• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Ukrainian Conflict - Donetsk Boogaloo

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sviatoslav said:
So they're doing it because they're incompetent then? Is that what you're suggesting? They seem a lot more competent in exposing flaws in governments that aren't west-leaning.

When dealing with Russia I long ago learned that you have to take info coming from both sides with a grain of salt. Have to dig through the BS from both sides. Can't take what either media says for granted.
Click to expand...

dude, the us media is incompetent. Its a sham, investigative journalism is too expensive. Its cheaper to talk about justin beeber farting
 
SRG01 said:
China is extremely protective of any country's "internal affairs". This is probably stemming from years of colonial rule by foreign powers.
Click to expand...

Also from this being very much aligned with their own current foreign policy. It allows them to shrug off any criticism of anything to do with say Tibet and still retains the right to meddle in things like the Senkaku Islands - and above all Taiwan, obviously - because they claim that these places are Chinese territory anyway.
 
sphagnum said:
There's basically no reason to ever trust western media (or any big media for that matter). Western media will always find a way to take a pro-western stance, RT will always take the Russian stance, etc.
Click to expand...

Talk about a specious comparison. One might have assigned more credibility to Russian media before Putin sacked everyone in charge and replaced them with Kremlin loyalists. At least Western media has some diversity of opinion and freedom of the press.
 
thehunter01 said:
I don't think you understand how Europe works.

Europe isn't america. They are not controlled by one leader and one military. Europe consists out of 50+ country's. Which have all there own military there own economy, there own culture there own believes, there own idea's, there own markets, there own trade partners, there own history etc.

Even if for example germany is attacked by russia, it still doesn't mean that UK will go into war with russia, Or that france will go into war.

Europe isn't one country with one opinion, it has a ton of those. Even if 1/3 of west europe is in war, it's good possible that 2/3 of europe will still ignore it or show no interest in the conflict.

Western europe actually is a name for a lot of country's. But there is nobody that controls all of western europe let alone eastern europe.

There is a reason why the president of Europe ( lol ) never gets shown on television, because its a puppet with absolute no power over anything. The market leader "Germany" is the one that shows its face always and it's always the person to talk whenever anything happens. But even then it's taking by everybody not German or heavily related towards there economy seen as just another opinion.

A piece of paper signed decades ago, by different leaders from all those country's that also shifted over the years heavily in opinions etc is absolute nothing worth at all for most of the western population.

The only thing that the individual country's care about atm is there own people and there own economy's. They don't want to piss off a giant that will give them another hit on there economy's, specially when that place is and was of no meaning towards them financially.

The best chance Ukraine has = America. Because america doesn't deal with what Europe has "endless opinions".
Click to expand...

"Europe consists out of 50+ country's" . Holy shit :D EU is 28 now.
 
Sviatoslav said:
Looking at the voting for this bill(to make a far-right party member Prosecutor General of Ukraine) for example it looks like the vast majority of Party of Regions people aren't even there to vote for this stuff. Communist party too. Again I'm not an expert on this stuff but it looks strange to me.
Click to expand...

Well, some of the PoRs were too close to Yanukovich and now hiding, I'm sure you believe me if I tell you they have good reasons not to answer before court. Many people left the fraction and formed a new one. Still those 40 - 70 votes that they still have are crucial to anything big. + ~45 communist votes and you got almost a third of the active parliament, enough to stall the parliament.

Gotta sleep, sorry guys. Hopefully noone dies this night in Crimea. Protect us God.
 
BBC said:
Steve Rosenberg BBC News, Moscow says many of the Russian tabloids are packed with patriotic fervour and pro-Kremlin columns. One of the country's most popular papers, Komsomolskaya Pravda, claimed that Vladimir Putin was "one step away from becoming the leader of the world, the chief figure embodying independence from American hegemony".
Click to expand...

All hail our new leader.

Wait...
 
Rubenov said:
Well, the situation and this thread has me jonesing for some Europa Universalis or Total War game.
Click to expand...

