them something they don't want to hear, and then applying a much less stringent (or entirely nonexistent) burden of proof and standard of objectivity when the source is telling them something that they want to hear. It's utterly and completely ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 11:21:23 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That should be a cautionary tale for other interests, but that's a discussion for another thread. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Didn't even read it did you Of course I did. I know exactly what it says. They're basically saying they can neither confirm nor deny. About that
That should be a cautionary tale for other interests, but that's a discussion for another thread. I am picking up what you are throwing down here....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 11:22:27 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That Rivet joint slurped up everything I'm sure. I personally have recorded Russian comms from that area(still get a chuckle out of the plight of Yug95 ). The EOB that was created out of those transmissions helped build a picture of what forces were northwest of Kyiv and in what condition, in realtime. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Those Rivet Joints aren't flying along the border looking at Ukraine through binoculars. That Rivet joint slurped up everything I'm sure. I personally have recorded Russian comms from that area(still get a chuckle out of the plight of Yug95 ). The EOB that was created out of those transmissions helped build a picture of what forces were northwest of Kyiv and in what condition, in realtime. There was a Rivet Joint overflying Phoenix during the election. Make of that what you will. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 11:26:14 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://theweek.com/russo-ukrainian-war/1011528/zelensky-nationalizes-tv-news-and-restricts-opposition-parties A real paragon of virtue, that one. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Zelensky's entire reason for being president was fighting corruption. One of his first actions as president was gutting the Ukrainian version of the Department of Justice and replacing the corrupt prosecutors that were not investigating corruption. Another huge part of his efforts has been exposing the level of Russian government influence and interference within Ukraine, which is another reason why Russia chose to invade. He was costing them both power and money. Had the Russians not started banging the war drum last year and shifting his focus substantially, I'm sure that he would have made even more progress. https://theweek.com/russo-ukrainian-war/1011528/zelensky-nationalizes-tv-news-and-restricts-opposition-parties A real paragon of virtue, that one. I would theorize that: 1. If it's true that Zelensky purged the government Justice agencies (who else purged government agencies cough cough Obama and Biden), and 2. If it's true that Zelensky was installed via an "Orange Revolution" that was the product of millions of dollars of personnel and financial investments in that election by George Soros, the Obama Admin/Clinton's State Department, then 3. Zelensky's purging of the government was probably NOT in reality "going after corruption" as stated by Theodoric (who is also a known parrot of leftist talking points in general - but we'll ignore that), but rather, protecting it after the fact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 11:33:38 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is what we call rationalizing. Hey, who said this? Most of these people are unable to see the hypocrisy of establishing an impossible burden of proof and standard of objectivity when the source is telling them something they don't want to hear, and then applying a much less stringent (or entirely nonexistent) burden of proof and standard of objectivity when the source is telling them something that they want to hear. It's utterly and completely ridiculous. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: He's in the middle of a war. We also effectively nationalized the news media during WW2, and we also outlawed the communist party during the Cold War and vetted anyone else hat was going to work for the government to make sure they weren't a member. This is what we call rationalizing. Hey, who said this? Most of these people are unable to see the hypocrisy of establishing an impossible burden of proof and standard of objectivity when the source is telling them something they don't want to hear, and then applying a much less stringent (or entirely nonexistent) burden of proof and standard of objectivity when the source is telling them something that they want to hear. It's utterly and completely ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 11:41:41 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would theorize that: 1. If it's true that Zelensky purged the government Justice agencies (who else purged government agencies cough cough Obama and Biden), and 2. If it's true that Zelensky was installed via an "Orange Revolution" that was the product of millions of dollars of personnel and financial investments in that election by George Soros, the Obama Admin/Clinton's State Department, then 3. Zelensky's purging of the government was probably NOT in reality "going after corruption" as stated by Theodoric (who is also a known parrot of leftist talking points in general - but we'll ignore that), but rather, protecting it after the fact. 1. Donald Trump would have fired the swamp if he could, why are you against that? 2. The Orange Revolution was in 2004-2005. In 2014 there was a “Revolution of Dignity” where the Russian puppet shot a bunch of protesters than fled to exile in Russia. There were disputes about the legitimacy of his election in the first place. There was an election then in 2014 and in 2019 Zelenskyy was elected. US involvement in the 2014 revolution appears to have been holding seminars for protesters on how to organize and delivering cookies to a protest. 3. More likely it was, corruption was pretty much his main focus. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 11:47:07 AM EDT
[#47]
Grey bars. Grey bars everywhere!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 11:48:32 AM EDT
[#48]
I’m so glad I came to this thread for the LOLs.
Guys.. please lay off the RT crack pipeline. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 11:49:50 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://theweek.com/russo-ukrainian-war/1011528/zelensky-nationalizes-tv-news-and-restricts-opposition-parties A real paragon of virtue, that one. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Zelensky's entire reason for being president was fighting corruption. One of his first actions as president was gutting the Ukrainian version of the Department of Justice and replacing the corrupt prosecutors that were not investigating corruption. Another huge part of his efforts has been exposing the level of Russian government influence and interference within Ukraine, which is another reason why Russia chose to invade. He was costing them both power and money. Had the Russians not started banging the war drum last year and shifting his focus substantially, I'm sure that he would have made even more progress. https://theweek.com/russo-ukrainian-war/1011528/zelensky-nationalizes-tv-news-and-restricts-opposition-parties A real paragon of virtue, that one. Red herring ETA- also fascinating you choose to believe this source. You guys have been giving us a raft of shit for believing the MSM (which isn't even what we're doing) then you come in here with a link to the MSM. The irony. The only person to link the MSM here is YOU. Pseudointellectualism.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2022 11:59:00 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Red herring ETA- also fascinating you choose to believe this source. You guys have been giving us a raft of shit for believing the MSM (which isn't even what we're doing) then you come in here with a link to the MSM. The irony. The only person to link the MSM here is YOU. You're being deliberately obtuse. The source is quoting Zelensky. It's not an unsubstantiated claim that has been denied. It's taken directly from his words. I've been talking about evidence rather than sources. The media occasionally gets things right when they report facts - in this case, they're simply quoting Zelensky. It's when they report WITHOUT evidence that I take issue. I mean, going back to 2016, every time the media in this country has more or less said "trust me bro, it was Russia" it turns out it was in fact not the Russians but the American and global left/fascist plutocracy. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
