Russian invasion of Ukraine

BlueAnorak said:
I would laugh if it wasn't so fucking depressing.
Click to expand...
He is a person who routinely lies about who pays for tariffs, inflation figures and even golf scores so we should all be at the stage of disbelieving everything he says.
Deliberately surrounding oneself with yes men leads to zero constructive criticism at a time when even a glimmer of self doubt occurs.

Don't expect this man to change
 
POKROVSK-DOBROPILLIA Axis: The Enemy is Trapped


On this sector of the front, Ukrainian assault troops are conducting one of the most successful operations in recent months. The enemy is attempting to advance, but AFU are systematically grinding down enemy forces, cutting supply routes, and subjecting them to devastating crossfire


In just two weeks, Ukrainian forces achieved what once seemed impossible. Through the coordinated efforts of the 33rd and 425th Assault Regiments, in cooperation with the 1st Assault Regiment, the 24th and 25th Assault Battalions, as well as the 79th and 82nd Air Assault Brigades, the enemy has found itself in operational — and in some areas, tactical — encirclement


Three major “pockets” are now clearly forming on the map. Russia has deployed some of its most capable units to this area, including special forces, in an effort to prevent the encirclement from closing. Yet even elite formations have failed to halt the advance of Ukrainian assault troops


The fighting is intense, with ongoing engagements. An increasing number of Russian troops, realizing the inevitable, are surrendering. Ukrainian fighters note that the situation is beginning to resemble the Battle of Kursk: the enemy is laying down arms en masse, unable to withstand the pressure.

Slava Ukraini.
 
SPIDERBOY said:
POKROVSK-DOBROPILLIA Axis: The Enemy is Trapped


On this sector of the front, Ukrainian assault troops are conducting one of the most successful operations in recent months. The enemy is attempting to advance, but AFU are systematically grinding down enemy forces, cutting supply routes, and subjecting them to devastating crossfire


In just two weeks, Ukrainian forces achieved what once seemed impossible. Through the coordinated efforts of the 33rd and 425th Assault Regiments, in cooperation with the 1st Assault Regiment, the 24th and 25th Assault Battalions, as well as the 79th and 82nd Air Assault Brigades, the enemy has found itself in operational — and in some areas, tactical — encirclement


Three major “pockets” are now clearly forming on the map. Russia has deployed some of its most capable units to this area, including special forces, in an effort to prevent the encirclement from closing. Yet even elite formations have failed to halt the advance of Ukrainian assault troops


The fighting is intense, with ongoing engagements. An increasing number of Russian troops, realizing the inevitable, are surrendering. Ukrainian fighters note that the situation is beginning to resemble the Battle of Kursk: the enemy is laying down arms en masse, unable to withstand the pressure.

Slava Ukraini.
Click to expand...
Meanwhile....

www.bbc.co.uk

As Russian forces advance, Ukrainians in Donbas must choose to stay or go

In Bilozerske, eastern Ukraine, people must make the agonising decision to flee or risk staying.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
The BBC’s coverage of this war has been highly questionable at times.
Click to expand...
Some may say they have an "agenda"...
But why? By who? And how?

For example:
The Why, with anti City coverage can be explained by the head of BBC sport being a Rag.
So we know Who.
How, they get away with it from a supposed neutral corporation is the bigger question.
(how they moderate/delete online chat in sport reports is unbelievably biased to certain teams. Try it if you don't believe)
 
Last edited:
fulabeer said:
Some may say they have an "agenda"...
But why? By who? And how?
For example:
The Why, with anti City coverage can be explained by the head of BBC sport being a Rag.
So we know Who.
How, they get away with it from a supposed neutral corporation is the bigger question.
(how they moderate/delete online chat in sport reports is unbelievably biased to certain teams. Try it if you don't believe)
Click to expand...
I’d say it’s far more nuanced than the BBC’s reporting on City which is readily explained in a sentence or two.

I wouldn’t say the BBC’s coverage was pro-Russian, because it’s manifestly and expressly not. They actually make a conscious effort to condemn the invasion, and Russian tactics, and certainly don’t seek to excuse either, which would be present at least in attenuated form if malign Russian influence was a factor in their output.

However, when it comes to their reporting on the tactical direction of the war you’d think that Russia was making gains in a way that simply isn’t being reflected on the battlefield. The way that certain recent advances in Donetsk have been repelled being a case in point, with the advances being well reported but the outcome getting next to no coverage.

I always try to be careful around media output in respect of this war. Some of the YouTube videos posted on here are clearly presenting a tendentious viewpoint from the Ukrainian perspective for example, and so I feel we all need to fight against our own confirmation biases when evaluating how things are going, but my own assessment is the BBC have a particular line on this which permeates through most of their output.

Maybe it’s as simple as not wanting sympathy for Ukraine to waver or even falter, or maybe it’s because the effects of Russian military activity are more newsworthy, as well as being easier to access and therefore report upon, but I certainly don’t feel the BBC’s news output is entirely true to what is happening in the theatre of war, where I think Sky News (most especially Professor Michael Clarke, who I respect and like very much) provide a far more balanced perspective.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I’d say it’s far more nuanced than the BBC’s reporting on City which is readily explained in a sentence or two.

I wouldn’t say the BBC’s coverage was pro-Russian, because it’s manifestly and expressly not. They actually make a conscious effort to condemn the invasion, and Russian tactics, and certainly don’t seek to excuse either, which would be present at least in attenuated form if malign Russian influence was a factor in their output.

However, when it comes to their reporting on the tactical direction of the war you’d think that Russia was making gains in a way that simply isn’t being reflected on the battlefield. The way that certain recent advances in Donetsk have been repelled being a case in point, with the advances being well reported but the outcome getting next to no coverage.

I always try to be careful around media output in respect of this war. Some of the YouTube videos posted on here are clearly presenting a tendentious viewpoint from the Ukrainian perspective for example, and so I feel we all need to fight against our own confirmation biases when evaluating how things are going, but my own assessment is the BBC have a particular line on this which permeates through most of their output.

Maybe it’s as simple as not wanting sympathy for Ukraine to waver or even falter, or maybe it’s because the effects of Russian military activity are more newsworthy, as well as being easier to access and therefore report upon, but I certainly don’t feel the BBC’s news output is entirely true to what is happening in the theatre of war, where I think Sky News (most especially Professor Michael Clarke, who I respect and like very much) provide a far more balanced perspective.
Click to expand...
I feel with the BBC it's more what they don't report that is altering the picture of the war.
I do understand they have a duty to verify information that can cause delays and in some cases omit data.
However, if your only source of information was the BBC, i don't feel their coverage portrays the reality on the ground.

So we cannot expect them to be pro Ukraine, but if there had to be "some" positive bias, surely an allied nation should be the one getting it!
 
CTID1977 said:
Click to expand...

Taking partisan notions out of the equation, cold hard logic supports the truth of this statement. If Russia were making the advances that have been heralded by them, as echoed by some western media, then far more settlements of note would have fallen in the last twelve months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top