I've been using Russia in my ongoing game of Civ V. My strategy almost mirrors real Russia. (With the exception of Ethiopia which I unrelentlessly steamrolled.)
 
Well in a show that not everything is pro Russia in Crimea. The Crimean branch of the SBU(State Security Service) has pledged its loyalty to the government in Kiev.
 
ape2man said:
"Europe consists out of 50+ country's" . Holy shit :D EU is 28 now.
Click to expand...

It's not far off. If you count Kosovo and the ones partially in Asia, you get to about 50 countries. Many of the small countries on the Balkan and former soviet countries are not part of the EU. Plus, you have your few outliers like Norway and Switzerland.
 
lastplayed said:
All hail our new leader.

Wait...
Click to expand...

vladimir-putin-4.jpg


All hail the king or prepare to eat lead
 
ape2man said:
dude, the us media is incompetent. Its a sham, investigative journalism is too expensive. Its cheaper to talk about justin beeber farting
Click to expand...

You can plug in an antenna and watch The News Hour on PBS for free and get an hour worth of in depth coverage. Try it.

The US media does not care enough about Russia to have an anti-Russia stance. The anti-gay laws have gotten Russia more bad press than everything since the Cold War ended combined. When Gov. Romney said Russia was the US's principal rival during the campaign, it was treated as a gaffe and the media acted like he had just been thawed out after being frozen in 1955.
 
Berto said:
Actually it does. they have an alliance (NATO).
Click to expand...

NATO rarely acts together. Being in NATO means though if a member state is attacked, the use of force for all member nations is justified. If push came to shove and there was real death and destruction sure.

Then again, Germany and France are the stronger relationships Russia has in the region. They'd never really go to war.
 
Soyongdori said:
Whatever happened to the guy who is viciously pro-Russia in this topic? I still wanna hear from his side of story.
Click to expand...

This board is extremely Western-slanted for obvious reasons. It'd be nice to hear from the actual Russian citizenry on their feelings about the issue. I wonder if we have any on GAF.
 
ambientmystic said:
This board is extremely Western-slanted for obvious reasons. It'd be nice to hear from the actual Russian citizenry on their feelings about the issue. I wonder if we have any on GAF.
Click to expand...

Oh there are plenty of Russians on here. The problem is they tend to sound exactly like Russia Today and other Propaganda sources so it becomes very hard to have any sort of discussion.

I welcome healthy debate but you can't debate with Propaganda.
 
I nearly walked into a guy coming out of the bathroom at work who looked just like Putin. He even looked about the right size (5'5'').

It was really disconcerting to see how small he'd be in real life.
 
Guileless said:
The US media does not care enough about Russia to have an anti-Russia stance. The anti-gay laws have gotten Russia more bad press than everything since the Cold War ended combined. When Gov. Romney said Russia was the US's principal rival during the campaign, it was treated as a gaffe and the media acted like he had just been thawed out after being frozen in 1955.
Click to expand...

Maybe not something as stated as an anti-Russia stance, but I do think that much of the Western media - perhaps without realizing it - regurgitates a lot of deep state security/neo-con arguments and interpretations. We saw this with Iraq, we saw this with Libya (and Syria), and now we see this again with Eastern Europe and Russia.
 
Clevinger said:
Antonz, I'm curious, what exactly do you want the US to do?
Click to expand...

I think its more of what we should be ready to do if we need to. If this escalates into a full fledged war between Ukraine and Russia then we need to do everything we can to shore up the Ukrainian Military.

There is not going to be any nukes used. That's not the point of the Nuclear Deterrent. The Nuclear Deterrent exists to ensure wars stay conventional.

Countries like the Ukraine have wanted into the Wests clubs like NATO for years but we hem and haw not wanting to insult Russia. Well Russia has basically told the world to fuck off so lets get them in NATO etc.
 
sphagnum said:
I nearly walked into a guy coming out of the bathroom at work who looked just like Putin. He even looked about the right size (5'5'').

It was really disconcerting to see how small he'd be in real life.
Click to expand...

