Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[slc]

22 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

now they don't attempt large maneuver actions unless they absolutely pummel an area pre-strike with artillery.

Funny thing is this has been the Soviets modus since their invasion of Afghanistan.  Pummel the Muj w/ artillery and air and then follow up w/ and infantry sweep 

[ClearedHot]

1 hour ago, slc said:

Funny thing is this has been the Soviets modus since their invasion of Afghanistan.  Pummel the Muj w/ artillery and air and then follow up w/ and infantry sweep 

Oddly, they didn't win despite a huge ramp to their industrial base and the employment of millions of rounds of artillery, airstrike and even chemical weapons.  It's almost like an adversary employing asymmetric tactics (Stinger), blunted their advantage, bled them until they packed up and went home.  Who would have thought...

[HeloDude]

15 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

…until they packed up and went home.

Sounds familiar…2021?  I’m a big of fan of the “Hearts and Minds” strategy—it’s been working so well the several decades.

[Lord Ratner]

22 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Oddly, they didn't win despite a huge ramp to their industrial base and the employment of millions of rounds of artillery, airstrike and even chemical weapons.  It's almost like an adversary employing asymmetric tactics (Stinger), blunted their advantage, bled them until they packed up and went home.  Who would have thought...

Are you sure the Afghans didn't just have superior firepower, superior numbers, a deeply secure anti-corruption apparatus, and direct support from US military units?

 

Because I've been told that's the only way Ukraine has a chance here...

[Lawman]

This made me wonder if we also have any Psyop outlets. If so, what would they be?

If you are trying to compare “mass mainstream profit driven media” to state funded controlled media as equal in their dangerousness or level of deliberate subversion you aren’t making an accurate comparison.

That’s like saying driving above the posted speed limit and drunk driving are both risky behaviors and their for equal in danger value to those that do them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[gearhog]

2 hours ago, Lawman said:

If you are trying to compare “mass mainstream profit driven media” to state funded controlled media as equal in their dangerousness or level of deliberate subversion you aren’t making an accurate comparison.

That’s like saying driving above the posted speed limit and drunk driving are both risky behaviors and their for equal in danger value to those that do them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I thought you were talking about a Russian podcast since that was the example you provided. I just wondered if we had an equivalent state funded controlled media foreign propaganda outlet.

58 minutes ago, Negatory said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Europe/Radio_Liberty

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/cia-and-committee-free-asia-under-project-dtpillar
 

Interesting how Americans don’t get taught about these things. Still operating by the way.

...And apparently we do, although they may not have the power and reach of the 250th ranked podcast in the US. Thanks, I was completely unaware that these existed. I am happy to know they aren't dangerous or subversive, because I wouldn't want to know that we were being hypocritical.

[Lawman]

...And apparently we do, although they may not have the power and reach of the 250th ranked podcast in the US. Thanks, I was completely unaware that these existed. I am happy to know they aren't dangerous or subversive, because I wouldn't want to know that we were being hypocritical.

No I was pointing out that specific podcast from the absolute absurd claim by our local useful idiot that everything on our side is a lie and the proof is on a dubious state funded post cast used by the Russians to advance their BS.

And if you want to go down the “do we have Psyop” you should see what happened to all our actions post peace dividends. We basically unfunded that part of the State Dept and wonder why so many places seem to be cozy with China over Belt and Roads.

Diplomacy/statecraft/foreign policy is my A-holes vs the other sides A-holes, and I know which one has my and my children’s better interests in mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

So how long before Ukraine asks for more money/resources once this $60B or whatever is used up?  A year, give or take?

[gearhog]

5 minutes ago, Lawman said:

No I was pointing out that specific podcast from the absolute absurd claim by our local useful idiot that everything on our side is a lie and the proof is on a dubious state funded post cast used by the Russians to advance their BS.

And if you want to go down the “do we have Psyop” you should see what happened to all our actions post peace dividends. We basically unfunded that part of the State Dept and wonder why so many places seem to be cozy with China over Belt and Roads.

