d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Russia / Ukraine
Prev14844854864874884541Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 51,782
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 16,320.00
Apr 14 2022 08:42am
Quote (ofthevoid @ Apr 14 2022 03:41pm)
Reuters is fairly trusted source.


agree with that. more trusted then Fox/CNN/BBC anyway (its crazy that I can even include Fox alongside BBC, didnt expect that day to come).

Quote (Saucisson6000 @ Apr 14 2022 03:42pm)
I'm not saying it sunk, i'm saying we canT even see the damage done.


noted.

This post was edited by ferdia on Apr 14 2022 08:43am
Member
Posts: 6,769
Joined: Mar 21 2018
Gold: 14,949.00
Apr 14 2022 08:45am
Quote (ferdia @ 14 Apr 2022 09:31)
ok great. did the russians say that ? that translates to "we wont invade", i.e. no crisis. so happy to ignore what sweden and finland do throughout 2022.

found it - direct from russia:

MOSCOW, April 14. /TASS/. Russia will beef up security along its Western borders if Sweden and Finland join NATO and there would be no more talk of a nuclear-free Baltic, Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of Russia Dmitry Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel on Thursday."Very soon, that is precisely, by this summer, the world will become even ‘safer’," he noted. "If Sweden and Finland join NATO, the length of the alliance's land border with Russia will more than double. Naturally, it will be necessary to strengthen these borders," he maintained. Medvedev explained that it would be necessary to beef up the group of ground troops and the air defense system and deploy substantial naval forces in the Gulf of Finland. "If this is the case, there can no longer be talk about the Baltic’s non-nuclear status - the balance must be restored," he stated.

"Until today, Russia has not taken such measures, nor was it going to do so. If we are forced to, then ‘note, it wasn’t us who suggested this,’ as a character in a famous old movie said," he added.
The top official noted that currently, Sweden and Finland are discussing the possibility of joining the alliance "with ferocious seriousness." That said, NATO itself "is ready to literally carry them in, as quickly as possible and with the least amount of bureaucratic procedures." "The US is broadcasting its "Welcome!" [sign] to the representatives of Northern Europe literally in every way possible. Just humbly knock - and we will let you in. And what does this mean? This means that Russia will have more official adversaries," he pointed out.

He added that it is clear that Moscow should react to this "without emotions, and with a cool head.""The number of countries in NATO - thirty or thirty-two - on the whole is not really important to us. Two more, two less, with their importance and population there is no big difference," he noted. That said, Medvedev stressed that there is no sense in arguing that if it was not for the special operation in Ukraine, the accession of these countries to NATO wouldn’t have been an issue in the first place, and the situation would have been simpler for Russia. "This is not true. First of all, the attempts to drag them into the alliance were made before. Secondly, which is the main thing, we do not have territorial disputes with these countries like with Ukraine. This is why the value of such membership is different for us," he explained. The deputy chairman of the Security Council noted that public opinion in Sweden and Finland on the issue of the necessity of joining NATO is divided practically down the middle and this is after "the utmost effort of homespun advocates." "Nobody in their right mind wants higher prices and taxes, mounting tension along the borders, Iskanders, hypersonic weapons or ships with nukes a stone’s throw from their house. Let’s hope that the common sense of our neighbors eventually prevails. Yet if not, then, as they say, "they started it," Medvedev concluded.

This looks pretty good to me on the part of the russkies.



“They started it.” “NATO actually doesn’t matter to us.”

How is this good on the russkies? They literally just threw out one of their biggest “reasons” for invading and then elude to it being about wanting Ukraine's’ land.

This post was edited by IchBinDaddy on Apr 14 2022 08:47am
Member
Posts: 30,165
Joined: Sep 10 2004
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Apr 14 2022 08:46am
Quote (ferdia @ 14 Apr 2022 16:42)
agree with that. more trusted then Fox/CNN/BBC anyway (its crazy that I can even include Fox alongside BBC, didnt expect that day to come).


well technically, you can "include" everything alongside everything. if you are, however, suggesting that BBC is similarly biased and fact-free as FOX, then you're simply wrong. by no reasonable journalistic standard is that the case. you seem a bit prone to false equivalence, mate...
Member
Posts: 51,782
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 16,320.00
Apr 14 2022 08:48am
Quote (IchBinDaddy @ Apr 14 2022 03:45pm)
“They started it.” “NATO actually doesn’t matter to us.”

How is this good on the russkies? They literally just threw out one of their biggest “reasons” for invading and then elude to it being about wanting ukraines’ lands.


They are saying that while they will respond to Finland and Sweden joining Nato, they are not going to invade them. Even where the response is, FU Sweden and Finland we are going to aim nukes at you forever from now on - this is better then outright invading them (aka WW3).

Quote (fender @ Apr 14 2022 03:46pm)
well technically, you can "include" everything alongside everything. if you are, however, suggesting that BBC is similarly biased and fact-free as FOX, then you're simply wrong. by no reasonable journalistic standard is that the case. you seem a bit prone to false equivalence, mate...