He'd fuck you up bad though with his KGB skills.
 
Iolo said:
At least Western media has some diversity of opinion and freedom of the press.
Click to expand...

Unless it's about stuff like NSA and Snowden and such.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/06/21/cens-j21.html

I get information from everyone and then combine everything instead of just reading western media.

Western media is biased as well and does some "weird" things quite often. People like me notice it, most people don't. And that's the actual problem. When the common newspapers call for war (see US + UK Iraq "coverage"), then that's enough to form a public opinion. It doesn't matter when some other newspaper was at least not totally pro war.

Germany's state-sponsored television for example made an interview with Snowden some weeks ago. I would assume, that this is something really important for the common public. Which means it should have been aired during the afternoon or right after the news. Strangely they aired it an hour before midnight and they also only released a dubbed version at first. Quite a few people complained and at first they even had the audacity to say that they wouldn't own the rights for the original, which was factually not true. After some days or so they finally gave up and aired the non-dubbed interview in the middle of the night. And in the end they were "nice" and uploaded it to youtube - but blocked it for everyone else.

Which simply doesn't make sense, because the public paid for it and people from other countries are surely interested in it as well. None of it made sense unless you just look at what politicians like Merkel did at that time. They tried to swipe it under the rug. Which somewhat even worked. Which again - doesn't make sense in case you believe that they would follow their oath.

And I also recall that the same state-sponsored television aired an interview with Putin some years ago - and people found out that strangely all EU criticism was cut out. But that's not censorship, nooooo. People found out, called them out and their excuse was "there was not enough time to broadcast it all". And they sent the uncut interview ... you guessed it ... in the middle of the night, where noone watches television.

I also have to get my Greece news from personal contacts and/or blogs, because media just doesn't report about it at all - and what's happening there is totally fucked up. Yeah, maybe a few articles are hidden somewhere, but I mean what the hell. And I also had to use RT.com to get some up-to-date Fukushima news and had to wait a few days until that news made it to a GAF-non-blocked site, so that I was able to post it.

Or what about taking information and not questioning it. Just search for Iraq 1990 and incubators and babies. I won't spoil the fun. What's really crazy is that the first links, that I currently find on google are from sites, that some people would call conspiracy sites, but the whole story was really 100% faked (look on wikipedia, Nayirah testimony) and noone really cared. And I can personally remember seeing that "testimony" in television and it was broadcasted everywhere without any criticism or doubts. It was simple propaganda and faked by an US public relations firm Hill & Knowlton (the company name is not listed on wikipedia anymore, funny isn't it?) and strangely everyone bought it - which shouldn't have been possible in the first place. But it was.
 
Putin is such a fake ass tough guy flexing all hard for the cameras. If the KGB was so tough they'd still be around. But all they did was get their asses kicked in Afghanistan before disbanding.
 
jimi_dini said:
Unless it's about stuff like NSA and Snowden and such.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/06/21/cens-j21.html

I get information from everyone and then combine everything instead of just reading western media.

Western media is biased as well and does some "weird" things quite often. People like me notice it, most people don't. And that's the actual problem. When the common newspapers call for war (see US + UK Iraq "coverage"), then that's enough to form a public opinion. It doesn't matter when some other newspaper was at least not totally pro war.

Germany's state-sponsored television for example made an interview with Snowden some weeks ago. I would assume, that this is something really important for the common public. Which means it should have been aired during the afternoon or right after the news. Strangely they aired it an hour before midnight and they also only released a dubbed version at first. Quite a few people complained and at first they even had the audacity to say that they wouldn't own the rights for the original, which was factually not true. After some days or so they finally gave up and aired the non-dubbed interview in the middle of the night. And in the end they were "nice" and uploaded it to youtube - but blocked it for everyone else.

Which simply doesn't make sense, because the public paid for it and people from other countries are surely interested in it as well. None of it made sense unless you just look at what politicians like Merkel did at that time. They tried to swipe it under the rug. Which somewhat even worked. Which again - doesn't make sense in case you believe that they would follow their oath.

And I also recall that the same state-sponsored television aired an interview with Putin some years ago - and people found out that strangely all EU criticism was cut out. But that's not censorship, nooooo. People found out, called them out and their excuse was "there was not enough time to broadcast it all". And they sent the uncut interview ... you guessed it ... in the middle of the night, where noone watches television.

I also have to get my Greece news from personal contacts and/or blogs, because media just doesn't report about it at all - and what's happening there is totally fucked up. Yeah, maybe a few articles are hidden somewhere, but I mean what the hell. And I also had to use RT.com to get some up-to-date Fukushima news and had to wait a few days until that news made it to a GAF-non-blocked site until posting it.

Or what about taking information and not questioning it. Just search for Iraq 1990 and incubators and babies. I won't spoil the fun. What's really crazy is that the first links, that I currently find on google are from sites, that some people would call conspiracy sites, but the whole story was really 100% faked (look on wikipedia, Nayirah testimony) and noone really cared. And I can personally remember seeing that "testimony" in television and it was broadcasted everywhere without any criticism or doubts. It was simple propaganda and faked by an US public relations firm Hill & Knowlton (the company name is not listed on wikipedia anymore, funny isn't it?) and strangely everyone bought it - which shouldn't have been able in the first place. But it was.
Click to expand...
That's cool, what's the Russian equivalent of the NYT?
 
Well, China and Russia are not that friendly - Russia would rather sell advanced weapon to India than to China. Ukraine also has some military cooperation with China so China is not going to completely side with Russia.

Speaking of gay law, Uganda passed something even worse and nobody really care.
 
jimi_dini said:
Or what about taking information and not questioning it. Just search for Iraq 1990 and incubators and babies. I won't spoil the fun. What's really crazy is that the first links, that I currently find on google are from sites, that some people would call conspiracy sites, but the whole story was really 100% faked (look on wikipedia, Nayirah testimony) and noone really cared. And I can personally remember seeing that "testimony" in television and it was broadcasted everywhere without any criticism or doubts. It was simple propaganda and faked by an US public relations firm Hill & Knowlton (the company name is not listed on wikipedia anymore, funny isn't it?) and strangely everyone bought it - which shouldn't have been able in the first place. But it was.
Click to expand...

That was some serious bullshit, and the Western media propagated it like it was the gospel truth in order to advance the justification of the first Iraq war. At the time, no one bothered confirm the validity of the story, everyone just ate it up because it fit the narrative of Iraq = bad, Kuwait = good.

Great post mate.
 
antonz said:
Well Russia has basically told the world to fuck off so lets get them in NATO etc.
Click to expand...

Russia was upset with NATO expansion long before this crisis though. And plunking countries that would be extremely difficult to protect into the treaty seems to me to be disaster waiting to happen.

I would hope that the people driving NATO toward Russia's borders have been honestly asking at least some of these questions:

Is expanding the alliance to places like Ukraine worthwhile? Does it create more or less stability in the region? Can NATO actually fulfill its obligations to all of its new members?

Does it make it harder or easier for NATO to work with Russia in places like Afghanistan or the Middle East?
 
All media is there to manipulate the audience, according to the views of the owners or the government in place. But there's no justification for what Russia has done in Ukraine. This is one of those weird times when it really is just white or black.
 
jimi_dini said:
Unless it's about stuff like NSA and Snowden and such.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/06/21/cens-j21.html

I get information from everyone and then combine everything instead of just reading western media.

Western media is biased as well and does some "weird" things quite often. People like me notice it, most people don't. And that's the actual problem. When the common newspapers call for war (see US + UK Iraq "coverage"), then that's enough to form a public opinion. It doesn't matter when some other newspaper was at least not totally pro war.

Germany's state-sponsored television for example made an interview with Snowden some weeks ago. I would assume, that this is something really important for the common public. Which means it should have been aired during the afternoon or right after the news. Strangely they aired it an hour before midnight and they also only released a dubbed version at first. Quite a few people complained and at first they even had the audacity to say that they wouldn't own the rights for the original, which was factually not true. After some days or so they finally gave up and aired the non-dubbed interview in the middle of the night. And in the end they were "nice" and uploaded it to youtube - but blocked it for everyone else.

Which simply doesn't make sense, because the public paid for it and people from other countries are surely interested in it as well. None of it made sense unless you just look at what politicians like Merkel did at that time. They tried to swipe it under the rug. Which somewhat even worked. Which again - doesn't make sense in case you believe that they would follow their oath.

And I also recall that the same state-sponsored television aired an interview with Putin some years ago - and people found out that strangely all EU criticism was cut out. But that's not censorship, nooooo. People found out, called them out and their excuse was "there was not enough time to broadcast it all". And they sent the uncut interview ... you guessed it ... in the middle of the night, where noone watches television.

I also have to get my Greece news from personal contacts and/or blogs, because media just doesn't report about it at all - and what's happening there is totally fucked up. Yeah, maybe a few articles are hidden somewhere, but I mean what the hell. And I also had to use RT.com to get some up-to-date Fukushima news and had to wait a few days until that news made it to a GAF-non-blocked site, so that I was able to post it.

Or what about taking information and not questioning it. Just search for Iraq 1990 and incubators and babies. I won't spoil the fun. What's really crazy is that the first links, that I currently find on google are from sites, that some people would call conspiracy sites, but the whole story was really 100% faked (look on wikipedia, Nayirah testimony) and noone really cared. And I can personally remember seeing that "testimony" in television and it was broadcasted everywhere without any criticism or doubts. It was simple propaganda and faked by an US public relations firm Hill & Knowlton (the company name is not listed on wikipedia anymore, funny isn't it?) and strangely everyone bought it - which shouldn't have been able in the first place. But it was.
Click to expand...
Now the way I see it, the world media has gone two ways. Either you have the Russia Today's of the world, where everything is state controlled, or you have capitalism, where the news sites tell the people what they want to hear.

Really it all started with Fox News, which also just so happens to get the highest ratings out of all the major network channels. Now why do you think that is? It sure as hell ain't the quality of its reporting. No, it was because Fox became masters of telling their viewers EXACTLY what they wanted to hear. Soon other networks have begun to follow suit, and that has lead us to the situation we are in now.

People don't want to have their assumptions challenged. That's why we see the media portraying America's interventions as heroic deeds, and those getting shot at as horrible baby killers (which to be fair in the case of the Taliban that is more or less the case). Not necessarily a nefarious master plan cooked up in some dark corner of the government, but still deeply worrying.
 
Russia Today is state sponsored not controlled. State controlled would be what happens in North Korea and China where it's basically a mouthpiece of the government.

Russia Today just focuses on anti-US, anti-EU and pro-Russia news. They do bring in a lot of "independent" experts sometimes, ones that always do it for the money or because they have a soapbox ie. Some conservative nutjob, some liberal professor from New York etc.
 
Jupp said:
All media is there to manipulate the audience, according to the views of the owners or the government in place. But there's no justification for what Russia has done in Ukraine. This is one of those weird times when it really is just white or black.
Click to expand...

cuz it's Russia?
 
Style Fox said:
Putin is such a fake ass tough guy flexing all hard for the cameras. If the KGB was so tough they'd still be around. But all they did was get their asses kicked in Afghanistan before disbanding.
Click to expand...

Well no, they tried a coup of the Soviet Government before being disbanded.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

How did you get better at handling conflict?
2
60
2K
kpopSuperstar replied
Rogue Squadron Delayed Due to 'Scheduling Conflicts'
45
2K
ManaByte replied
NYT: 1st Amendment No Longer Bipartisan, Now Weaponized for Civil Conflict
36
3K
iconmaster replied
LTTP: The Dress of Conflicting Colors
8
1K
Gavin Stevens replied
NYT: NK Missile Success Is Linked to Ukrainian Plant
2
56
11K
Dingens replied
Top Bottom