sidcow Posted February 9, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) 16 minutes ago, blandy said: I’ll defend @Arj Guyhere, to an extent. Because that video on social media is a good example to use. There are thousands and thousands of clips out there of stuff related to this war. Unless someone speaks Ukrainian, it’s nigh on impossible to tell for yourself if it’s real or faked. So we use the internet to try to find out, or we come across something that points us one way or another. Which source we trust depends on all kinds of factors, including our own personal beliefs and biases. Even trusted outlets get stuff wrong, sometimes. So we end up with an informed, but potentially mistaken understanding of something based on a tiny clip and some Googling. And then we might come on here with that “understanding” and see someone else who has written down their different understanding and see theirs is “wrong”. And then if we are so inclined, we don’t discuss why, we just argue and get no further than thinking worse of each other for it. If people actually explain why they say what they do on here, we could look at the reasoning and the “research” sources and maybe sometimes we’d end up better informed. Of courses all the fakes out there are intended to take advantage of our not doing that to gain an advantage in the court of public opinion and thus influence the people making decisions on tanks and planes and sanctions and support and the rest of it. All true. But I just don't buy that if Zelensky had made a speech like that, there wouldn't be multiple news sites reporting it. OK you could argue it's a big conspiracy and the press are all being silenced on it, I mean all of them, globally, even those in not particularly friendly states. But there is just nothing (I've seen) reporting on this. There would 100% be some reporters breaking ranks if this was an officially confirmed speech and they were told to hush it up. And then you ask yourself, why the hell would Zelensky say it anyway? He's trying to curry favour with The West and very much playing the injured party with Russia the aggressor role. A speech like that would mess up his strategy. Basically an ounce of common sense would say it's fake or been taken massively out of context to fit an agenda. Edited February 9, 2023 by sidcow 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 9, 2023 Moderator Share Posted February 9, 2023 9 minutes ago, sidcow said: All true. But I just don't buy that if Zelensky had made a speech like that, there wouldn't be multiple news sites reporting it. I agree completely. But we're both looking at things via our own set of [whatever]. Arj maybe (I dunno) has a different set. My post wasn't meant to do anything other really than say "I prefer it when people discuss, rather than argue, because I get to learn more that way". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc1982am Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 4 minutes ago, blandy said: I’ll defend @Arj Guyhere, to an extent. Because that video on social media is a good example to use. There are thousands and thousands of clips out there of stuff related to this war. Unless someone speaks Ukrainian, it’s nigh on impossible to tell for yourself if it’s real or faked. So we use the internet to try to find out, or we come across something that points us one way or another. Which source we trust depends on all kinds of factors, including our own personal beliefs and biases. Even trusted outlets get stuff wrong, sometimes. So we end up with an informed, but potentially mistaken understanding of something based on a tiny clip and some Googling. And then we might come on here with that “understanding” and see someone else who has written down their different understanding and see theirs is “wrong”. And then if we are so inclined, we don’t discuss why, we just argue and get no further than thinking worse of each other for it. If people actually explain why they say what they do on here, we could look at the reasoning and the “research” sources and maybe sometimes we’d end up better informed. Of courses all the fakes out there are intended to take advantage of our not doing that to gain an advantage in the court of public opinion and thus influence the people making decisions on tanks and planes and sanctions and support and the rest of it. I think you're missing the point I was making. We've all posted stuff that has turned out to be fake or just rubbish, such is the nonsense of information of which to sift through. I have on occasions only to be corrected by others or to end up removing the fake info. It happens. The point being, so what. If others have alternate info, view point, beliefs etc, then share. Debate, converse and explain the alternate view. There are those that have come in to the thread, ranted about absolute shite, with no wish for a debate, conversation or even explained themselves.. just pushing the narrative regarding a stereotypical thread with biased information, only to then run away when challenged. There is nothing at all stopping people posting alternate info and contributing to the thread, rather than slagging off those that do who are only trying to be informative, or express an opinion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Lifeboats Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 1 hour ago, Arj Guy said: So week or so ago a video gets posted in this thread of Zelensky essentially calling for WW3 by asking NATO to bomb Russia and not a single person in here condemned it. It instead led to a conversation about how we can’t trust the subtitles or anything on the net. This despite the fact that a quick google search would reveal that he did indeed say it and his aids were forced to damage control. Sums up the state of this thread really As I said at the time, it was fake and I had seen it a few months ago. The subtitles suggested he was asking for a pre-emptive nuclear strike. He wasn’t. He did suggest pre-emptive use of sanctions and pre-emotive destruction of Russia weapons before they became active. That seems very reasonable to me. It’s the standard that Russia has already set as acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 The video is not fake, it’s real. The subtitles added to it are not what he’s saying in the video though. This is the tag Twitter has added