Diplomacy/statecraft/foreign policy is my A-holes vs the other sides A-holes, and I know which one has my and my children’s better interests in mind.

Curious, do you ever read what you write from the perspective of someone else? You often make some good points, yet sometimes post things that are bizarre. These things jump off the page when I read them as glaringly obvious. Perhaps you don't realize name-calling and hyperbole in the first sentence makes your position seem weaker.

You seem to be affirming that "Yes, we do have PsyOp programs" and "the ends justifies the means", which is a widely accepted Machiavellian principle. That those means won't also be used against you should your interests diverge seems incredibly naive.

And lastly, you seem to be calling the people on your side A-holes while simultaneously expressing faith that those same assholes have you and your children's best interests in mind. It seems completely inverted because you're the one defending them for foreign policy decisions that will result in conflict for you and your family. You care about them more than they care about you. I'm not trying to attack you, but it does seem crazy to me.

 

 

[Biff_T]

13 hours ago, nsplayr said:

We're all better informed by listening to Duran Duran

Lol.  Hungry Like the Wolf is the best Duran Duran song.  Excellent choice kind sir!

[Lawman]

Curious, do you ever read what you write from the perspective of someone else? You often make some good points, yet sometimes post things that are bizarre. These things jump off the page when I read them as glaringly obvious. Perhaps you don't realize name-calling and hyperbole in the first sentence makes your position seem weaker.
You seem to be affirming that "Yes, we do have PsyOp programs" and "the ends justifies the means", which is a widely accepted Machiavellian principle. That those means won't also be used against you should your interests diverge seems incredibly naive.
And lastly, you seem to be calling the people on your side A-holes while simultaneously expressing faith that those same assholes have you and your children's best interests in mind. It seems completely inverted because you're the one defending them for foreign policy decisions that will result in conflict for you and your family. You care about them more than they care about you. I'm not trying to attack you, but it does seem crazy to me.
 
 

That guy is advancing Russian propaganda now openly admitted in a site full of professional military officers from various points of perspective to all call him out on his stupidity.

He is a Shill, and yet he continues to do it. Sorry but not sorry whatever he did in whatever life before he pretty much flushed to become that old crazy Vet on your street screaming about whatever “liberal conspiracy” or other noise.

And you’re feigning ignorance or woefully uninformed to think we (like every other nation on Earth) aren’t engaged or maintaining Psyops and other methods to advance agendas. There is an entire discipline in JSOC called “Psyops.” Why do you think we do all these partner force exchanges or exercises if “make them align our way” wasn’t part of it? This kind of theory shouldn’t surprise you. Do you want to be the honest guy at the poker table when you know everybody else is cheating?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gearhog]

2 minutes ago, Lawman said:

That guy is advancing Russian propaganda now openly admitted in a site full of professional military officers from various points of perspective to all call him out on his stupidity.

He is a Shill, and yet he continues to do it. Sorry but not sorry whatever he did in whatever life before he pretty much flushed to become that old crazy Vet on your street screaming about whatever “liberal conspiracy” or other noise.

I noticed you never addressed any specific claims in the podcast. If you are an honest person, what specific claims or false information were in that podcast that you feel were dangerous and subversive?

You didn't listen to it. You just googled it and the proof you provided was a screenshot of an unknown website that actually uses the word "accuses" in reference to other media outlets making claims about the podcast being Russian propaganda. How is that any more substantive than you simply making those claims without any proof and no screenshot. Again, I find it difficult to believe you, a professional military officer, is posting these things without pausing, stepping back, and seeing how little sense it makes.

I don't know anything about that podcast and my schedule is full, so I probably won't listen... but why should anyone trust you for slapping RP labels on something, only because it was posted by BC? I read one of your earlier posts on population or whatever earlier and it actually made sense, but what if I were to dismiss it because I automatically label everything you say as BS? You're not being honest.

[Lawman]

I noticed you never addressed any specific claims in the podcast. If you are an honest person, what specific claims or false information were in that podcast that you feel were dangerous and subversive?
You didn't listen to it. You just googled it and the proof you provided was a screenshot of an unknown website that actually uses the word "accuses" in reference to other media outlets making claims about the podcast being Russian propaganda. How is that any more substantive than you simply making those claims without any proof and no screenshot. Again, I find it difficult to believe you, a professional military officer, is posting these things without pausing, stepping back, and seeing how little sense it makes.
I don't know anything about that podcast and my schedule is full, so I probably won't listen... but why should anyone trust you for slapping RP labels on something, only because it was posted by BC? I read one of your earlier posts on population or whatever earlier and it actually made sense, but what if I were to dismiss it because I automatically label everything you say as BS? You're not being honest.

Don’t just be contrarians and pretend to be arguing from a position of honesty. “Who fact checks the fact checkers” is just chaff and flare strategy for people that know their source would never hold up.

Is RT at state funded propaganda site or not? Do I need to watch what guests they have this week to make that determination myself or can I just go off the well known fact.

It’s like knowing I don’t need to talk to MTG to know she’s a moron. Screaming “Jewish space lasers” or any other such absurdities removes you from the adult table. Same is true when you are telling us all not to be “fooled by the narrative” and listening to a podcast hosted by RT and funded by mysterious sources.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gearhog]

7 minutes ago, Lawman said:

Don’t just be contrarians and pretend to be arguing from a position of honesty. “Who fact checks the fact checkers” is just chaff and flare strategy for people that know their source would never hold up.

Is RT at state funded propaganda site or not? Do I need to watch what guests they have this week to make that determination myself or can I just go off the well known fact.

It’s like knowing I don’t need to talk to MTG to know she’s a moron. Screaming “Jewish space lasers” or any other such absurdities removes you from the adult table. Same is true when you are telling us all not to be “fooled by the narrative” and listening to a podcast hosted by RT and funded by mysterious sources.

That's a lot of typing to say you don't know what info you're labeling as Russian propaganda, but it isn't going to stop you.

[Lawman]

That's a lot of typing to say you don't know what info you're labeling as Russian propaganda, but it isn't going to stop you.

Oh no… there is no way to actually find out about a place without going there… restaurants and hotels must be such an adventure for you…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gearhog]

45 minutes ago, Lawman said:

Oh no… there is no way to actually find out about a place without going there… restaurants and hotels must be such an adventure for you…

Uh… yeah? I do around 8 overnights a month, and I make it a point to explore new places, look at the menu, and experience things for myself. I don’t understand how you mean that as a criticism. 
 

What would you suggest? Read a single review and repeat it to everyone I know without any first hand knowledge? This is what I meant when I asked if you read your posts from the perspective of others. I’m sure it sounded like a zinger in your own head, but….??

[Biff_T]

Russia sucks. 

[Lawman]

Uh… yeah? I do around 8 overnights a month, and I make it a point to explore new places, look at the menu, and experience things for myself. I don’t understand how you mean that as a criticism. 
 
What would you suggest? Read a single review and repeat it to everyone I know without any first hand knowledge? This is what I meant when I asked if you read your posts from the perspective of others. I’m sure it sounded like a zinger in your own head, but….??

There isn’t “one bad review” or whatever of the given podcast we are talking about. To borrow your metaphor you would have to “ignore multiple closings for health code so you could see yourself what all the fuss is about.”

No we don’t need to waste time and energy deciding of places with records like RT or others have a credible position.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gearhog]

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

There isn’t “one bad review” or whatever of the given podcast we are talking about. To borrow your metaphor you would have to “ignore multiple closings for health code so you could see yourself what all the fuss is about.”

No we don’t need to waste time and energy deciding of places with records like RT or others have a credible position.

That restaurant metaphor wasn't mine. You seem to have this blind implicit trust in anyone that happens to be in a position of authority. Wouldn't you want to know why something was deemed unsafe rather than just accept anything someone says at face value just because they happen to be aligned with your beliefs? It's easy to fool someone, but it takes 10x the effort to convince most people that they've been fooled. You're so deep into the approved narrative that you're unwilling to even listen.

In this case, the link/play button for the podcast in question was directly in front of your face, one click away. But you chose to navigate away/open up another page, do a google search, screenshot a random claim of that podcast being Russian propaganda, which was substantiated only by other media outlets making baseless claims. Then you had to copy/save/upload/post it, and act all condescending like it was the gospel, while not one step in your entire process contained an original thought of your own, a source, or specific point. It's bewildering that you, a self-proclaimed professional military officer, would try to pass this off as some sort of astute deductive reasoning. It's so glaringly intellectually dishonest, it's insulting that you would expect anyone to even consider that you might have a valid position.

It seems crazy to me that you somehow thought that was the best/most honest COA. If you were correct in your assessment, it would have been far easier for you, and more difficult for me to refute, if you'd have listened to 5-10 minutes and said "Here are some of the claims being made... and they're false Russia propaganda because here are the facts..." I could respect that. But we both know why that didn't happen: When you know your position can't be adequately defended or finding a flaw in the opposing argument proves too difficult... name-calling, hyperbole, and ad hominem are the preferred tactics. Not one person on this website has ever, ever, been a cheerleader for Russia as much as you would like to paint them as such.

Many of us here have, however, reasonably argued that our US leadership shares some (not all) amount of the blame for the origination of the chaos and conflict we are experiencing, as well as the continuous funding and intensification of multiple conflicts on multiple fronts. No one here hates America, and no one wants America to fail. But it's easy for our obviously corrupt leadership to lead us further into trouble when they have people like you willing to do these ridiculous logical gymnastics to justify their actions and cock block dissident voices because you don't want to be proven wrong.

[Lord Ratner]

2 minutes ago, gearhog said:

Not one person on this website has ever, ever, been a cheerleader for Russia as much as you would like to paint them as such.

Bashi is getting a bit close. Continuously proclaiming the inevitability of Russian victory and arguing that Ukrainian corruption sets them up as an unworthy ally. Especially when there are plenty of examples of much bigger countries being defeated/repelled by well-funded underdogs. But he's also just a troll

 

But yeah, the character attacks as Russian shills is getting old.

[gearhog]

4 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Bashi is getting a bit close. Continuously proclaiming the inevitability of Russian victory and arguing that Ukrainian corruption sets them up as an unworthy ally. Especially when there are plenty of examples of much bigger countries being defeated/repelled by well-funded underdogs. But he's also just a troll

But yeah, the character attacks as Russian shills is getting old.

If it weren't for the US, wouldn't Russia win? Virtually all of our leadership has been saying this. There's countless examples of Ukrainian corruption. It's been over two years. I've lost count of the funding, but I think we're closing in on $200 Billion, yet the front lines haven't moved much at all. What are we going to get for another $200 Billion? Who exactly is bleeding whom dry? It's not apparent. I don't want to believe that maybe we're the ones being played, but I have to wonder.

Just a mention of the players involved elicits an overwhelming bias. If we were somehow able to examine this exact same battlefield scenario while replacing the names of the states involved with Moravia, Tiberistan, etc.. I think many people would feel differently. One of us may post a vid of a Russian plane crash, and another responds with Ukr tank on fire. No one knows what's going on. It's all third hand information. The only thing that can be known is that the war is still raging.. when it shouldn't be. If winning this war was as important as they'd like you to believe - it'd have already been over. As I've said before: there's no money in the cure.

I'd think by now people would understand the playbook. It's just routine now.

1. Find a crisis and exacerbate it. If one doesn't exist, create it.

2. Full-court press on the propaganda front to appeal to public fear and garner support.

3. Transfer hundreds of billions of dollars from the public sector to the private sector.

It's like taking candy from a baby and everyone's falling for it. Every. Single. Time. Let's just admit we're completely lost in apathy and gullibility.

[Lawman]

That restaurant metaphor wasn't mine. You seem to have this blind implicit trust in anyone that happens to be in a position of authority. Wouldn't you want to know why something was deemed unsafe rather than just accept anything someone says at face value just because they happen to be aligned with your beliefs? It's easy to fool someone, but it takes 10x the effort to convince most people that they've been fooled. You're so deep into the approved narrative that you're unwilling to even listen.
In this case, the link/play button for the podcast in question was directly in front of your face, one click away. But you chose to navigate away/open up another page, do a google search, screenshot a random claim of that podcast being Russian propaganda, which was substantiated only by other media outlets making baseless claims. Then you had to copy/save/upload/post it, and act all condescending like it was the gospel, while not one step in your entire process contained an original thought of your own, a source, or specific point. It's bewildering that you, a self-proclaimed professional military officer, would try to pass this off as some sort of astute deductive reasoning. It's so glaringly intellectually dishonest, it's insulting that you would expect anyone to even consider that you might have a valid position.
It seems crazy to me that you somehow thought that was the best/most honest COA. If you were correct in your assessment, it would have been far easier for you, and more difficult for me to refute, if you'd have listened to 5-10 minutes and said "Here are some of the claims being made... and they're false Russia propaganda because here are the facts..." I could respect that. But we both know why that didn't happen: When you know your position can't be adequately defended or finding a flaw in the opposing argument proves too difficult... name-calling, hyperbole, and ad hominem are the preferred tactics. Not one person on this website has ever, ever, been a cheerleader for Russia as much as you would like to paint them as such.
Many of us here have, however, reasonably argued that our US leadership shares some (not all) amount of the blame for the origination of the chaos and conflict we are experiencing, as well as the continuous funding and intensification of multiple conflicts on multiple fronts. No one here hates America, and no one wants America to fail. But it's easy for our obviously corrupt leadership to lead us further into trouble when they have people like you willing to do these ridiculous logical gymnastics to justify their actions and cock block dissident voices because you don't want to be proven wrong.

That’s a lot of noise to tell us we need to accept RT like it’s somehow not a proven outlet of state propaganda while attempting to cloak your BS in “nobody hates America.” And look now youre telling us “approved narratives” and other such tells. Yes obviously you are arguing from a point of honest debate…

Nobody accused you of hating America, I accused Bashi of being a shill and in this case you of being simply contrarian for the purpose of arguing. Whatever your motivations are for doing that it’s your problem.

Nobody can pass judgement on a podcast with direct links to a Russian propaganda outlet? We need to sample stupid from close range to not recognize it from afar? Did you notice I’m not the only one pointing out the nature of the source he openly admitted to following. Man what would cause that… I don’t know the fact some of us have more intimate knowledge of what’s going on over there than some Russia tied podcaster and enjoy the access (along with several others on here) to know that.

By the way you have still yet to admit to whether RT is a reputable source of information or a state sponsored propaganda outfit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BashiChuni]

the duran podcast has been FAR more accurate about what is happening in Ukraine than any western media outlet.

david sacks was recently a guest on their podcast. are you calling david sacks a russian shrill? hardly.

the truth will eventually come out (like COVID) and you will be shown to be a fool. hell you haven't even listened to any of the podcast! just parroting what you have found online that suits your narrative.

[BashiChuni]

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-considers-deploying-more-military-advisers-to-ukraine-russia-2024-4

US considering sending more "advisors" to Ukraine?

gee, where have we heard that before? how'd that work out for us last time?

 

[BashiChuni]

18 hours ago, Lawman said:

In this case you are quoting a literal Russian Psyop outlet.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hmmmm i seem to remember people like you and the western media calling anyone who didn't question the COVID narrative guilty of peddling "fake news" and "misinformation"

hell if you're against the latest Ukranian spending package one finds themselves labeled "pro-russian" and "anti-democracy".

the facts on the battlefield and the analysis done by the Duran podcast match up. if that's considered Russian "fake news" then you're no better than Baghdad Bob.