Support NeoGAF

[M1chl]

Same system which downed the MH17, clean hit.

 

[Liljagare]

Yeah, nukes seem highly unlikely to me. What would be the benefit?

You'd never know it from the ground (how tf can you be sure even from a photo?), unless the planes crashed. And if that happened, assuming Sweden went public with it, it would only serve to further galvanize NATO.

Doesn't make much sense to me.

This is also highly disputed here in Sweden atm, it seems that the news crew on channel 4 here made a assumption. The planes that violated our airspace are nuclear capable, but no such systems can be seen in the pictures taken.

The four planes that violated Swedish airspace on March 2, seem to have been naked, apart from their extra fuel tanks. The AMC 48080/48081 (RN24/RN27-28) tactical nuclear bombs that the SU-24 can carry are pretty big, and would show on even the low res images released.

So fake news from my own country. Yay!

 

[Wildebeest]

Russia grows its own sugar. Their continued trading partners India and China are 2 & 3 producers in the world. This panic buying sugar seems irrational.

 

[FunkMiller]

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

you won me. I have to say it is amazing all the information.

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

If true, they know this war is shit and do not want to die a senseless death.

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

I mean why not purge the cause of your pain? It will be better for everyone in your country and the whole world.

As Putin's dream of a swift victory in Ukraine fades, reports of Kremlin purges and paranoia emerge​

abc.net.au/news/2...

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

More information from a previous post of mine



7 Radioactive buses due to stupidity

 

[chromhound]

 

[Raven117]

So fake news from my own country. Yay!

Welcome to the party, pal!

 

[Rest]

More information from a previous post of mine



7 Radioactive buses due to stupidity

Is this from them kicking up dirt there, or was Russia doing some kind of extra stupid shit there?

 

[TwinB242]

Is this from them kicking up dirt there, or was Russia doing some kind of extra stupid shit there?

They dug trenches in the dirt. The levels of stupidity continue to amaze me

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

They dug trenches in the dirt. The levels of stupidity continue to amaze me

Surely this must be propaganda? I cannot fathom how they could be this incompetent.

 

[Rest]

They dug trenches in the dirt. The levels of stupidity continue to amaze me

Jesus christ.

 

[eyesabitdull]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

 

[TwinB242]

Surely this must be propaganda? I cannot fathom how they could be this incompetent.

Russia probably doesn't even educate their population about Chernobyl despite it being a significant moment in their history. These uninformed, poorly educated kids had no idea what they were walking into (which goes for the entire Russian army as a whole it seems).

 

[Xyphie]

Surely this must be propaganda? I cannot fathom how they could be this incompetent.

Yes. Throughout this war Ukraine has used nuclear fear in the west as propaganda. You're not going to get ARS from doing anything around Chernobyl. It's been over 35 years, so the most radioactive isotopes have decayed away long ago.

 

[EviLore]

Yes. Throughout this war Ukraine has used nuclear fear in the west as propaganda. You're not going to get ARS from doing anything around Chernobyl. It's been over 35 years, so the most radioactive isotopes have decayed away long ago.

Maybe not ARS, but still a danger if one goes digging around.

Red Forest - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The site of the Red Forest remains one of the most contaminated areas in the world today.[3]"

"The explosion and fire at the Chernobyl No. 4 reactor contaminated the soil, water and atmosphere with radioactive material equivalent to that of 20 times the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[4]"

"In the post-disaster cleanup operations, a majority of the pine trees were bulldozed and buried in trenches by the "liquidators". The trenches were then covered with a thick carpet of sand and planted with pine saplings.[5] Many fear that as the trees decay, radioactive contaminants will leach into the ground water. People have evacuated the contaminated zone around the Red Forest."

Frequently Asked Chernobyl Questions | IAEA

On April 26, 1986, the Number Four RBMK reactor at the nuclear power plant at Chernobyl, Ukraine, went out of control during a test at low-power, leading to an explosion and fire that demolished the reactor building and released large amounts of radiation into the atmosphere. Safety measures...

www.iaea.org

"5. What radioactive elements were emitted into the environment?
There were over 100 radioactive elements released into the atmosphere when Chernobyl’s fourth reactor exploded. Most of these were short lived and decayed (reduced in radioactivity) very quickly. Iodine, strontium and caesium were the most dangerous of the elements released, and have half-lives of 8 days, 29 years, and 30 years respectively. The isotopes Strontium-90 and Caesium-137 are therefore still present in the area to this day. While iodine is linked to thyroid cancer, Strontium can lead to leukaemia. Caesium is the element that travelled the farthest and lasts the longest. This element affects the entire body and especially can harm the liver and spleen."

 

[Xyphie]

Maybe not ARS, but still a danger if one goes digging around.

Sure. But any danger would be a statistically higher chance of getting cancer a few decades from now, not dying in a matter of days from your skin peeling off in a cartoonish fashion.

 

[akimbo009]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

Won't y'all think of the Russians too? If we don't, we might get too wrapped up caring for women, children, and illegal invasion and not give solid consideration to the barbaric actions of a dictator led military.

I'll start... Fuck Putin.

 

[eyesabitdull]

Won't y'all think of the Russians too? If we don't, we might get too wrapped up caring for women, children, and illegal invasion and not give solid consideration to the barbaric actions of a dictator led military.

I'll start... Fuck Putin.

Like I said, echo chamber.

 

[akimbo009]

Like I said, echo chamber.

Ohhh is it? Why don't you start with the Russian defense. Do let us know how a balanced both sides argument sounds with Russia.

 

[GeorgioCostanzaX]

Live from Putin’s cabinet meeting…

 

[eyesabitdull]

Ohhh is it? Why don't you start with the Russian defense. Do let us know how a balanced both sides argument sounds with Russia.

Is this how you conduct a conversation and/or discussion in real life? Legitimate question because you seem to be super on edge.

I never said I'm on the defence of any side.

I'm saying that this entire thread is simping towards Ukraine to the point where it is no longer a conducive thread for an actual proper discussion - something thay Gaf has been more than capable of doing in many instances and topic discussions.

The way you're acting and behaving, is exactly the kind of bullshit black and white thinking that children - or man children - have, and basically proving my point.

Theres no reason for you to get all huffy and puffy over what I said, but you are - because that's how sensitive you have become in your virtue signaling for UA.

So carry on, bro. Keep doing your thing.

 

[Hugare]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

Maybe the conversarion is one sided because it's obvious who is in the wrong here

Or would that be the invaded country?

I want to know your opinion about it

 

[funkygunther]

Is this how you conduct a conversation and/or discussion in real life? Legitimate question because you seem to be super on edge.

I never said I'm on the defence of any side.

I'm saying that this entire thread is simping towards Ukraine to the point where it is no longer a conducive thread for an actual proper discussion - something thay Gaf has been more than capable of doing in many instances and topic discussions.

The way you're acting and behaving, is exactly the kind of bullshit black and white thinking that children - or man children - have, and basically proving my point.

Theres no reason for you to get all huffy and puffy over what I said, but you are - because that's how sensitive you have become in your virtue signaling for UA.

So carry on, bro. Keep doing your thing.

What's your contention exactly? The bans? Raise them with a mod, or point them out and discuss them.

Certain posters? Call them out, quote them.

You're welcome to provide this "actual proper discussion" but right now, a failure to get into specifics, is just whining.

 

[akimbo009]

Is this how you conduct a conversation and/or discussion in real life? Legitimate question because you seem to be super on edge.

I never said I'm on the defence of any side.

I'm saying that this entire thread is simping towards Ukraine to the point where it is no longer a conducive thread for an actual proper discussion - something thay Gaf has been more than capable of doing in many instances and topic discussions.

The way you're acting and behaving, is exactly the kind of bullshit black and white thinking that children - or man children - have, and basically proving my point.

Theres no reason for you to get all huffy and puffy over what I said, but you are - because that's how sensitive you have become in your virtue signaling for UA.

So carry on, bro. Keep doing your thing.

Thanks for the permission. Really feel validated.

Or you know, there is no middle ground with a terrorist like Putin. You act all moral and high judgement about me, and the obvious conclusions. Maybe after a month of watching children blown to bits folks have got a bit callous to persuasive commentary around Russia - or maybe we never did cause Putin illegally invaded a neighboring country with no justification or cause. So I dunno, maybe there just isn't a whataboutism argument to be made in the age old balanced way of previous debates (I don't know, I wasn't here for political debates during the Trump years but going by the fact they are banned and were a shit show the internet over I suspect it wasn't all that balanced).

But you just strolled into this thread, clearly not reading it and the fact we've had this same "won't you think about both sides" at least a dozen times. And welp, hard to find someone wanting to argue for Russia's position.

But you can if you want. I guess. Or make some actual point rather than being some weird thread critic.

 

[Atrus]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

People are not discussing “both sides” because the culpability for this invasion is crystal clear and is supported across the political spectrum save for fringe left-wing and right-wing nuts who reposition the conflict onto the US and agree that the US is bad or that the West is in decline; essentially serving as useful idiots for the Kremlin.

Did you feel that Nazi propaganda was not given a fair shake in the West in WW2? Not enough pictures of SS killing allied soldiers? Not enough consideration for the legitimate reasons the Nazis had for concentration camps? Any bias in this war against Russian fascists runs along this same principle.

Every single time someone wants to discus the “other side” it is a regurgitation of Kremlin propaganda that they haven’t put enough time into digesting and wastes everyone’s time.

 

[BigBooper]

Like I said, echo chamber.

Sometimes, there's not much point in playing devil's advocate unless you simply love being contrary. Almost everyone I've seen comment on the topic realizes that Ukraine is no utopia of morals or ethical government. There are a couple that were practically fetishizing Zelensky and they were rightly mocked for it. Exaggerated claims about Ukrainian supermen were countered and mocked as they were proven false. Almost everyone doesnt want the US or Nato to be involved yet and that's been discussed a lot.

Until the invasion is over, there's nothing that can reasonably be done about the ethical concerns of the Ukrainian government or their ties with other governments. Unless Ukraine starts making Russian cities start to look like Mariupol below, then all the other concerns can wait on the back burner for now, imo.

 

[raystlin7]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

Yeah it was a pleasant surprise. It's good to see people recognising good and evil. The other side? Hey let's discuss the views of the rapists and murderers. They also have their motives I guess. Let's also put some blame on the victim. They had it coming, didn't they? Go ahead and say something about an echo chamber again.

 

[eyesabitdull]

Maybe the conversarion is one sided because it's obvious who is in the wrong here

Or would that be the invaded country?

I want to know your opinion about it

That's not how discussions work though.

I'm merely stating, that if we are to discuss this war, we need to look at information from both sides - whether we like it, or disagree with it - because only then can we have a proper discussion.

One does not need to disregard that the Russians are the invaders to talk about information coming out of Russia, as a way to sift through what could be the truth, and what could easily be highly diluted.

I did not come into this thread (for the third time) claiming i'm on any side, I am stating that this thread has become so one sided, that it is neigh impossible for anyone in here to actually say this is a civil discourse of the topic at hand.

What's your contention exactly? The bans? Raise them with a mod, or point them out and discuss them.

Certain posters? Call them out, quote them.

You're welcome to provide this "actual proper discussion" but right now, a failure to get into specifics, is just whining.

My contention comes from the fact that any and all information in this thread is highly pro-Ukraine, and I believe that there's something amiss with that because wars are not black and white - therefore we're opening ourselves in this thread to information that could be very well just be propaganda, and not actual credible information, because we're so inclined to being on the Ukrainian side.

And god bless all of us for standing for the citizens of Ukraine, they are definitely the victims in this entire situation and their safety is immeasurable and cannot be dismissed.

But, I believe we must be open to any and all information from Russia - whether good, or bad, propaganda or not (like we are with Ukraine) - because only then can we see this war with clear eyes, we can then properly discuss the situation without all of us giving kneejerk reactions to everything.

Situations like Snake Island, Ghost of Kiev, and etc, all of them are result of us being deep into wanting the UA to win, and refusing to wanting to listen to the other side, so we believed it to be true (including myself).

That's all I'm saying, because I feel like, we're about to reach "Saddam Hussein has WMD's" level of rhetoric to convince the world to go into World War III mode - and idk about you guys, I would not want that.

So level headed conversations are needed.

Thanks for the permission. Really feel validated.

Or you know, there is no middle ground with a terrorist like Putin. You act all moral and high judgement about me, and the obvious conclusions. Maybe after a month of watching children blown to bits folks have got a bit callous to persuasive commentary around Russia - or maybe we never did cause Putin illegally invaded a neighboring country with no justification or cause. So I dunno, maybe there just isn't a whataboutism argument to be made in the age old balanced way of previous debates (I don't know, I wasn't here for political debates during the Trump years but going by the fact they are banned and were a shit show the internet over I suspect it wasn't all that balanced).

But you just strolled into this thread, clearly not reading it and the fact we've had this same "won't you think about both sides" at least a dozen times. And welp, hard to find someone wanting to argue for Russia's position.

But you can if you want. I guess. Or make some actual point rather than being some weird thread critic.

Is this your first war, or something?

Or did you close your eyes and block your ears to the suffering and death of Yemenis the past few years?

It's clear I can't have any civil discourse with you, so feel free to ignore me.

 

[eyesabitdull]

Sometimes, there's not much point in playing devil's advocate unless you simply love being contrary. Almost everyone I've seen comment on the topic realizes that Ukraine is no utopia of morals or ethical government. There are a couple that were practically fetishizing Zelensky and they were rightly mocked for it. Exaggerated claims about Ukrainian supermen were countered and mocked as they were proven false. Almost everyone doesnt want the US or Nato to be involved yet and that's been discussed a lot.

Until the invasion is over, there's nothing that can reasonably be done about the ethical concerns of the Ukrainian government or their ties with other governments. Unless Ukraine starts making Russian cities start to look like Mariupol below, then all the other concerns can wait on the back burner for now, imo.

True, maybe you're right. Maybe I missed a lot in the 220 pages.

It just feels odd because we've been very capable of talking about a lot of topics on GAF, but somehow it does feel a little bit one sided here?

Oh well, you make a good point. It's no point me trying to play devils advocate here. I'll just ignore the thread again.

Appreciate you replying without condemning me though!

 

[akimbo009]

That's not how discussions work though.

I'm merely stating, that if we are to discuss this war, we need to look at information from both sides - whether we like it, or disagree with it - because only then can we have a proper discussion.

One does not need to disregard that the Russians are the invaders to talk about information coming out of Russia, as a way to sift through what could be the truth, and what could easily be highly diluted.

I did not come into this thread (for the third time) claiming i'm on any side, I am stating that this thread has become so one sided, that it is neigh impossible for anyone in here to actually say this is a civil discourse of the topic at hand.



My contention comes from the fact that any and all information in this thread is highly pro-Ukraine, and I believe that there's something amiss with that because wars are not black and white - therefore we're opening ourselves in this thread to information that could be very well just be propaganda, and not actual credible information, because we're so inclined to being on the Ukrainian side.

And god bless all of us for standing for the citizens of Ukraine, they are definitely the victims in this entire situation and their safety is immeasurable and cannot be dismissed.

But, I believe we must be open to any and all information from Russia - whether good, or bad, propaganda or not (like we are with Ukraine) - because only then can we see this war with clear eyes, we can then properly discuss the situation without all of us giving kneejerk reactions to everything.

Situations like Snake Island, Ghost of Kiev, and etc, all of them are result of us being deep into wanting the UA to win, and refusing to wanting to listen to the other side, so we believed it to be true (including myself).

That's all I'm saying, because I feel like, we're about to reach "Saddam Hussein has WMD's" level of rhetoric to convince the world to go into World War III mode - and idk about you guys, I would not want that.

So level headed conversations are needed.


Is this your first war, or something?

Or did you close your eyes and block your ears to the suffering and death of Yemenis the past few years?

It's clear I can't have any civil discourse with you, so feel free to ignore me.

Ignore you? Never. I like the entertainment.

It was actually civil discourse until you strolled in. And don't get too huffy about people pushing back against you - you just aren't arguing in good faith. And as I and others have said, go ahead and start the discussion for the other side or whatever.

And as much as I appreciate your concern for my vulnerability to pro-Ukrainian propaganda I think I'll be ok.

We really should get back to the topic though.

 

[LimanimaPT]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

We are on the side of the ones who got invaded and are being indiscriminately bombarded. The side that has about 4 million refugies and got cities flattened.
The other side is killing children, is bombarding hospitals, schools and invaded a soberane country.
In what side should we go for?

 

[akimbo009]

Some updates, basically Russia's withdrawal promises just opened the door for long range attacks.

 

[akimbo009]

Oh, and this one is great. Bunch of Russians exit a collapsed building like a clown car..

 

[MisterFalcon]

Some updates, basically Russia's withdrawal promises just opened the door for long range attacks.

Every action from Russia is aimed at maximizing cruelty. Promising to stop the killing and then doing it anyway is more cruel then simply continuing because it gives a tiny sliver of hope and then takes it away.

 

[Rentahamster]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

How about instead of complaining you can enlighten us with any information you think we might be missing, and we can evaluate it to see if it's relevant.

 

[mxbison]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

We have both sides.

The Russian one is killing people and destroying cities. The pro-Russian news is also getting plenty of attention, not our fault they are so comically bad at spreading lies that it's immediately obvious to anyone with half a brain.

 

[FunkMiller]

True, maybe you're right. Maybe I missed a lot in the 220 pages.

It just feels odd because we've been very capable of talking about a lot of topics on GAF, but somehow it does feel a little bit one sided here?

Oh well, you make a good point. It's no point me trying to play devils advocate here. I'll just ignore the thread again.

Appreciate you replying without condemning me though!

While I kind of see your point about one of the great things about GAF being that it allows contrary positions on many subjects, and people have a high degree of freedom of expression...

...an illegal war, with Nazi level atrocities committed by the perpetrators, is not the subject for that kind of 'both sides' argument.

I don't *think* you're attempting to sound pro-Russian, but I also think this is very definitely the wrong thread and subject matter to be extoling the virtues of GAF's brand of open dialogue.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

That's not how discussions work though.

I'm merely stating, that if we are to discuss this war, we need to look at information from both sides - whether we like it, or disagree with it - because only then can we have a proper discussion.

One does not need to disregard that the Russians are the invaders to talk about information coming out of Russia, as a way to sift through what could be the truth, and what could easily be highly diluted.

I did not come into this thread (for the third time) claiming i'm on any side, I am stating that this thread has become so one sided, that it is neigh impossible for anyone in here to actually say this is a civil discourse of the topic at hand.



My contention comes from the fact that any and all information in this thread is highly pro-Ukraine, and I believe that there's something amiss with that because wars are not black and white - therefore we're opening ourselves in this thread to information that could be very well just be propaganda, and not actual credible information, because we're so inclined to being on the Ukrainian side.

And god bless all of us for standing for the citizens of Ukraine, they are definitely the victims in this entire situation and their safety is immeasurable and cannot be dismissed.

But, I believe we must be open to any and all information from Russia - whether good, or bad, propaganda or not (like we are with Ukraine) - because only then can we see this war with clear eyes, we can then properly discuss the situation without all of us giving kneejerk reactions to everything.

Situations like Snake Island, Ghost of Kiev, and etc, all of them are result of us being deep into wanting the UA to win, and refusing to wanting to listen to the other side, so we believed it to be true (including myself).

That's all I'm saying, because I feel like, we're about to reach "Saddam Hussein has WMD's" level of rhetoric to convince the world to go into World War III mode - and idk about you guys, I would not want that.

So level headed conversations are needed.


Is this your first war, or something?

Or did you close your eyes and block your ears to the suffering and death of Yemenis the past few years?

It's clear I can't have any civil discourse with you, so feel free to ignore me.

So you want to post Russian propaganda to find the grain of truth in the mountain of bs?

Kremlinology died when the Cold War died, now it’s just a madman with delusions of grandeur ruling over a corrupt oligarchy.

Edit: changed tone to be less confrontational

 

[Tams]

Surely this must be propaganda? I cannot fathom how they could be this incompetent.

Sadly, it may well true.

Given how much of a clusterfuck this invasion has been, and that many Russian soldiers are conscripts or contract soldiers (often signed on under duress/false promises) and likely not well educated... they might well have not even known about Chernobyl (the accident). Hell, some might not have even known where they were.

 

[Tams]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

Because this one of the most black and white situations there has been.

Ukraine is a sovereign nation, with their own democratically elected government. Russia invaded them unprovoked and are now causing immense damage.

As for Russian media and sources... ever heard of the boy who cried wolf? They have been found to be inaccurate or lying so many times that there's no point in trusting them for facts anymore.

Now, you want to 'hear both sides'. No one here has an obligation to post for any side. But if you think it's unbalanced, then you are free to post in a mature fashion the Russian side and then we are free to critique it. If not... well you can not participate in the thread.

Those few who have been banned over posts in this thread have been due to badly written propaganda, that didn't even make logical sense.

 

[Wildebeest]

The problem with "both sides" on this issue is that there is very little information on the Russian side due to suppression of the press, and what information you get is very easily provable as false or black propaganda designed to scare you but backed with no evidence. Another "problem" is how the people you might call the "centrists" are prepared to look at this situation and see the big picture of a dictator carrying out an old-fashioned war of imperialistic aggression, in which normal people suffer and die as small pieces in his sick game. It is not the sort of culture war we are used to seeing as such, although people who are used to arguing from the extremes of the culture war are tempted to treat it like an extension of the culture wars. I would not necessarily call the people who always side with Russia in culture wars great debaters who I really want to hear from.

 

[FunkMiller]

Because this one of the most black and white situations there has been.

You might as well start a thread about the benefits of cancer. It would make about as much sense.

 

[M1chl]

#notAllRussians

 

[FunkMiller]

#notAllRussians

Pigs that frankly need butchering.

….sorry, that feels a little insulting to pigs.

 

[kurisu_1974]

Like I said, echo chamber.

Please post some pro-Russia views then. Not a bait, genuinely interested. Is it about NATO warmongering at Russia's borders and forcing soevereign nations into their organization? Is this a defensive war for Russia?

 

[FunkMiller]

Please post some pro-Russia views then. Not a bait, genuinely interested. Is it about NATO warmongering at Russia's borders and forcing soevereign nations into their organization? Is this a defensive war for Russia?

I'll let the other dude posit his own answer to this if he so chooses, but on this singular point: NATO expansion is entirely voluntary to the nations that have wanted to join it. At no stage in the admission process for any nation has NATO used their joining as a way to encourage aggression. Quite the opposite, in fact. Expansion was and is designed to prevent aggression from the likes of Russia... who really do seem to like being aggressive, don't they?

If Putin and Russia have found NATO expansion to be threatening, it is because they don't like the idea of previous Soviet nations being allowed to voluntarily join a democratically created and maintained organisation. There is no defence for the 'NATO aggression' argument, without also denying sovereign nations the right to self determination.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Ya know, of all the places that I thought would be so one sided in the conversation about Russia-Ukraine, GAF was not one of them.

After the US general election, and the civil discourse we had over it that was very contained, open minded to both sides opinions, and welcoming to differing perspectives - I thought we would have similar discourse over here.

So color me surprised at the absolute one sided conversation here, with almost constant pro-UA news without ever showing the other side - regardless of source or whether it appears bias or not - to enter the discussion.

Not because i'm pro Russia (i could care less on either side tbh), but because it's starting to be an echo chamber in here.

It's one of those very rare cases where it's really a one-sided issue. I find myself agreeing with people who are usually wrong about everything, but that's just how it is. Russia is the bad guy, there's no way around it.