under that video: Quote The subtitles in this video are altered. Instead of "prevent usage of nuclear weapons by Russia" they say "they can use nuclear weapons on Russia". This changes the meaning of the entire speech that follows. Original reporting on the speech from Oct 6 2022 is here: UKR pravda.com.ua/news/2022/10/6… ENG pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/… 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Lifeboats Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-zelenskyy-nato-russia-nuclear-162428316989 “Zelensky did not ask NATO to use nuclear weapons”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, Arj Guy said: So week or so ago a video gets posted in this thread of Zelensky essentially calling for WW3 by asking NATO to bomb Russia and not a single person in here condemned it. It instead led to a conversation about how we can’t trust the subtitles or anything on the net. This despite the fact that a quick google search would reveal that he did indeed say it and his aids were forced to damage control. Sums up the state of this thread really Did you bother checking the source of the video? From a quick search, it's been spread (with some taking it down) by the following people. David Vance - Rabidly pro Putin, conspiracy theorist, racist nutjob. Ben Shapiro (taken down) - see above, add in MAGA loon. Pål Steigan - pro-totalitarian tin foil hat brigade leader in Norway. Lots of followers of George Galloway, Marine Le Pen, Geert Wilders - all squarely in Putin's pocket. Scott Ritter - several times over convicted of spreading child pornography. "ended up" in Russia and now "fair and equal reporter" for RIA. The list goes on. Take your pick of the above and you've got yourself some of the top misinformation campaigners directly in Putin's pocket. Why do you instantly assume that the video has any credibility? It's about as real as Soloyov/Medvedev/Peskov threatening to nuke all European capitals - oh wait? Edited February 9, 2023 by magnkarl 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc1982am Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 Looks like Prigozhin is now being downgraded and put back in his box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) Here's one of Hitl err I mean Putin's wunderwaffes getting destroyed recently, the BMPT Terminator. Looks to have been abandoned - it runs on a similar engine to the T-14 Armata which is also not remotely ready for combat. This was supposed to crush all opposition, much like the SU35. It's reportedly the idiots in the video below harassing trees, I guess the vehicle couldn't handle shooting. Edited February 9, 2023 by magnkarl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 I so hope pur little country dont get involved in supplying them fighter jets, not that we really have any to give. To me that'll be an act of war to Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: I so hope pur little country dont get involved in supplying them fighter jets, not that we really have any to give. To me that'll be an act of war to Russia. Frankly I presume it'll be one of the Nordic countries, Poland or the Baltics that will. Norway's just gotten a batch of F-35's and so have some older stock available. Same with Poland. Delivering aircraft isn't an act of war, just like tanks, missiles, ammo, afv's, ifv's, mraps etc aren't either. Russia supplied the same weapons including jets to Vietnam, to Syria, to Iraq to whatever all the time without us taking it as an act of war. In fact Russia supplied pilots with the jets in certain conflicts, they're obviously going to call it a red line or whatever, but it won't change anything. Edited February 9, 2023 by magnkarl 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 2 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: I so hope pur little country dont get involved in supplying them fighter jets, not that we really have any to give. To me that'll be an act of war to Russia. Why are tanks and guns ok but planes not? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 It's our 'little country' when it comes to this, but it's our great, empirical country when voting for Brexit... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) Roger Waters' fallen quite hard for the conspiracy theories, hasn't he? Edited February 9, 2023 by magnkarl 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pas5898 Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 16 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: I so hope pur little country dont get involved in supplying them fighter jets, not that we really have any to give. To me that'll be an act of war to Russia. War with the UK = War with Nato 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 I think we’ve established Putin has enough on his plate without starting a fight with NATO. If he was going to follow through on threats about supporting Ukraine he’d have done it long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeVillan Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 20 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: It's our 'little country' when it comes to this, but it's our great, empirical country when voting for Brexit... What on earth are you going on about? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuart_75 Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 36 minutes ago, magnkarl said: Roger Waters' fallen quite hard for the conspiracy theories, hasn't he? Whats he jabbering on about this time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) 6 minutes ago, stuart_75 said: Whats he jabbering on about this time? He spoke for Russia at a UN meeting yesterday. Then he was called out by the Ukrainian UN ambassador for being 'another brick in the wall of Russian propaganda'. Other than his newest release, there's this banger (below the original): Edited February 9, 2023 by magnkarl 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Lifeboats Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 1 hour ago, foreveryoung said: I so hope pur little country dont get involved in supplying them fighter jets, not that we really have any to give. To me that'll be an act of war to Russia. Russia supplied a missile that shot down a civilian airliner over Ukraine. Isn't that an act of war? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts