Russia / Ukraine Watch

[Max B Gold]

Not clicking that, looks dodgy.

No worries. Remain ignorant and uninformed. Your choice.

[ComeOnYouOs]

Nato is almost 100% responsible for this terrible war, with all its suffering, although Putin hasnt covered himself in glory either

The woman was almost 100% responsible for her rape, with her short skirt and that, although the rapist didn't cover himself in glory either.

What completely and utterly ridiculous analogy. I cant believe you are serious actually.

[Real Al]

Re article I referred to above.

This is the right one.

https://consortiumnews.com/2023/06/01/p ... ed-to-see/

Love this bit at the bottom: "The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News."

Not really surprised, as the author spends the whole article mocking other journalists for not going to a warzone, while merely putting their own view on someone else's reporting, while themselves not entering a warzone.

[Max B Gold]

Re article I referred to above.

This is the right one.

https://consortiumnews.com/2023/06/01/p ... ed-to-see/

Love this bit at the bottom: "The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News."

Not really surprised, as the author spends the whole article mocking other journalists for not going to a warzone, while merely putting their own view on someone else's reporting, while themselves not entering a warzone.

Do you believe he would be allowed to report from the war zone? But, thanks for missing the point entirely and deflecting from the sorry role the Western corporate media propaganda machine has played which has led to an information scarcity about the war and its context. Hoist the blue and yellow flag and boo the bogey man.

[tuffers#1]

Re article I referred to above.

This is the right one.

https://consortiumnews.com/2023/06/01/p ... ed-to-see/

Love this bit at the bottom: "The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News."

Not really surprised, as the author spends the whole article mocking other journalists for not going to a warzone, while merely putting their own view on someone else's reporting, while themselves not entering a warzone.

Do you believe he would be allowed to report from the war zone? But, thanks for missing the point entirely and deflecting from the sorry role the Western corporate media propaganda machine has played which has led to an information scarcity about the war and its context. Hoist the blue and yellow flag and boo the bogey man.

Max reporting on an Ancient gun that has been talked about for over 11 months .

[Max B Gold]

Love this bit at the bottom: "The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News."

Not really surprised, as the author spends the whole article mocking other journalists for not going to a warzone, while merely putting their own view on someone else's reporting, while themselves not entering a warzone.

Do you believe he would be allowed to report from the war zone? But, thanks for missing the point entirely and deflecting from the sorry role the Western corporate media propaganda machine has played which has led to an information scarcity about the war and its context. Hoist the blue and yellow flag and boo the bogey man.

Max reporting on an Ancient gun that has been talked about for over 11 months .

That isn't the point being made. But thanks anyway for your snider.

[tuffers#1]

Do you believe he would be allowed to report from the war zone? But, thanks for missing the point entirely and deflecting from the sorry role the Western corporate media propaganda machine has played which has led to an information scarcity about the war and its context. Hoist the blue and yellow flag and boo the bogey man.

Max reporting on an Ancient gun that has been talked about for over 11 months .

That isn't the point being made. But thanks anyway for your snider.

It was the 1st point made in the article , I Shall debunk the other points within the next 24-48 hours.

[Max B Gold]

Max reporting on an Ancient gun that has been talked about for over 11 months .

That isn't the point being made. But thanks anyway for your snider.

It was the 1st point made in the article , I Shall debunk the other points within the next 24-48 hours.

It's not me making the point but the New Yorker magazine which is quoted in the Consortium news article.

[tuffers#1]

That isn't the point being made. But thanks anyway for your snider.

It was the 1st point made in the article , I Shall debunk the other points within the next 24-48 hours.

It's not me making the point but the New Yorker magazine which is quoted in the Consortium news article.

Which has been lazily written by someone rehashing old news ie a ww1 machine gun that has kowingly been used for 11 months. Its hardly hard edged ground breaking Journalism is it ?

[Max B Gold]

It was the 1st point made in the article , I Shall debunk the other points within the next 24-48 hours.

It's not me making the point but the New Yorker magazine which is quoted in the Consortium news article.

Which has been lazily written by someone rehashing old news ie a ww1 machine gun that has kowingly been used for 11 months. Its hardly hard edged ground breaking Journalism is it ?

No they mention it in an article published on 29 May as part of the wider point about the shoddy materials and arms being provided to them and is from their observations of the frontline a few months ago. I'm beginning to wonder if you have read and understand the article and the bigger picture point the Consortium guy is making.

[Celtient]

Nato is almost 100% responsible for this terrible war, with all its suffering, although Putin hasnt covered himself in glory either

The woman was almost 100% responsible for her rape, with her short skirt and that, although the rapist didn't cover himself in glory either.

What completely and utterly ridiculous analogy. I cant believe you are serious actually.

So, Putin is, what 2% responsible for starting the war? Explain please.

[tuffers#1]

It's not me making the point but the New Yorker magazine which is quoted in the Consortium news article.

Which has been lazily written by someone rehashing old news ie a ww1 machine gun that has kowingly been used for 11 months. Its hardly hard edged ground breaking Journalism is it ?

No they mention it in an article published on 29 May as part of the wider point about the shoddy materials and arms being provided to them and is from their observations of the frontline a few months ago. I'm beginning to wonder if you have read and understand the article and the bigger picture point the Consortium guy is making.

O.K , Lets play along the guy writes a story about some differing reporting styles that says very little about the war, soldiers being scared about things exploding near them, old guns holding lines & no visible winner 14 months into a 3 week Invasion . Other than that he has said F#ck all .

Those old guns poorly trained soldiers seem to be filling an awful lot of graves &
Urns

[Max B Gold]

Which has been lazily written by someone rehashing old news ie a ww1 machine gun that has kowingly been used for 11 months. Its hardly hard edged ground breaking Journalism is it ?

No they mention it in an article published on 29 May as part of the wider point about the shoddy materials and arms being provided to them and is from their observations of the frontline a few months ago. I'm beginning to wonder if you have read and understand the article and the bigger picture point the Consortium guy is making.

O.K , Lets play along the guy writes a story about some differing reporting styles that says very little about the war, soldiers being scared about things exploding near them, old guns holding lines & no visible winner 14 months into a 3 week Invasion . Other than that he has said F#ck all .

Those old guns poorly trained soldiers seem to be filling an awful lot of graves &
Urns

He is saying something fundamental about the reporting of this war and the complicity of the media of not reporting (or even being in a position to report) what is actually happening.

[tuffers#1]

No they mention it in an article published on 29 May as part of the wider point about the shoddy materials and arms being provided to them and is from their observations of the frontline a few months ago. I'm beginning to wonder if you have read and understand the article and the bigger picture point the Consortium guy is making.

O.K , Lets play along the guy writes a story about some differing reporting styles that says very little about the war, soldiers being scared about things exploding near them, old guns holding lines & no visible winner 14 months into a 3 week Invasion . Other than that he has said F#ck all .

Those old guns poorly trained soldiers seem to be filling an awful lot of graves &
Urns

He is saying something fundamental about the reporting of this war and the complicity of the media of not reporting (or even being in a position to report) what is actually happening.

In other words he is being paid to write an article he has no Idea about whats going on , an old gun soldiers fearful of dying & not knowing who will win .Again Hard nosed Cutting Edge reporting its not ! Cheers Thank you !

[Max B Gold]

O.K , Lets play along the guy writes a story about some differing reporting styles that says very little about the war, soldiers being scared about things exploding near them, old guns holding lines & no visible winner 14 months into a 3 week Invasion . Other than that he has said F#ck all .

Those old guns poorly trained soldiers seem to be filling an awful lot of graves &
Urns

He is saying something fundamental about the reporting of this war and the complicity of the media of not reporting (or even being in a position to report) what is actually happening.

In other words he is being paid to write an article he has no Idea about whats going on , an old gun soldiers fearful of dying & not knowing who will win .Again Hard nosed Cutting Edge reporting its not ! Cheers Thank you !

You can take a horse to water .....etc,etc. I give up.

[tuffers#1]

He is saying something fundamental about the reporting of this war and the complicity of the media of not reporting (or even being in a position to report) what is actually happening.

In other words he is being paid to write an article he has no Idea about whats going on , an old gun soldiers fearful of dying & not knowing who will win .Again Hard nosed Cutting Edge reporting its not ! Cheers Thank you !

You can take a horse to water .....etc,etc. I give up.

You can lead a horse to water but cant make it drink BULLSH!T .

Play it Some Hip Hop & It'll f#cking dance for you !

[Max B Gold]

Bring on the empty horses.

[tuffers#1]

Bring on the nato !

[Long slender neck]

Putin moving nukes to Belarus.

[Max B Gold]

Putin moving nukes to Belarus.

How do you feel about that?

[Long slender neck]

Bad

[FrankOFile]

Putin moving nukes to Belarus.

How do you feel about that?

I suppose that is our fault too.

[Max B Gold]

Putin moving nukes to Belarus.

How do you feel about that?

I suppose that is our fault too.

Don't take it so personally.

[RedDwarf 1881]

Putin moving nukes to Belarus.

Who cares . If they are mad enough to use them then that will be the last thing they will ever do . No winners in a nuclear confrontation , only losers . Anyway what's the difference between that and having American nukes stationed on British soil .?

[Long slender neck]

We're not crazy?