Printable View
I basically agree. News media being used as a tool to manipulate people isn't new. And there are still quality news sources available. What I think has changed is the number of junk sources and the reach those sources can have. All you need is a laptop and an internet connection and you can reach most of the world. If they choose to listen. All you need is a phone to reach those who choose to use social media as a news source.Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
Germany’s Merz vows to build Europe’s strongest army
https://www.politico.eu/article/frie...entional-army/
So can I swear on the neo Nazis now or the post will be deleted as well?
Anyhow, that, at least will bring me Funky and plu to a brotherhood. The other countries will accept surrender or get pommel withing a month. US will come late as usual.
At least as a bonus all traitors would be executed as a martial law will come in place so , MR Prime traitor that you also support this , beware.
He's loudly declared he's going to do it. The schtick where you say Trump won't do the illegal/immoral think he says he's going to do and then crow when he goes ahead and actually does it is getting weak.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
Depends what yardstick you set. If you're looking for either side to make the territorial gains they want then neither will "win" because neither has the capacity to do so. Ukraine does not have the wherewithal to evict Russia from all Ukrainian territory but Russia neither does Russia have the wherewithal to make any significant advancements on what they've made already. Indeed, by that yardstick, Russia lost within a week of launching their offensive.Quote:
People actually believe that Ukraine can beat Russia in head to head conventional warfare. If that isn't proof of the immense hypnotic power of corporate media, I don't know what is.
But the mistake there is to look at this as a territorial war of manoeuvre. It hasn't been that for two years. This is a static war of attrition similar to WW1 and Ukraine is currently winning that hands down. The casualty rates being inflicted on Russia dwarf those being experienced by Ukraine and it's economy is in tatters, particularly following the recent collapse in global fuel prices. In WW1 nothing changed for 4 years then everything changed in weeks. If this runs to a conclusion rather than becoming a frozen conflict, you will likely see a similar play out.
Arguing that Ukraine couldn't win without support seems fatuous since Ukraine does enjoy the support of it's allies. And so does Russia, though far less. Indeed Russia has already had to engage the actual soldiers of it's allies, having already burned through it's own stocks of young men, while Ukraine has yet to implement full conscription (though it has engaged replacement level conscription).
So by any mutually applied yardstick, Russia is getting it's arse kicked.
"journalistic integrity," is a mythical creature.Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
I agree a 100%Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
I used to think the same thing, but lately, I've been of the mind that perhaps it never existed. You see, the only reason we know that journalistic integrity is dead is because of social media and camera phones. In ancient times, we didn't have these things. We depended on corporate media to tell us everything, so how could we possibly know if they were lying and propagandizing us back then?Quote:
Originally Posted by abhijit
When Germany forms the neo Nazi army and Europe falls down and give brouklentar jabs (regulate this ) to Russia to help, will Woke leader countries ally with Germany (we are one of them also, by lead of course but he will be strudeld (regulate this) )?
Edit: Teams is so bad that a donkey tried to take a brik , he saw it and moved further.
It'll be interesting to see what comes of the FBI's new push to examine social media posts for death threats made against Trump.
The deranged have themselves so tightly wound up in their reality-distortion field that they seem to have no trouble embracing a culture of assassination. Perhaps a few public convictions for such terrorism might help break the fever.
It took a social media death threat against Trump to get you interested? You didn't notice all the other death threats against politician, judges, election workers ...... that have become more and more frequent over the last decade.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
Welcome to the party.
Quote:
Originally Posted by abhijit
Adorable take. Let the grown-ups talk about "journalistic integrity". It is obvious you do not know where it is and I guess you do not how to find it .
I'm curious, honestly asking, do you really believe this stuff you post or are you just having fun posting it?Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
This isn't what it seems. Just as virtue signalling is a sport on the left, calling for the assassination of Trump is now just another category in that sport. It's just another pretense they use to score points with each other. Most of these leftists won't do a damn thing. All they do is talk **** on TikTok. The real problem is the people who take these fools seriously and try to act on it. However, I believe they are in a minority. If they weren't, there would have already been a dozen assassination attempts on Trump instead of just two.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
What are you even talking about? Do you know how many leftists on TikTok are calling for the assassination of Trump? I've seen dozens upon dozens of them since Kamala's campaign began right up to the present. This was and perhaps still is a very popular TikTok trend among ultra left wing influencers. Hell, right now on X there is a big conversation about it, something about the number 89 or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
It was actually "86". This is what the fake outrage is all about. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com...0.cms?from=mdrQuote:
Hell, right now on X there is a big conversation about it, something about the number 89 or something.
It's a term I've heard many times in regards to banning someone from a restaurant, store, club or bar..... I've never heard it used as a death threat but I never hang out with murders so maybe they use it.
It just political nonsense being played. Like I said before, outrage is all the rage now a days. lol
Ah I see. Well, X is on fire right now with this conversation. It's like the Elon Nazi salute nonsense all over again. Every other post on X is talking about it. I'm not really following what it is about as I quickly lost interest when I read it had something to do with calling for Trump's assassination. It seems like every other day some crazy leftist is calling for his assassination, so I'm quite desensitized to it. It's just boring now.Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
I do think that the authorities should be paying attention to it though, as some idiot might try to act on it. Social media has always been a great place to recruit broken people into doing heinous things on behalf of misguided causes.
Very true. However, this has been the case since Trump first won in 2016. The world went crazy and outrage because a bonafide business since then. One of the things I can't wait to see is what will happen when Trump finally exists the political arena. I would really love to see where that excess energy is going to go because I really doubt the world can go back to the way it was. The media will have to manufacture a new super villain to keep the grift going.Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
I was speaking about his videos in general, not that one specifically. But that doesn't matter, they are all the same theme and from extremists. Dil is such a good coder it is hard for me to believe he believes the stuff he posts.Quote:
What are you even talking about? Do you know how many leftists on TikTok are calling for the assassination of Trump? I've seen dozens upon dozens of them since Kamala's campaign began right up to the present. This was and perhaps still is a very popular TikTok trend among ultra left wing influencers. Hell, right now on X there is a big conversation about it, something about the number 89 or something.
I agree the political world in the US has changed and there is no going back because of Trump. And to me it turned for the worse. It is the same old dirty politics, just right out in the open and in your face. Outright lying is now acceptable. Open hatred gets votes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niya
It isn't easy being so ahead of our time.
I'd say one thing you can count on is that things will change. Societal norms/values evolve, they don't stay stagnant. I don't know what form the changes will take, I just know they'll change over time.Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
I don't see any reason why those changes can't be less lying and hate. It our choice.
As much as I go on and on about Trump and republicans I'm actually optimistic about a shift in the other direction. I just think it will take well over a decade.Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
I think the two problems we have though areQuote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
1. A lot of people are happy to believe a lie that they agree with than an uncomfortable truth, promise people what they want and they will like you; if you fail to deliver then lie about the cause of the failure. Just look at how Brexit was handled in our country - nearly everything about it was a lie (from the number of immigrants, the money saved for our NHS, the promises of no extra bureaucracy, the idea that the EU needs us more than we need them, something something sovereign country something mumble blue passports mutter mutter etc.)
2. Hate and victimisation of minorities support my first point.
The (delete as applicable - economy / health service / crime statistics / benefit fraud / cost of living) isn't doing badly because of (delete as applicable - poor management / government corruption / tax avoidance by rich people and corporations / increased numbers of people and children living in poverty / lack of training and education opportunities) it is because of (delete as applicable - Transexuals / immigrants - or at least the non-white ones / refugees / benefit cheats / homosexuals / tolerance to minorities / vaccines / neurodiversity). It is easier to point peoples attention and blame to "others" rather then the real issues. Politics of division benefits the people in charge at the expense of everyone.
At the risk of waving a target about... This is one of the major ways the Nazi party strengthened their power in 1940s Germany; prior to 1933 Germany had a very progressive LGBTQ scene (obviously that label wasn't applied then but it still applies) and the word homosexual was first used in Germany around this time.
The Nazi party started targeting this community using often unsubstantiated arguments such as "criminal activity", "asocial behaviour", or the typical conflation of homosexuality and child abuse and used it to justify draconian measures against homosexuals. Major Nazi party members, such as Himmler, describes them in terms of conspiracy against the state, enemies of the state, and even shirking their duty to repopulate. Far easier to attack "other" people than face the problems in society
Similarly the Nazi prosecution of Jewish people was a way of blaming a particular group of "other" people - often using untrue claims that it was their fault Germany lost WW1 as a justification. Far easier to blame somebody else, that face the truth about losing....
Hate makes it easier to do extreme things; you want to deport people without due process to a concentration camp - then you just need to use terms like "illegal immigrant", "criminal gang member", or "photo shopped evidence of tattoos" and bingo! You can do it! You want to be able to only employ straight, white, cis-gendered people to positions of power (even if they are unqualified) then you just need to cast suspicion that anyone "non-white" or "non-heterosexual" has been hired purely to make up numbers (even if they are obviously capable and qualified) and bingo! You can fire them and replace them with unqualified people!
Get enough people onboard with hate and people will actually start claiming they don't mind if someone is a dictator, or corrupt, or a racist, or a liar, or a sex offender, or an adulterer - because at least they are doing something about those "others" we don't like.
People prefer a comfortable lie, to an uncomfortable truth.
Sadly...there is a lot of truth in that post :(Quote:
Originally Posted by PlausiblyDamp
Come on, that doesn't leave you anything left to say. The anti-Trump screeds above positively drip with hatred, lies, and bad will.Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
Which of my above posts "positively drip with hatred" towards Trump? Dislike, definitely. I think he is a morally bankrupt, self absorbed con man. But that's an opinion, not hatred. Unless you consider any negative opinion of Trump as hatred, I can only guess you just felt compelled to spout insults.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
A small country like Ukraine can't outlast a large country like Russia, but they don't have to. They have to outlast the will of Russia to keep pushing forwards despite the costs. I wouldn't say for certain how that will end up. Too many different factors weigh into the calculation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niya
As to whether they can do it without help, I would say that the answer was absolutely not two years ago, probably not today, but perhaps they can in another year. The point people need to keep in mind with that war is that it is changing the face of warfare at such an astonishing pace that predicting the future is harder than normal. Technology has often leapt forwards during wartime, but I can't think of any leaping as bouncy as what is happening in that war. Smaller, lighter, and far more lethal, autonomous fighting vehicles (I use the term loosely to include air, ground and sea) are coming out at such a frenetic pace that what was cutting edge a month or two back may not be working today. Ukraine is also ramping up the home-grown industry along those lines to such an extent that other countries ought to be buying from them. Not only do they have some superior kit, but buying from them would fund their warfighting. If that were to happen, then...it's not so clear that they couldn't support themselves. It's way too fluid a situation to be certain about.
Don't think he meant you, he meant the other long post that I just scanned for 10 seconds and saw NAZI, LGBTQ ,Jewish so I did not even bother.Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
So Ukraine that had all the US and NATO help before and he just kept losing grounds can now somehow do it at it's own? That does not make sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
Also if you see Russia map of conquered you will know what they are doing and also remember that a full scale attack will kill millions of innocent so they don't go that about as they are the same race as Ukraine, or believe your media than from what I read lately they don't brag no more for Russia somehow losing.
Anyhow will see today. Trump is calling Putin. On a side note both US and Russia want Ukraine natural resources, so I'm curious to see what will happen.
Chill out with some music:
https://youtu.be/GXPqzfBIGEA?si=yHahpWDWGcSvOJR1
Only if you pay little attention. Neither side is using anything like the same tactics or technology that they were using at the start of the war. They are advancing the state of the technology so fast that it's hard to say where it will end up, but certainly not where it started.Quote:
Originally Posted by sapator
You're going to have to restate that if you want me to understand it.Quote:
Also if you see Russia map of conquered you will know what they are doing and also remember that a full scale attack will kill millions of innocent so they don't go that about as they are the same race as Ukraine, or believe your media than from what I read lately they don't brag no more for Russia somehow losing.
Nothing. Those natural resources are only theoretically valuable. You may remember the stories about how many billions of dollars the minerals in Afghanistan were worth. That would have been true, if the minerals could have been magically teleported out of the ground and to some place that could use them. Once you factored in the cost of extraction, including all the infrastructure that would be required, the minerals weren't worth the money. The same is true for Ukraine, though for different reasons. They don't lack the infrastructure the way Afghanistan does, but the minerals are not as theoretically valuable, either. They are more like several mineral deposits in the US: The minerals are there, but not in sufficient quantity or quality to justify the cost of extraction.Quote:
On a side note both US and Russia want Ukraine natural resources, so I'm curious to see what will happen.
Shaggy I love you, you're a buddy your a pal but that is all wrong.
Since I said I will not write what we wrote in the known thread no2 I will go with dil example and dedicate this to all the people that really think that a deal is not struck behind the doors for Ukraine and both Ru and US are not getting what they want. With Europe still having it's pant....Oh sorry the invisible censorer. Having it's pants on the hovercraft of a lemurious goblin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89dGC8de0CA&ab_channel=AerosmithVEVO
That's a hard comparison. WWII had the evolution of the airplane both fighter and bombers, changing from a battleship dominated navy to an aircraft carrier dominated navy, radar, the atomic bomb, rocket technology.Quote:
Technology has often leapt forwards during wartime, but I can't think of any leaping as bouncy as what is happening in that war. Smaller, lighter, and far more lethal, autonomous fighting vehicles (I use the term loosely to include air, ground and sea) are coming out at such a frenetic pace that what was cutting edge a month or two back may not be working today.
All wars suck but they do drive innovation.
WWII saw all that, but planes were evolving fast leading up to the war. The change in warships was also already happening. Just look at the fleet exercises conducted prior to WWII. That was driving the evolution of the aircraft carrier, which can be seen in the fact that the Essex class carriers were already on the way by the time of Pearl Harbor. Radar wasn't new, either, though the effectiveness of use on ships was not well known. Rockets...well, they're mentioned in the US national anthem. They sucked, they had horrible accuracy, but they were rockets. That technology certainly improved, but it wasn't new. Nuclear weapons were certainly new, and I think jet aircraft were new. There were also some great advances in medicine.
Still, the tech being used in Ukraine is advancing faster than all that. They've practically returned to WW I trench warfare because drones have made the whole battlefield transparent. That led to a rapid paced race in jamming technology, and now we're seeing fly-by-wire fiber optic drones showing up. They're reportedly about 20% of Ukrainian drones, but are expected to be 70% of front line drones within a few months.
One interesting point about evolution is that it can turn back on itself, at times. If something works, then a countermeasure is developed, that something may go away, which may cause the countermeasure to go away (assuming it is costly), which might mean that the something comes back again. This is as true in biology as in any other kind of warfare.
I wonder if, once both Russia and Ukraine are making extensive use of fiber optic drones, will the front lines begin to resemble a giant spider web?
I think your selling WWII short. I was wasn't talking about only new inventions(drones certainly aren't new), though there were some. The navy was building a new class of carrier but their mindset was still very much the battleship was the king of the sea and the aircraft carrier was there to protect and support them. I believe it was the battle of the Coral Seas that changed their attitude. The upgrade from their main fighter, the Wild Cat to the HellCat was huge. It had a 19:1 kill ratio. Don't believe the US had any fighter jets in WWII but Germany did. They came to late and not enough numbers of them. The evolution from the B17 to the pressurized B29 is also very significant. True, radar wasn't new but the increase in it's capabilities was also very large. The V2 rocket wasn't a small leap either.
The drone technology in the Ukraine war may be evolving faster but that's just one advancement. Just one measuring method.
Anyway, I do find the battlefield situation strange. Seems to have turned into a defensive war and not an offensive war.
Yeah, that may be the case. War always pushes technology forwards. I suppose that's one good thing about it.
In this case, the battlefield has become transparent in ways that have never existed before. The modern version of the WW I tank technology is starting to show up. That will be drone mini-tanks. Aerial drones will keep people in bunkers, drone mini-tanks will attack the bunkers. Or maybe technology will go in a different direction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth-generation_warfare
Quote:
Fifth-generation warfare (5GW) is warfare that is conducted primarily through non-kinetic military action, such as social engineering, misinformation, cyberattacks, along with emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and fully autonomous systems. Fifth generation warfare has been described by Daniel Abbot as a war of "information and perception."
Combine everything and we got Skynet! Finally! Death by Microsoft! Go raptors!
Edit: I saw a kid use Teams once. He has crying on the sidewalk having an injured knee screaming No More Teeeams!
I've never agreed with that characterisation. Informational manipulation has been part of the warfare space since Genghis Khan put up a white tent. And Nation States have always tried to undermine each others societies, even during peace. I don't see it as representing a new generation of warfare. The tools are changing, certainly, but they've always changed with the times and this is true of conventional warfare tools too.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
You can characterise it as a parallel to warfare (just as politics is) or an integral part of warfare but I don't see it as a generation of warfare.
Yeah, I agree. WW2 massively pushed weapons and tactics forward. So did WW1, the American Civil War, the French Revolution and so forth. I don't think it undermines Shaggy's position, though, which I think was that the Ukraine conflict has jumped tech forward rather than that previous conflicts didn't.Quote:
I think your selling WWII short.
Um, he did respond to Wes's post and quoted it so it feels like a fair assumption.Quote:
Don't think he meant you,
Personally I think Ukraine probably would struggle if abandoned by it's allies. Man for man it probably has the most capable army in the world right now and is enjoying a generational technological advantage but it's production capacity probably couldn't keep up with Russia's.
I honestly don't know why this is part of the conversation, though, because, with the possible exception of the USA, it's allies do not look like abandoning it, quite the opposite. USA has been a major contributor but Europe's contribution has been considerably higher. A US departure would be a blow, certainly, but hardly a terminal one. And it's far from certain that the USA is going to abandon it. There are certainly some voices around Trump that seem to want to, though they shift back and forward a lot, but that decision doesn't actually belong to Trump, it belongs to Congress which seems to be overwhelmingly supportive of Ukraine.
Discussion about whether Ukraine could stand without allies are fatuous because Ukraine has allies. My cup of tea would be horrible with milk and sugar in it but that doesn't matter because my cup of tea has milk and sugar in it. It's a brown cup of comfort.
And why are we talking about Ukraine allies without addressing Russia allies. Ukraine has received materials from it's allies, Russia has been reduced to begging for men. It is clear that Russia has become ALOT more dependent on it's allies than Ukraine has.
I don't think there really is a ground for conversation for people that believe that the war is conducted:
For the king for the land for the mountains For the green valleys where dragons fly For the glory the power to win the black lord I will search for the emerald sword.
(that is a general comment not addressed directly to Funky, just happened to have the post above)
So as soon as Russia get the critical ground he wants to, the war will be over with a treaty that will maintain the status quo, that is my prediction, it might don't go that way but it's certainly better than what written so far. OMHO of course.
Edit: Teams is so bad that MS decided to put bug in it to eat the bugs it has and maybe be better. F Microsoft. F of course means Futile and nothing more.
Holy SH*T! Europe BRACES for a wave of violence as Ukrainian weapons flow across the EU
https://youtu.be/jVEriolok2s?si=fsZDNxBUo_rODjXM
I think perhaps I'm still not making myself clear enough. Russia's goal isn't the complete destruction of Ukraine and it's people. If it were, they could have done that in a month or perhaps less, using conventional weapons. They could have done it in an instant using nukes. Ukraine couldn't do a thing a stop it. The fact is Russia can decide at anytime that they are tired of this and just go all in and they would win decisively.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
The point I'm trying to drive home is that in terms of sheer military might, Russia is a bulldozer and Ukraine is a bicycle, yet people insist on pretending that it's close to an even match.
Yeah, I get it, I just think it's laughably wrong. I do agree that if Russia used nukes, that would make short work of all kinds of things. Everybody has stopped short of that since Nagasaki because it would mean going off into a future nobody can quite predict. However, when it comes to conventional weapons, they aren't a bulldozer, they've shown themselves to be a paper tiger. They're producing a whole lot of armor each month, but it's not new armor, it's refurbished Soviet armor...which gets smoked in short order if it ever gets in range of the drone swarms both sides are operating around the front lines. They produce almost no new armor, and it is also getting smoked. They're producing vast amounts of ammunition each month, and using it to little effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niya
Back when they first attacked, lots of people thought the way you did, and predicted a swift Russian victory because of their overwhelming might. Then they attacked and promptly lost so much armor that Ukrainian farmers had, at one point, one of the largest concentrations of armor in Europe. Currently, while estimates vary, Russia has lost an estimated three quarters of a million troops. Yes, they are trying to increase the size of their military to twice that, but unless you are advocating they use human wave attacks, it won't make that much difference.