525
It always boils down to this
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2023
525 points (94.3% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
5624 readers
35 users here now
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
comrade, she is just aoc for zoomers
AOC is AOC for zoomers, Greta doesn’t have any power and there’s still some hope for her.
She just supported people that blown up Nordstream, Kakhovka dam (and a lot of other things), shelled nuclear plant, started and maintain that war and use depleted uranium shells. I would say that even from a strictly ecological point of view she fucked up incredibly.
She's supporting the Ukrainians tho.
Are you actually saying that they did all this to themselves? That's what the Russian state has been saying without credible proof.
Edit: I'd like to see where you got your info.
You're right, it makes much more sense that Russia would destroy their own pipeline which took 10 years to build so that Europe would buy US gas instead. And it makes perfect sense that Russia would destroy a dam they control and flood the defenses they had spent a whole year building, especially considering the Ukrainian counter offensive didn't pan out and most of their soldiers died before ever seeing the fortifications.
There's no proof of that either, but as a good citizen, I believe everything my government tells me. They have my own personal best interests at heart, after all. Especially when they turn away refugees and let them drown in the Mediterranean, I don't know how but I'm sure it protects me.
Maybe they did the pipeline, but none of that other stuff.
Either way you haven't actually showed me where you got any of this info.
I used my brain, which unfortunately seems to be becoming a rarer resource.
Where's your evidence for saying Russia blew up the dam they controlled?
In order of my google search's results.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4043221-ukraine-kakhovka-dam-collapse-theories/
https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-says-russia-admits-blowing-up-nova-kakhovka-dam-call-intercepted/
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/06/16/world/europe/ukraine-kakhovka-dam-collapse.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65818705
Most of these articles admit that it is kind of impossible to know for sure in the middle of a warzone. It's as likely that it collapsed due to lack of proper maintenance in the middle of a war.
What's your source?
lmao you actually think the BBC is credible? When they've been caught lying and have to issue retractions several times a year? The same BBC that went all in for the invasion of Iraq? Here's a source you'll lap up lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC
Just because it's British and you like their documentaries doesn't mean they're actually a good news source.
It's funny though that you linked to that specific Hill article, because here are two others they wrote: https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4042184-ukraine-claims-evidence-russia-destroyed-dam/ (source: Telegram post from SBU lol) ; https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/4037183-the-kakhovka-dams-destruction-shows-a-russian-military-on-its-back-foot/.
Which is exactly the same "source" all your other articles use. You're cherry-picking and sealioning, you realize you're not fooling anyone here though, right? Like nobody is falling for your "uhhh I'm just asking questions and not giving my own opinion, just read my media!!"
We're just having fun with you lol, it's funny watching you having to actually reckon with real people who are actually asking for receipts and some minimum amount of critical thinking instead of deferring to a higher authority. Do you also ask the BBC what you eat for breakfast or can you think of that one yourself?
"Uhhh if you can't point to established media then it doesn't count, if a journalist says it it's okay but if you say it it's not 🤓"
I used my brain, which unfortunately seems to be becoming a rarer resource. Yours is the SBU lmao so you better come back with something stronger
Not particularly, they are heavily influenced by the party in power that gets to selectively enforce biased news laws. That was in the order that Google gave it to me with no reordering. BBC is B-Tier for North American news because there is less impetus for political bias. I usually go the Associated Press and The Globe And Mail.
My comment was more to how easy it is to find many news stories covering this from a multitude of perspectives.
And for the record, yes, I do believe that journalistic standards upheld by credible institutions are safeguards against specious speculation and lies. You can phrase that however you'd want, but the conceit of that statement is true.
I didn't hand curate them, I just went to google and copy/pasted in a demonstration of the lowest amount of effort I could do to find articles that dispute the narrative here.
Most of these countries have free press, btw. And some articles blame Russia, others give credence to the possibility that Ukraine could have done this, but with the realistic perspective that it's basically impossible to know.
In fact, reading those stories makes me incredibly skeptical of anyone who doesn't show uncertainty on this topic. Look at that, I just changed my own view by researching a bit more.
Press free to be bought and controlled by billionaires.
Murdoch doesn't own EVERY newspaper.
But yeah Murdoch media is fucked.
You say that like Russia isn't Capitalist as all get out.
The only good counterpoint to Capitalism in the modern global landscape is Singapore, and possibly China if you're feeling extra spicy and support their version of global hegemony.
The modern Russian state is a Fascist Autocracy propped up by Oligarchs. Y'know, what Trump likes.
Edit: Actually I'm going to add Slovenia to that as well, as I had a great time learning about that Jewel of a Country before the Delta Variant absolutely wrecked it.
When I was there in 2018, it was a fantastically eye-opening example of a successful socialist state.
But that's where my knowledge end on counterpoints to Capitalism, in its varied forms. I'm sure more exist. I'm not an academic on this subject.
You are gliding over every single time that Xi Jinping said, out loud, that this is the long term goal? Why wouldn't you believe him?
Yeah, they couch it carefully, but it's quite clear, from the China #1 propaganda, that China doesn't want to uplift anyone else, they want to use their soft power to make neighboring countries dependent on them. They're following the playbook laid out by Western companies in the 20th century, but organizing it with State controlled corporations.
And as for Singapore, there's a lot of propaganda from some right-wing Supply-Side economists that mischaracterize that country as being an ideal Capitalist state, while gliding over how the State controls most of the means of production. It isn't an ideal system, it has many inequities. But it's an example that serves as a surprising counterpoint to the argument that only free markets can thrive & survive in global capitalism, and components of it could be useful for looking for solutions to the issues with capitalism. Right wing economists do this, so they don't have to confront how incorrect their argument that Capitalism cannot be reformed with the State taking a direct role in the economy without disaster.
It's one of those things where I look at it, and say 'wow that sucks... But you can't argue with the results damn, can we workshop a better version of that?'
To themselves??? None of those were theirs.
Nordstream is Russian-German, not Ukrainian. Sabotaged obviously by USA, though USA claim Ukraine did it. <- note this shit, how they are wriggling themselves as pretzels and Greta is standing between them, supporting both possible perpetrators of that huge multitiered ecological catastrophe.
Kakhovka dam is on territory annexed by Russia and is very important strategic asset for Russia since it protects mainly Russian side and supplies Crimea with water, which is huge problem and was one of the main reasons Russians taken it. Also Ukraine previously already attacked it and they were freely admitting to WaPo they have a plan to blowing it. Also it wouldn't be even first dam blown up by them.
Power plant is also occupied by Russians which had to shut it down because Ukraine was shelling it. Unless you believe the UA info that Russian artilery shelled literally themselves.
Uranium shells are supplied to Ukraine by UK. They will use it in Ukraine, so i guess this is what they do to themselves, it's their kids who gonna be born with plethora of problems. Alternatively, they might bombard Donetsk with it i guess, they are under no illusion this city is theirs and they are routineley showering civilian objests and infrastructure there with cluster mines, and other supposedly rare munitions (weird how they beg around the world for it and then use it on pointless attacks on civilians).
it seem it is you who argue that Russia don't even need an enemy because for some reason they keep attacking and sabotaging themselves all the time.
What I'm hearing is a tonne of supposition without backed up facts and hard reporting.
I would love to see a link to a news story covering the evidence. Otherwise this sounds like a social media consensus built in a speculation-echo-chamber.
It's funny you talk about speculation, because right now there are people in Washington making a ton of money when the government sells or gives equipment to Ukraine to prolong this war.
You are probably getting too much of your news from social media.
I beg you: find news organizations that you can judge as credible, and go directly to them for news.
I beg you: literacy, especially critical reading skills, are a blessing. You are squandering that blessing.
HAHAHAHA now that's fucking rich of you, coming here from the imperialist social media consensus.
But ok, i will humor you, though note that one sealion got banned already in this thread.
Nordstream.
Power plant, here, here, here
Dam here and here
Donetsk bombings plenty here
Uranium shells effects are pretty obviously researched in Iraq and Serbia, about howm seding it to Ukraine here and here. They are even bragging about it ffs.
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using an URL instead of its name, which doesn't work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !ukraine_war_news@lemmygrad.ml
Some of those links are broken, but I'm getting the jist. Not all those links support your position, tho. Many that are not Russian news orgs are pointing the blame at Russia.
The politico article makes sure to point out that Russia is placing artillery in a position very close to the nuclear plant. That's Bad, and inviting disaster.
~~The first link is a conspiracy blogger.~~ this is patently not true! Leaving this up as an abject lesson in doing a little more reading before reacting to reflexive vitriol. I don't particularly like that Ukraine shot at a nuclear power plant, but...
There is no real great answer to the question of "how do you behave when someone as a boot to your throat?" This war, started by Russia, is monstrous, in no small part because of the horrible cycle of retribution.
I didn't know that Ukraine actually fired on Russian installations near a nuclear power plant. Thank you for informing me. I don't like it, but I blame Russia for daring Ukraine to attack it.
Seymour Hersh is a conspiracy blogger??? You want to tell me all the previous times when he was correct like was also conspiracy theories? My Lai, Watergate, CIA support for Pinochet, Israel having nukes, Abu Ghraib, etc. ???
Small part of the consequence of NATO being "Bad, and inviting disaster" since it been founded and especially since 1991.
All works for me, just checked, but nvm
This isn't "horrible cycle of retribution", this is ongoing imperialism and specifically USA efforts to maintain their global hegemony in the capitalist system - an infinite growth in finite planet. And even the hot part of that war wasn't started by Russia, it was started by Ukraine attacking Donbas in 2014, Russian intervened in that in 2022.
I'll fully admit that I hadn't read the entire thing or did due diligence on the sources prior to my comment. That's a mistake I just did, and I will not be removing my previous comment, but striking it out with an added a correction as an abject lesson & to walk back the clearly erroneously statement. This is a bad habit of mine when I see vitriol online, particularly when it has a flavor of Russian state Media talking points.
~~Thank you for pointing me to this guy's blog. That is very promising to me, someone who likes to be informed by people who do their due diligence.~~ (Hold up one more time! Here is a article that I found that refutes Seymour Hersh's assertions. Also, we only have a single anonymous source of S. Hersh's claims. https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/blowing-holes-in-seymour-hershs-pipe) I don't like the idea that the US did this on Ukraine's behalf, but that doesn't make me think that Russia is the good guys, actually. The number of things that Ukraine and the United States would have to do to outweigh the atrocities that Russia has perpetrated, especially in starting this war for reuniting 'Greater Russia.' Not for standing against Capitalism, which is alive and well in the de facto fascist-oligarchy that is the modern Russian state.
Russia horribly mischaracterized a political pressure cooker, and made it tremendously worse by invading. You are repeating that purposeful propaganda in this moment. Protecting 'ethnic russians' was never the goal.
I suppose next you'll tell me that the Crimean peninsula vote to join Russia was above board?
Even the comments in this article you linked are criticising it pretty hard. Again, this is the guy who was consistently correct in decades, and the Nordstream issue is hottest potato since "Cuban" missile crisis, a literal attack on ally by USA and part of escalation which might as well lead to WW3. Of course a lot of people and institutions are gonna try to deflect it really hard.
https://dessalines.github.io/essays/us_atrocities.html
Yawn, cut and slice and gotcha moment.
We really don't have anything to talk about.
I can only urge you to diversify your news intake with non-social media sources, as social media is corrosive to media literacy.
Additionally here's this article that pointedly refutes many of the main claims of Seymour Hersh's article.
https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/blowing-holes-in-seymour-hershs-pipe
Also there's only one anonymous source on Seymour Hersh's article.
It's plausible that the USA had a part in it, but hardly conclusive.
Slamming someone for parroting imperialist media and then citing Washington post as a source is peak lol. I get it Ukraine and NATO are bad but how is supporting the equally corrupt, equally capitalist Russia in any way better?
Even your own imperialist media break the narrative occasionally. We use them when they do, to try to make liberals think for a second, though the liberal taming is usually way too strong.
Imperialism, that's why.
I’m learning that “speculation echo chamber” is exactly what this instance is. Although “Russian propaganda repeater” might be more accurate as they don’t invent these narratives on their own.
In order of my google search's results.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4043221-ukraine-kakhovka-dam-collapse-theories/
https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-says-russia-admits-blowing-up-nova-kakhovka-dam-call-intercepted/
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/06/16/world/europe/ukraine-kakhovka-dam-collapse.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65818705
Most of these articles admit that it is kind of impossible to know for sure in the middle of a warzone. It's as likely that it collapsed due to lack of proper maintenance in the middle of a war.
What's your source?
I think you replied to the wrong guy
Oh yah hah.