The BBC is better by an order of magnitude to Fox News across the spectrum of news broadcast, but specific to this conflict I am not seeing much of a difference. trusting this clarifies my point.
The Guardian is more like Fox of course -_-

This post was edited by ferdia on Apr 14 2022 08:53am
Member
Posts: 30,165
Joined: Sep 10 2004
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Apr 14 2022 08:53am
Quote (ferdia @ 14 Apr 2022 16:48)
The BBC is better by an order of magnitude to Fox News across the spectrum of news broadcast, but specific to this conflict I am not seeing much of a difference. trusting this clarifies my point.


i get your point, but this holds true for the ukraine war. remember, tucker carlson is a fox news host - if i'm not mistaken, their most viewed one by quite a margin. he's been spewing russian propaganda for months - i'd be surprised if the BBC had someone even remotely as biased and prominent commenting on this war.
Member
Posts: 51,782
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 16,320.00
Apr 14 2022 08:55am
Quote (fender @ Apr 14 2022 03:53pm)
i get your point, but this holds true for the ukraine war. remember, tucker carlson is a fox news host - if i'm not mistaken, their most viewed one by quite a margin. he's been spewing russian propaganda for months - i'd be surprised if the BBC had someone even remotely as biased and prominent commenting on this war.


I concede this point - the BBC has no one like tucker carlson. he is an outlier. However, having said that, and again this is my point, i hesitate to even say this lol, Fox News IS providing relevant news content on a serious matter, for once, as related to Ukraine. Heretofore I always considered Fox News simply as a waste of space which provided no neutral content and was very biased in the majority of the stories it released. I say stories rather then "news". I would look at it just to see their opinions/rhetoric rather then to hear news. For Ukraine it can be used for information purposes.

current headlines from fox, all of which are more then reasonable by "international" standards.

Russia makes nuclear threat to Sweden, Finland over NATO consideration
Ukraine gets 30 citizens back in prisoner of war exchange
Russian crackdowns silence war protestors
Russia's finance minister plans to attend G20 meeting next week, Indonesia says
Ukraine war is a 'perfect storm,' threatening food, energy, and debt crises across the globe: UN

*by international i mean when comparing headlines around the world from state or non-state broadcasters.

/e alot of their content is and remains shit of course.

This post was edited by ferdia on Apr 14 2022 09:07am
Member
Posts: 37,954
Joined: Nov 16 2005
Gold: 13.37
Apr 14 2022 09:00am
Quote (dro94 @ 14 Apr 2022 17:07)
is this the one where 10-15 ukrainian soldiers were posing on a destroyed Russian BMP and got hit by tank fire?


Yes, but I still think that it was friendly fire or captivated Ukrainian tank. Otherwise they are were stupid.

This post was edited by Norlander on Apr 14 2022 09:01am
Member
Posts: 30,165
Joined: Sep 10 2004
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Apr 14 2022 09:16am
Quote (ferdia @ 14 Apr 2022 16:55)
I concede this point - the BBC has no one like tucker carlson. he is an outlier. However, having said that, and again this is my point, i hesitate to even say this lol, Fox News IS providing relevant news content on a serious matter, for once, as related to Ukraine. Heretofore I always considered Fox News simply as a waste of space which provided no neutral content and was very biased in the majority of the stories it released. I say stories rather then "news". I would look at it just to see their opinions/rhetoric rather then to hear news. For Ukraine it can be used for information purposes.

current headlines from fox, all of which are more then reasonable by "international" standards.

Russia makes nuclear threat to Sweden, Finland over NATO consideration
Ukraine gets 30 citizens back in prisoner of war exchange
Russian crackdowns silence war protestors
Russia's finance minister plans to attend G20 meeting next week, Indonesia says
Ukraine war is a 'perfect storm,' threatening food, energy, and debt crises across the globe: UN

*by international i mean when comparing headlines around the world from state or non-state broadcasters.

/e alot of their content is and remains shit of course.


i'd imagine that faux always had news segments with some factual reporting, especially on international issues without american boots on the ground. that's not my point though. tucker carlson is the face of fox news, their most popular host by a mile, and he's got a daily show in which he pushed his pro pootin talking points for months. i don't think it's fair to just disregard that when evaluating an outlet's overall coverage of an issue.

anyway, it's a bit weird that you're now suggesting that faux news is providing some relevant news (again, i don't even contest that), when the original post i replied to was you suggesting that faux / cnn / bbc are NOT so trustworthy, and i merely wanted to point out how suggesting they are similarly unreliable / untrustworthy would be a false equivalence...
Member
Posts: 37,954
Joined: Nov 16 2005
Gold: 13.37
Apr 14 2022 09:26am
Ukrainian army fighting their grandparents

Member
Posts: 52,057
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,933.00
Apr 14 2022 09:32am
Quote (HeLiCaL @ Apr 14 2022 08:23am)
nice conspiracy theory nutter

majority Russian area doesn't like that USA stooges staged a USA-backed coup in the country the live in, so they decide to leave

sorry those you bootlick have decided 13,000 PLUS had to die because of this


Your extra chromosome is showing.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev14844854864874884541Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll