That's probably right. But how many Russians do you see on this thread (or forum)?

And, funny enough, you may see the mods as pro-Russian. but I tend to see them (or most of them) as pro-Western.

And, no, I'm not "pro-Russian", just anti-NATO and anti-US hegemony. And definitely against world government. But I better not even mention that as it's supposed to be "conspiracy theory" and against the "rules" .... :wink:

So it's really innaccurate to describe what is published by the non-Russian media as propoganda. Sure there are biases, hidden agendas, there are Western media with left-wing biases, others with conservative biases, there are some scandalously mendacious Western media outlets (I'm thinking Murdoch). But there's a weekly review in on the Australian Broadcasting Corp that covers these kinds of issues and at least it can be debated. It's a free press and still a basically free society, despite the efforts of many nefarious forces to hobble it. But in Russia what any media outlet can report is literally mandated and regulated by the Government, and no organisation, for example, is even allowed to report on the Ukraine invasion as 'an invasion' on pain of going to prison.

You got called out by me for basically copypastaing a Biden speech. Many of us have condemned the invasion as absolutely unjustified. That's a different issue.

If you want to listen to some analysis about what's going on militarily, you might watch from minute 11 to minute 15 of the following:



"I'm just shaking my head at the US media, all the armchair generals, people who don't know their history, don't understand the geography. Putin's bogged down... etc, they're stalled. It's nonsense. Kyiv is not the first target on the list, it's the last target on the list. You go for the capital when you've got everything else under control... If you want to attack a city from three sides, you don't want one side to start without the other two... He's not stalled, he's not bogged down, he's waiting until everything else in place.

A few key points:

1) Look at a map. There is no way Russia was ever going to allow Ukraine, which completes a C encirclement of Moscow to ever be under NATO control.
2) Putin is on track to win the war as planned. He's constructing a diagonal line of control from the NE to the SW. This cuts the Ukranian army in two, similarly to how the Germans cut the allied armies in two at the beginning of WWII by going through the Ardennes.
3) There will be a three vector attack on Kyiv. Russia will be attacking from the North from Belarus, from the South from Crimea, and from the East after Kharkhiv falls.

You might not agree with this analysis and it might not turn out as described but it is proper analysis and if you look at a map of Putin's military positioning and the analogies given, the reasoning makes a lot more sense than blanket declarations, backed up by nothing, that this has been a military disaster for Putin

So it's really innaccurate to describe what is published by the non-Russian media as propoganda. — Wayfarer

There are lots of inaccurate statements people make on forums. It's no different from other social media. Especially on a super-fast-moving thread like this with some members apparently posting nearly 24/7, there is nothing you can do about it.

Pretty hopeless, really, but that's how the cookie crumbles. Probably wisest to keep a safe distance ....

you may see the mods as pro-Russian. but I tend to see them (or most of them) as pro-Western. — Apollodorus

Glad to be perceived as being on the opposite side of everyone here. :up:

And I'm glad that you are glad. It could be worse .... :wink:

Baden had some good examples of propaganda by Western media outlets. Brushing that off as bias is in my view problematic because it suggests all journalists collectively suck. Or it suggests the capitalist drive for profit is such that only certain narratives are profitable so that's what's written just to get unique visitors.

Comrade, as they say where we are from, the goat with the longest beard is wisest.

You got called out by me for basically copypastaing a Biden speech. — Baden

I did no such thing. I said this:

The Russian campaign is arguably already a total failure. According to sober estimates they've lost 15,000 troops, that is more than in their entire Afghanistan campaign, and failed to fully capture any city. The troops are demoralised and were it not for the Russian willingness to destroy civilian infrastructure with missiles they would be considered totally defeated already; they've had to practically destroy the only city (Mariopul) they've come near to capturing. As a consequence of all this, NATO and the United States are more united than ever, NATO has drawn up plans to bolster its defensive forces on all of their Eastern lines. Russia is almost totally isolated from the rest of the world save India and China and some other hold-outs. The Russian economy is contracting at a rate which is bound to ensure a domestic depression and a catastrophic diminution of living standards, erasing nearly all the gains made by economic liberalisation since the end of the USSR. In short, the whole adventure has been a catastrophic error of judgement which is going to end in disaster for the Russian government. So, I think you're backing the wrong horse. — Wayfarer

I wrote it, and I stand by it. As for 'backing the wrong horse' that is a comment on your repeated suggestion that Putin might succeed or win, whatever that might mean, but I'm not going to argue the case further at this point as it's obviously inflammatory.

Baden had some good examples of propaganda by Western media outlets. Brushing that off as bias is in my view problematic because it suggests all journalists collectively suck. — Benkei

You can't believe everything you read in the media. No kidding. But the images we've been seeing of entire regions completely gutted by long-range missiles, millions of people fleeing, bodies in the streets - this is not 'propaganda', it's actually happening.

If you don't believe in relevant reasoning or evidence re making a judgement on military success or failure. For example, if you have no interest in looking at a map or military positioning or historical precedent, then while you are entitled to your opinion, it's entirely worthless. Kind of like if I was to say, "Hey, Kant was wrong, his philosophy was a disaster", and when asked to provide some kind of analysis as to why, refuse and just repeat the charge. An opinion, but a useless one.

But the images we've been seeing of entire regions completely gutted by long-range missiles, millions of people fleeing, bodies in the streets - this is not 'propoganda', it's actually happening. — Wayfarer

Yes, and how do you square this with Russia being the big loser of this war. When I post this kind of stuff it's to demonstrate how badly Ukraine is losing and suffering in the process. Which is right on point.

For example, if you have no interest in looking at a map or military positioning or historical precedent, then while you are entitled to your opinion, it's entirely worthless. — Baden

My reasoning is that Putin's forces may succeed in finally subduing the Ukrainian army, although so far they have not done so. So in military terms, he might ultimately prevail, albeit at the cost of practically destroying the entire country, as he did in Chechnya 20 years ago.

But I say that the price of this supposed battlefield victory is going to be so enormous for both sides, that it can't be regarded as a victory, because of the economic impact on both Russia and the world, and the fact that it's going to make the Putin government an international pariah state. In other words, I'm of the view that Putin has embarked on a war which he cannot meaningfully win.

Yes, and how do you square this with Russia being the big loser of this war. — Baden

So if Russia kills or displaces most of the population and practically destroys the country, then do you call that 'success'? I'm saying that even if Putin prevails militarily, which is still far from certain, it's not going to result in the prosperous union of Ukraine and Russia. That there will be no winners.

My reasoning is that Putin's forces may succeed in finally subduing the Ukrainian army — Wayfarer

Regardless of your qualifications, that is absolutely not consistent with:

The Russian campaign is arguably already a total failure — Wayfarer

So if Russia kills or displaces most of the population and practically destroys the country, then do you call that 'success'? — Wayfarer

Success for Russia is achieving their objectives. If, hypothetically, their objective is to destroy the country then of course it's a success for them. What else would you call achieving your military objective?

as far as I'm concerned it's factual. I will post stories that draw attention to this from time to time. — Wayfarer

Why in hell's name would you do that? Do you think there's a soul in the Western world who doesn't know that already? It's the front page of every fucking newspaper, every news program and every blog. What are you trying to achieve by filling a discussion forum with it too. If I want news, I'll go to a news website. This one's for reasoned discussion. You voice an opinion, you give your reasons for it, its not show-and-tell.

As for 'backing the wrong horse' that is a comment on your repeated suggestion that Putin might succeed or win, whatever that might mean, but I'm not going to argue the case further at this point as it's obviously inflammatory. — Wayfarer

It's just a poorly chosen metaphor seeing as I'd much prefer if Putin lost. Ask me how soon. Yesterday. I'm not a fantasist though. I follow where the evidence leads.

@Wayfarer You seem to be conflating moral judgements with military analysis, which is just going to complete confuse you and everyone else who tries to interact with you. Morally. we agree the invasion was unjustified and Putin is a very bad guy, so there's no debate on that score and there's no need to keep inserting it.

we agree the invasion was unjustified and Putin is a very bad guy, so there's no debate on that score and there's no need to keep inserting it. — Baden

I haven't participated in this thread much. I've made a few comments, generally along the lines of expressing horror at what is happening, which were promptly deprecated as propaganda, including by yourself. It's not. I am simply expressing an opinion.

No, I didn't accuse you of propganda for expressing horror at what's happening. I have several times expressed horror at what's happening. I said the unsubstantiated idea that the war was going disastrously for Putin was propaganda parroted from Western media. Which is supported by the fact that A) The idea is not based on your own analysis or serious analysis you've read. You apparently haven't done any or read any. B) Actual analysis that has been done suggests it's likely very misleading to say the least.

Could be a scene in Orwell's 1984, or from Brazil (the movie).



"They asked me, 'Why do you hate us?'
The director of the Kherson theater recounts his abduction
By Faustine Vincent, 25 March, le Monde (your daily source for French propaganda)

Oleksandr Kniga, local figure and member of the Kherson regional council, the first major Ukrainian city to fall under Russian control, was kidnapped Wednesday March 23. Released the same day, he spoke to Le Monde by telephone about a rather sureal interview.

... At 7 a.m. he saw a dozen armored jeeps arrive at his home in Olechky, near Kherson. ... There were so many Russians then that he asked them what they were afraid of. “They searched the whole house, talked to me for a bit in my library, checked our social networks, then told me to pack my things and took me outside. Almost the entire area was cordoned off."

His captors took him to a car with three Russian soldiers inside. “We drove to Kherson. Ukrainian radio was playing a song about the Bayraktar” drones. This song, released on March 1 , insults the Russian army and criticizes the invasion. It has become very popular in the country.

The convoy stopped at the regional administration of Kherson. Blindfolded, the captive was put in an empty cell. “They asked me who I was, took my fingerprints and photos." His captors were masked, but Oleksandr Kniga understood, during the interrogation, "that they wee not simple soldiers but officers, probably from the secret services".

Why did they kidnap him? “They were looking at me as a public figure." The director of the theater was probably all the more suspicious since many employees of his establishment take part in the demonstrations that take place every day against the occupation in the Kherson region. “People were tired of being scared, hearing explosions and sitting in basements. They are happy to see each other at rallies,” said Mr. Kniga.

During his captivity, a hooded man asked him: “Why are you organizing demonstrations?“ Oleksandr Kniga then tries to explain to him that these gatherings are spontaneous: “People come out by themselves, everyone can express their opinion freely." Opposite, the man shakes his head and insists: “Why are you organizing demonstrations?"

“I don't think they can understand,” sighs Mr. Kniga. The Russians were so convinced of being welcomed as “liberators” in the cities they occupied, that in their eyes the Ukrainian resistance could only be an artificial creation, orchestrated by “nationalists” who need to be flushed out. "They also asked me, 'Why do you hate us?' I answered that it was not hatred, but an immense anger made of helplessness when they bombard the maternities, the theaters and the residential districts.»

Oleksandr Kniga's interrogation then takes the form of a "long conversation about everything", including theater. “They asked me if people from Kherson often go there." The Ukrainian then explains that his theater is reputed far beyond the city, and that the actors sometimes play up to 40 plays a month on five different stages. ...

Unlike many other victims of kidnappings in the occupied regions, tortured by their executioners, Mr. Kniga reports to have been treated “correctly”. “They did not threaten me and remained polite." Is it because the occupants hope to encourage him to collaborate? He excludes this option. "It's out of the question," he says. "The members of the regional council held a meeting on this subject and reaffirmed that “Kherson is Ukraine” and that it cannot be otherwise.»

The day was coming to an end. It was dark outside when a man brough him back a briefcase they had confiscated, which contained his phone, his passport, a tablet and his wife's laptop. “He asked me if I had a place to sleep in Kherson, and I replied that I could go to the theater, because there are always people there." His captors blindfolded him and deposited him elsewhere, far from the theater, which the Russian troops had searched the day before, convinced of finding weapons there. Oleksandr Kniga did not have time to walk there before the start of the curfew, forty minutes later. Tense and exhausted, he remembered friends living nearby and found their home.

“Now I am home again, without fear, but I am worried about my loved ones. At the start of the war, my eldest son's family had five more people. They slept in the cellar for a week because the fighting was very close, then they left. I talk too much, I must be nervous."...


https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2022/03/25/ils-m-ont-demande-pourquoi-vous-nous-detestez-le-directeur-du-theatre-de-kherson-raconte-son-enlevement_6119199_3210.html

I said the unsubstantiated idea that the war was going disastrously for Putin — Baden

It's not unsubstantiated. Up to 15,000 casualties, five generals killed, hundreds of tanks destroyed; no major city taken, military advance bogged down outside Kiev, morale poor, supply-lines patchy; the Russian economy reeling from sanctions. This is reported in the Western media, and it's not propaganda.

Thanks for sharing that, very interesting. But it's been almost three weeks since that interview happened - based on the date. What he says makes sense.

The problem is that there's conflicting info on the state of the Russian military. It's somewhat low on morale, have lost many troops and allegedly have problems with supplies. On the other hand, they clearly haven't used the airplane arsenal they have, which could flatten any city in Ukraine.

I don't think Ukraine can win, despite these heroic narratives. The problem is going to be how long can Russia sustain this assault, while the sanctions bite.

They still have energy money coming in, but that could change. I don't think it helps that all the West has basically "cancelled" Russia. Not that they don't deserve some sanctions (oligarchs and the like) or condemnations, they sure do. But the way this is shaping out makes them extremely isolated and more dangerous too.

I don't know how they'll be given an opportunity to save face and declare a victory of sorts. Meanwhile, more civilians are just getting slaughtered....

keep Germans down

Lol, maybe in the 1950s. The US has been trying to get Germany to build a larger military for years and was all smiles when they announced their huge defence surge in response to Russia. They would be the third highest military budget in the world by a wide margin if Japan wasn't also surging defense spending. None of this has to do with the US, which has tried to get them to spend more unsuccessfully for decades, and everything to do with Russia and China acting aggressive enough to scare them.


----

On an unrelated note, the new narrative is hilarious. All the stalling out and counter attacks are actually part of a grand strategy.



So now I guess Russia only attacked Kiev in suicidal air assaults while the AA network was up as a distraction. They sent over a hundred special forces members to get gunned down on video in Kharkiv to make the distraction believable. They are trying to avoid hitting humanitarian infrastructure, and the obvious way to do this is to shell residential neighborhoods for days on end.

It's cool though, they have an endless number of replacements for their losses. That huge paper inventory of hardware. They do it just like the USA, tons of tanks neatly parked in rows and inventoried, stored in the desert where it never rains, with inspections cycling through and weatherization.





Certainly they wouldn't throw them in a heap in an area known for snow and heavy rain, right?

Have you asked yourself what's not reported in the Western media? Or considered the difference between a bunch of facts or half facts and how they are contextualized or interpreted? E.g. Western media says 'bogged down'. A military analyst says 'waiting'. How do you know which is true? Apparently, you just ignore the line of reasoning outlined here: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/673465 because it hasn't been reported in the Western media. You are absolutely proving my point about propaganda. Again, if this was about Kant, and I told you Kant was crap because I read that in the media, you'd think I was a fool. And that's how you sound to anyone interested in analysing what's going on in this conflict. It's willful ignorance.

Yeah, I know it's a few weeks old. He has one he did today actually, but it's much more finance orientated. He's still of the same view though that Russia is winning and that the narrative that it's a disaster for them is not not based on anything solid on the ground.

I'll sub to his channel, good stuff. :up:

So who the heck does have this info on the situation of the Russian military on the ground?

I've really been wanting to find it, but it's not easy in this media environment. All I can get are reports from "sources", almost always unnamed.

Of course they're going to lie about their casualties and the civilians they killed and just about everything else. That's what the military does. That doesn't mean you should underestimate them though.

So who the heck does have this info on the situation of the Russian military on the ground? — Manuel

Tough one. Fog of war and so on. Best you can do is get your information from a wide variety of sources and try to piece together something that makes sense. Actually, I original came across the guy as a guest on a finance channel. Sometimes finance news outlets are more likley to tell you the truth because there's money involved for their customers.

In case you didn't see this interesting prediction by Oleksiy Arestovych from 2019:

https://youtu.be/DwcwGSFPqIo

Also, I've been finding the comments by Vlad Vexler interesting. The titles are a little sensational. Don't let that put you off. Some of his analysis is really interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/c/VladVexler/videos

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCn7XHZiW6EUgSuxItybLLMg/videos

In case you didn't see this interesting prediction by Oleksiy Arestovych from 2019: — petrichor

Really interesting, thanks.

Update on the Russian mutiny propaganda story. The Guardian runs with it but half-heartedly as it seems to smell the bullshit all over it.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/25/russian-troops-mutiny-commander-ukraine-report-western-officials

"However, while there was some evidence to corroborate the claim that the commander had been run over, it was less clear whether, as the western officials claimed, the colonel had died. On Friday night, they partially retracted the claim in the light of conflicting evidence on social media. They said they were seeking to clarify whether he was alive or dead – and said that the key point was that he was a victim of a mutiny, not whether he had been killed or not."

Those 'western officials' and their 'key points' eh? :rofl: