Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Options
1294229432945294729483691

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,746 ✭✭✭zv2


    I don't think some people fully appreciate the fact that when Ukrainians say they are fighting for their existence they mean it. If things went very badly for Ukraine, Russians would invade and, given that they lost 200,000, they would add vengeance to cruelty. It would be a disaster and the social and political ramifications are beyond calculation. More weapons, NOW.

    Post edited by zv2 on

    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,059 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Hard to believe that any media outlet in Ireland or the EU would give exposure to that airbag at this stage. The only answer she should get if off with her to Moscow to plead her case and don't come back.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,059 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Was it RTE she was on? What programme? I'd write an objection to them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,347 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    Some strong words from Zelenskys meeting with the US.


    Russians dying is money well spent, can’t imagine Putler taking that one too kindly😄

    Post edited by Jinglejangle69 on


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,923 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Reductionists like Daly, Wallace et al, reduce countries down to "personalities" that they can attack about the past.

    For example, Rishi Sunak has nothing to do with Blair's decision to go into Iraq 20 years ago. However individuals like Clare Daly don't distinguish that, for them the "UK' is a person who invaded Iraq two decades ago, and therefore the "UK" is hypocritical in condemning the current invasion. It's a form of black and white thinking.

    Likewise, Tony Blair wasn't invading Iraq to plant a flag in it, to force it's children to speak English, to erase it's identity, it's culture, and so on, quite the opposite, he was trying, in a very naive and disastrous way, to liberate the people from a brutal regime. Quite the opposite of what's occurring two decades later in Ukraine. Yet individuals like Daly don't distinguish. To them, history is just a neat narrative they cherry-pick from to attack what they oppose.

    They oppose Europe/US, whom they see as the "real villains" of history. Take a look at Daly's voting record, she consistently against Europe in favour of Putin. They aren't anti-war, they are anti-West. Any modern conflict or situation is just an excuse for them to "whatabout" their reductionist views of the past. To once again use a recent term from the internet, they are campists:

    "A leftist who supports any country/organization simply for being opposed to the United States or the West, including authoritarian governments who would otherwise not follow leftist beliefs."



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,746 ✭✭✭zv2


    Missile attack on #Yurivka occupied by #Russia near #Mariupol


    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,444 ✭✭✭jmreire


    And neither did all the Ukrainians want to leave their homes, or the Syrians Putin help displace,,, and its a very long list, due to Russia's bloody history around the world. Sorry, but no sympathy, go complain outside the Kremlin.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,746 ✭✭✭zv2


    She was on the Katie Hannon show on rte. She thinks 'peace talks' ended WW2, lol.


    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users Posts: 170 ✭✭WheelieKing


    Not great language tbh. It gives the Russian's a great propaganda coup now to further brainwash their population.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,746 ✭✭✭zv2


    I agree. I think he is being really crass and stupid.

    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,714 ✭✭✭✭briany


    Technically, she's correct, but some of those peace talks amounted to, "Do you surrender without conditions?" "Yes."

    Also, pretty much all of us listening to Daly:




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,746 ✭✭✭zv2


    No, some American guy said it. His name escapes me at the moment.

    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,408 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Well, Iran may need to keep those drones for situations closer to home


    All Eyes On Rafah



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,615 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    It's good that Daly is advocating putin shoot himself in the head so the peace talks can start, like WW2.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,742 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    Oh but you have as I have discussed Russia in Ukraine in previous posts and made my position abundantly clear on the war. So what you have said is infact untrue. Being wiling to discuss two separate issues is not deflection. Furthermore acknowledging that other countries engage in war crimes is not in my view giving Russia a free pass for the war crimes it has committed in Ukraine. If I was deflecting as you accused me of, I would be trying to defend what Russia has done in Ukraine. At no stage have I done that despite your false accusations.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,742 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    What would the UN have done to stop him exactly? Putin has no respect for it. The mindset of Putin was underlined in his meetings ,prior to the war, with Marcon. He saw Marcon as a patsy that he could hoodwink. I doubt he would have launched this war if he had been met by a firm hand when he first invaded Crimea. He saw the lack of a firm and cohesive response to the invasion of Crimea as a green light to further pursue his vision of incorporating satellite states back into mother Russia



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,108 ✭✭✭yagan


    Putin got cosy with Bush Jr as he could see the USA's invasion of Iraq without a UN mandate made the institution irrelevant.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,059 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Katie Hannon needs a good kick up the arse, she must surely know Daly's form and inviting her on for supposed balance is derisory.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,993 ✭✭✭rogber


    Twitter in false rumour shock. Who'd a thunk it.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,993 ✭✭✭rogber


    Of course they're fighting for their existence but being desperate and in the right unfortunately doesn't alone determine who wins battles. Only your last line is relevant: more and better weapons. Without them Ukraine will not drive Russia from its territory



  • Registered Users Posts: 232 ✭✭IdHidden


    Long but this is a good read in Time magazine by Vera Bergengruen


    Three weeks after Russia invaded Ukraine last Feb. 24, a video appeared on a Ukrainian news site that seemed to show President Volodymyr Zelensky imploring his fellow countrymen to stop fighting and urging soldiers to lay down their weapons.

    “There is no need to die in this war,” he seemed to say in the video, which was widely circulated on social media and appeared briefly on Ukrainian television with a news ticker suggesting that he had fled the country. “I advise you to live.”

    The video—a crude deepfake that had been posted by hackers—was quickly taken down and debunked. It was dismissed by the real Zelensky as a “childish provocation,” and roundly mocked online as an example of Russia’s desperate and often cartoonish attempts to spread fake news. But researchers say the deepfake is just one example of a barrage of disinformation, manipulated imagery, forged documents, and targeted propaganda unleashed by Russia and pro-Kremlin activists that may have had a significant impact on audiences over the last year of war.

    “Changing people’s minds and positions is much harder than simply sowing doubt or fear,” says Andy Carvin, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, which has tracked Russian hybrid warfare activities since 2015 and on Wednesday released a pair of reports analyzing the Kremlin’s information warfare before and after the invasion. “It’s one of the reasons why Kremlin information operations focus so much on essentially generating chaos, causing contagion, causing a loss of morale, or just getting people simply confused about what’s true and what’s not.”

    Over the past year, the Kremlin and its allies used a dizzying array of strategies to defend its actions, seed doubt about news from the ground, and push misleading or false narratives to undercut support for Ukraine. Denied the easy victory they had hoped for, Russian officials working to erode global trust in Ukraine as a reliable partner. “To defeat Ukraine on the battlefield,” the report argues, “Russia needed to strangle all sympathy and support for Ukraine as well.”

    In pursuit of that goal, the Kremlin targeted everyone from Ukrainian citizens to right-wing groups in the U.S. and Europe, countries taking in Ukrainian refugees and those supplying crucial aid, and potentially sympathetic audiences in Africa and Latin America, as well as domestic audiences in Russia itself. Russia’s techniques for spreading these narratives included the use of fake accounts, manipulated imagery like deepfakes, forged documents, and videos with fake news tickers purporting to be from respected brands like the BBC or Al Jazeera. In other cases, operatives simply aimed to increase mistrust in foreign audiences about the credibility of Ukraine’s government and the effectiveness of its military.

    While many of these efforts may seem inept to digitally savvy Western observers, it’s a mistake to depict Russia as “losing” the information war, says Carvin, who oversaw the project. “There really isn’t a single information war going on,” he says. “Russia and Ukraine are fighting multiple battles, but Russia has the resources to create customized messages to different audiences all over the globe…And in some parts of the world, their messages resonate better than others.”

    Before Putin ordered tens of thousands of troops into Ukraine, the Kremlin spent years seeding false narratives to justify military action. When the invasion began, the effort kicked into overdrive. Ukrainian researchers were taken aback by the volume of false information in the war’s opening weeks.

    “It very hard [to know what to believe], especially when you hear the bombs outside of your window,” says Ksenia Iliuk, the co-founder of LetsData, a non-profit that uses artificial intelligence to analyze hostile information operations. In the first month of the invasion, her team identified about 35 new, unique pieces of Russian propaganda or disinformation narratives per day.

    Ukrainian officials treated the digital space as a front line in the war from the start, setting up teams and processes to verify the facts in all updates posted on official channels as a way to pre-empt any challenges to their credibility. “In a way, we are trying to protect our brand,” Ukraine’s Minister of Digital Transformation, Mykhailo Fedorov, told TIME last March. “Our brand as one of an honest nation and an honest people trying to tell the truth.”

    Social media is Ukrainians’ primary news source—surpassing television in 2020, according to a recent survey—and the Russians targeted popular apps with false narratives meant to demoralize the population, create panic, and undermine trust in Zelensky. Much of the information battle was fought on Telegram, a messaging app that surged in popularity due to its largely unmoderated platform which allowed raw footage of the war to be widely disseminated. The structure of the app made it easy to build massive propaganda channels that spread fake photos and videos to millions of followers.

    As part of an effort to target Telegram, Russia co-opted popular fact-checking formats. It created a host of multilingual channels, like one named “War on Fakes,” which “verified” or “fact-checked” allegations to support pro-Kremlin narratives and defend the Russian military’s actions. The original Russian-language channel amassed more than 750,000 followers on Telegram, and its website translated its content into Arabic, Chinese, English, French, German, and Spanish, which was then amplified by Russian embassies and other government channels, according to the report.

    Russia combined these efforts with more traditional intimidation tactics, including dropping leaflets in Dnipropetrovsk describing what residents should do if there was an explosion at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, military training flights that set off air-raid sirens, and rumors—fueled by Putin himself—that speculated about the potential use of nuclear weapons.

    Some of these narratives hit their mark, breaking through on a global scale. False allegations spread by the Kremlin that Ukraine was utilizing U.S.-funded research labs to develop bioweapons were widely amplified by prominent U.S. right-wing voices last summer. The right-wing channel One America News ran segments spreading the Kremlin’s conspiracies that the Russian strike on a maternity hospital in Mariupol was a “false flag.”

    The Russian government blocked access to Western social media platforms inside their own country—even designating Meta an “extremist organization”—criminalized independent reporting on the invasion, and passed a law imposing up to 15 years in prison for spreading intentionally “fake” news about the war. It also targeted the Russian diaspora abroad. In Europe, the Kremlin carried out “multichannel, full-spectrum disinformation campaigns” with tailored messages for different countries. For example, it used statements by high-level Russian officials, inauthentic social media accounts, and doctored documents to spread claims that Poland was planning to occupy parts of western Ukraine. In France, pro-Kremlin accounts amplified false claims of widespread reselling of Ukrainian weapons on the black market and hyped up fears that Europeans would freeze in the winter without access to Russian gas.

    Pro-Kremlin media also continued to pour resources into Africa and Latin America, exploiting historical distrust in the West and anti-imperialist sentiments. “By maintaining these information operations at a global scale, Russia has successfully prevented international consensus rallying behind Ukraine at a level that is often presumed in the West,” the report found.

    As the war enters its second year, the Kremlin is likely to continue to use these techniques to influence ongoing debates about whether to continue to supply Ukraine with weapons and funding, the report suggests. Russia may also continue to take advantage of the sympathy of China’s global media ecosystem towards their interests, according to researchers.

    “Russia’s reputation as unparalleled information warriors has taken a beating in the West, but this view is by no means universal,” the report’s authors found. “The more accurate assessment is that the impacts of information operations related to the war will have a much longer shelf life, well beyond the confines of the current conflict.”



  • Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭grumpyperson


    You post this shite and you expect someone to debate it?

    You just gave a response. Your reply seemed to be something Putin something hate Putin something. I don't think you'll win any debates with a response like that.

    Are you the author of these articles? 

    No.

    If you're not the author, then why not post the original article from the New Yorker rather than some putinbot's biased interpretation of it?


    Above link might help you understand the world a bit better but to fully address your statement would take too long and I suspect you wouldn't listen anyways.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,578 ✭✭✭Field east


    Her appearance on the Katie Hanson show about two weeks ago?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭paul71


    No you did not discuss Russia with me. That is a direct lie. I tried to debate the merits of 13 points I proposed, you tried to talk about Israel.


    When did Israel become part of Russia?



  • Registered Users Posts: 209 ✭✭Lionel Fusco


    Yes it did Germany only surrendered after it was surrounded and destroyed from all sides by a combination of the allies USA Great Britain and Soviet Union.

    Japan only surrendered after being nuked twice this is not a historical comparison relevant to the discussion of this conflict. Russia will only be brought to such a position if NATO invade and are victorious and that is not on the cards.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭paul71


    Are we going to rename this thread? It seems the topic is "Talk about anything except Russia"



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,746 ✭✭✭zv2


    Yes, but she is only the presenter. It's the backroom boys that are responsible.

    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,059 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    And yet most others stand and admire them, support them and wish them Godspeed in driving the Russian military from their country. If we were in the same position, this would be our lot. There are times to negotiate and jaw jaw but ultimately when your fascist neighbour has his greedy eyes on your land, resources and people - then you stand and fight, it's war war.

    Anyone like you offering succour to the Russian bastards should hang their heads in shame.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,772 ✭✭✭Sunny Disposition


    There is a habit of this in the Irish media though, get people with extreme views in the name of balance, instead of having reasonable people. There are tens of thousands of Ukrainians in Ireland with lived experience that would be very valuable to discussion, but instead they get a Putin sympathiser with very little knowledge of the region.

    Having provocative people isn't necessarily good for informing people, it'd be much better to confine TV/radio debate to people who know what they're talking about.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement