Cost of Bakhmut ‘meat grinder’ battle on Russian army revealed

[Bleipriester]

You posted his first statement while ignoring his second statement.

I ignored propaganda media. Now, I have the whole statement and you start to ignore while you insisted on it before.
While you are a clown now, I was right ignoring the propaganda that actually denied that there are battles in Bakhmut ("no ammo" claim).
Believing such a nonsense makes one a clown, insisting on such a nonsense makes one insult others.
Now, you still insist on that Wagner fighters go unarmed into battle to die in Bakhmut.
Now, we know how Nato believes there is 1:5 ratio.

Now you know, everything you got from MSM is to be questioned and counter-checked.
You knew before, but you are one of them bullshitters, right?

 

[toomuchtime_]

I ignored propaganda media. Now, I have the whole statement and you start to ignore while you insisted on it before.
While you are a clown now, I was right ignoring the propaganda that actually denied that there are battles in Bakhmut ("no ammo" claim).
Believing such a nonsense makes one a clown, insisting on such a nonsense makes one insult others.
Now, you still insist on that Wagner fighters go unarmed into battle to die in Bakhmut.
Now, we know how Nato believes there is 1:5 ratio.

Now you know, everything you got from MSM is to be questioned and counter-checked.
You knew before, but you are one of them bullshitters, right?

The problem is your definition of propaganda is anything that is unfavorable to Russia, so you trust Prigozhim when he says something that is favorable to Russia but not when he says something that is not favorable to Russia.

 

[Donald H]

Russia's propagandists say that 10 Ukrainians are killed for every 1 Russian.

Ukraine's propagandists claim that 5 Russians are killed for every 1 Ukrainian.

Who are we supposed to believe?

 

[BlackSand]

Russia's propagandists say that 10 Ukrainians are killed for every 1 Russian.

Ukraine's propagandists claim that 5 Russians are killed for every 1 Ukrainian.

Who are we supposed to believe?

.

In either case ... One that tells you one side has lost before the battle is over ... Is lying about that.

.​

 

[toomuchtime_]

Russia's propagandists say that 10 Ukrainians are killed for every 1 Russian.

Ukraine's propagandists claim that 5 Russians are killed for every 1 Ukrainian.

Who are we supposed to believe?

Well, since Russian media is state controlled and you can go to prison if you contradict anything the Russian government says, you know you can't believe anything you read or see in the Russian media, but since the many thousands of voices in western media are free to hold any opinions they choose and are even free to contradict the various governments, a crime in Russia, your best chance of learning the truth is to compare the various reports in western media and ignore the state run propaganda sheets of Russia.

 

[Bleipriester]

The problem is your definition of propaganda is anything that is unfavorable to Russia, so you trust Prigozhim when he says something that is favorable to Russia but not when he says something that is not favorable to Russia.

bla bla bla.

It is you who picks what he likes and ignores the rest.

 

[toomuchtime_]

bla bla bla.

It is you who picks what he likes and ignores the rest.

No, I accept both of Prigozhin's statements, that he expected to encircle the Ukrainan troops at Bakhmut and that he said Wagner might have to withdraw from Bakhmut and that would cause the entire Russian frontline to collapse and possibly cause Russia to lose the war, but you only accept his first statement. You've been honest in the past about considering all unfavorable reports about Russia to just be propaganda, so why deny it now?

 

[Bleipriester]

No, I accept both of Prigozhin's statements, that he expected to encircle the Ukrainan troops at Bakhmut and that he said Wagner might have to withdraw from Bakhmut and that would cause the entire Russian frontline to collapse and possibly cause Russia to lose the war, but you only accept his first statement. You've been honest in the past about considering all unfavorable reports about Russia to just be propaganda, so why deny it now?

No, not true. I told you that I generally question "news" unfavorable for Russia from sources hostile to Russia. This is also why I don´t come up with Russian sources that are unfavorable for Ukraine unless they are objective. I also use western sources if objective.

 

[toomuchtime_]

No, not true. I told you that I generally question "news" unfavorable for Russia from sources hostile to Russia. This is also why I don´t come up with Russian sources that are unfavorable for Ukraine unless they are objective. I also use western sources if objective.

And by objective you invariably mean favorable to Russia.

 

[Bleipriester]

And by objective you invariably mean favorable to Russia.

They have been predicting Russia´s demise and counting Russia´s alleged losses only. They hide behind "experts" they hire. They tell you that the EU "oil price cap" works, when it doesn´t. They tell you that the Russians lose when they are winning. They tell you Bakhmut isn´t important strategically although Ukraine sends seven teenagers and geezers to defend it. They lost all credibility. That is why I act like I do.

 

[toomuchtime_]

They have been predicting Russia´s demise and counting Russia´s alleged losses only. They hide behind "experts" they hire. They tell you that the EU "oil price cap" works, when it doesn´t. They tell you that the Russians lose when they are winning. They tell you Bakhmut isn´t important strategically although Ukraine sends seven teenagers and geezers to defend it. They lost all credibility. That is why I act like I do.

We both know none of that is true. Unlike Russia's state controlled media, you trust completely, western media outlets present all perspectives, just as all perspectives are represented on this board. Here in the US I see various Republican politicians favoring a Russian victory in Ukraine and even a prospective presidential candidate saying that if elected he would press Ukraine to give up as much of its land as necessary to appease Putin's ambitions to stop the war, presumably without caring what the Ukrainians want.

I've seen reports that Ukraine will be able to hold out in Bakhmut and I just saw a report from NATO's chief saying Bakhmut may fall in a few days. I see MacGregor and Rutter spinning their theories on American TV as well as American generals explaining why they are full of shit, so why do you continue to mischaracterize western media as if it speaks with one voice?

 

[BlackSand]

Well, since Russian media is state controlled and you can go to prison if you contradict anything the Russian government says, you know you can't believe anything you read or see in the Russian media, but since the many thousands of voices in western media are free to hold any opinions they choose and are even free to contradict the various governments, a crime in Russia, your best chance of learning the truth is to compare the various reports in western media and ignore the state run propaganda sheets of Russia.

.

That would make more sense if there was actually any accountability in western media.

Even in the article presented in the OP ... It refers to an "anonymous" source suggested as having actually knowledge ...
Implied by an undocumented and ambiguous relationship between a known organization ... And a completely unknown entity ...
And an entity that someone would have to simply believe existed in the first place for the article to mean anything ...

You can pretend you don't understand the complications in that ...
If you want to pretend that the propaganda you prefer ... Is somehow more substantiated by nothing.

.​

 

[Bleipriester]

We both know none of that is true. Unlike Russia's state controlled media, you trust completely, western media outlets present all perspectives, just as all perspectives are represented on this board. Here in the US I see various Republican politicians favoring a Russian victory in Ukraine and even a prospective presidential candidate saying that if elected he would press Ukraine to give up as much of its land as necessary to appease Putin's ambitions to stop the war, presumably without caring what the Ukrainians want.

I've seen reports that Ukraine will be able to hold out in Bakhmut and I just saw a report from NATO's chief saying Bakhmut may fall in a few days. I see MacGregor and Rutter spinning their theories on American TV as well as American generals explaining why they are full of shit, so why do you continue to mischaracterize western media as if it speaks with one voice?

We know this is not true. Republicans don´t oppose the war, they oppose Biden. They elected peace dove Trump but when his promises turned out to be utter bs and he started to play regime change and world police, they continued to support him.

Zelensky declared Bakhmut a fortress in December. Hitler also declared cities to fortresses. This strategy is used to sacrifice troops in order to bind larger hostile forces and win time. In war, such strategies are legitimate but it is the strategy of the war party that does not have the upper hand.

 

[toomuchtime_]

.

That would make more sense if there was actually any accountability in western media.

Even in the article presented in the OP ... It refers to an "anonymous" source suggested as having actually knowledge ...
Implied by an undocumented and ambiguous relationship between a known organization ... And a completely unknown entity ...
And an entity that someone would have to simply believe existed in the first place for the article to mean anything ...

You can pretend you don't understand the complications in that ...
If you want to pretend that the propaganda you prefer ... Is somehow more substantiated by nothing.

.​

Agan, you insist on mischaracterizing western media as speaking with one voice and that clearly isn't true. By law Russian media speaks with only one voice, Putin's, and there can be no accountability because it is a crime to contradict him. Western media is made up of thousands and thousands of independent outlets that are free to present any perspective they choose, and all perspectives are represented. And they are all held accountable both by competing outlets and by their viewers or readers who can switch to other outlets if they think as you claim the content is not believable.

Anytime you say western media does this or that, you are lying because western media is so diverse and so free to present any content it chooses even to attack the government of the country it is in and call government officials liars that no honest person would claim western media speaks with only one voice.

 

[BlackSand]

Agan, you insist on mischaracterizing western media as speaking with one voice and that clearly isn't true. By law Russian media speaks with only one voice, Putin's, and there can be no accountability because it is a crime to contradict him. Western media is made up of thousands and thousands of independent outlets that are free to present any perspective they choose, and all perspectives are represented. And they are all held accountable both by competing outlets and by their viewers or readers who can switch to other outlets if they think as you claim the content is not believable.

Anytime you say western media does this or that, you are lying because western media is so diverse and so free to present any content it chooses even to attack the government of the country it is in and call government officials liars that no honest person would claim western media speaks with only one voice.

.

No ... What I am saying is that propaganda knows no bounds ... Is being used ... And has been used for centuries by all parties ...
And those who want to deny that ... Are fooling no one but themselves ...

You can believe whatever you want ... But that doesn't mean it isn't bullshit.
Your government, military and clandestine operations ... Have departments and/or certain people where it is their job.

.​

 

[toomuchtime_]

We know this is not true. Republicans don´t oppose the war, they oppose Biden. They elected peace dove Trump but when his promises turned out to be utter bs and he started to play regime change and world police, they continued to support him.

Zelensky declared Bakhmut a fortress in December. Hitler also declared cities to fortresses. This strategy is used to sacrifice troops in order to bind larger hostile forces and win time. In war, such strategies are legitimate but it is the strategy of the war party that does not have the upper hand.

You are making my point for me. In the US you can hold any opinion and when you publish it, you don't go to prison, but in Russia, you are required to display cult like support for anything Putin says or you go to prison.

Republicans are split on Ukraine. About half support aid to Ukraine and a smaller number are strongly opposed to it as you have seen on this board. They are opposed to anything Biden does because they imagine Trump will run against him in 2024 and Trump is clearly opposed to aid to Ukraine. In a recent interview Trump said:

During a radio interview with Fox News host (and longtime confidant) Sean Hannity on Monday, the twice-impeached ex-president finally revealed how he personally would have prevented the war. According to Trump, all he needed to do was let Russia “take over” parts of Ukraine.

Fox News Edits Out Trump Saying He Might’ve Let Russia ‘Take Over’ Parts of Ukraine

While Trump told Hannity on the radio he could’ve prevented war by negotiating a deal with Russia, that portion was curiously edited out when aired on Fox News.

www.thedailybeast.com

In the west, all views are presented and freely supported or opposed, but in Russia only the only reality available to you is he one dictated to you by Putin.

 

[toomuchtime_]

.

No ... What I am saying is that propaganda knows no bounds ... Is being used ... And has been used for centuries by all parties ...
And those who want to deny that ... Are fooling no one but themselves ...

You can believe whatever you want ... But that doesn't mean it isn't bullshit.
Your government, military and clandestine operations ... Have departments and/or certain people where it is their job.

.​

Again, you suggest western media speaks with only one voice and now you suggest that voice is dictated by the government, but that is clearly not true. The present US government is strongly supportive of Ukraine, but Donald Trump has stated that if he were elected again, he would give Putin the parts of Ukraine he wants to end the war, sso clearly your paranoid fantasies about the CIA controlling western media are just nuts.

 

[BlackSand]

Again, you suggest western media speaks with only one voice and now you suggest that voice is dictated by the government, but that is clearly not true. The present US government is strongly supportive of Ukraine, but Donald Trump has stated that if he were elected again, he would give Putin the parts of Ukraine he wants to end the war, sso clearly your paranoid fantasies about the CIA controlling western media are just nuts.

.

Not at all ... I suggest that one's voice is their voice.
None of it has to be directed by government ... Some of it is ... And some voices can be just like yours and say whatever they want.

There is nothing paranoid about understanding the depth of any real obligation to do anything.
Your desire to pretend that news organizations do not adjust content to present their point of view favorably is naive at best.

Believe what you want ... You'll probably be happier that way ...
And someone will tell you what you want to hear ...



Edit:
Goes back to the article in the OP ... And then my comment ...

"You can pretend you don't understand the complications in that ...
If you want to pretend that the propaganda you prefer ... Is somehow more substantiated by nothing."

Whatever you post ... Will never give an actual identity or relevance ...
To the unidentified entity responsible for any value associated with the content of the article.

If there are no consequences for relating or reporting the information ... That may add any value to the content of the article ...
Then why would the source be anonymous ...

.​

 

[Bleipriester]

You are making my point for me. In the US you can hold any opinion and when you publish it, you don't go to prison, but in Russia, you are required to display cult like support for anything Putin says or you go to prison.

That is what Fake News gurus told you. Its not true.

Republicans are split on Ukraine. About half support aid to Ukraine and a smaller number are strongly opposed to it as you have seen on this board. They are opposed to anything Biden does because they imagine Trump will run against him in 2024 and Trump is clearly opposed to aid to Ukraine. In a recent interview Trump said:

During a radio interview with Fox News host (and longtime confidant) Sean Hannity on Monday, the twice-impeached ex-president finally revealed how he personally would have prevented the war. According to Trump, all he needed to do was let Russia “take over” parts of Ukraine.

Fox News Edits Out Trump Saying He Might’ve Let Russia ‘Take Over’ Parts of Ukraine

While Trump told Hannity on the radio he could’ve prevented war by negotiating a deal with Russia, that portion was curiously edited out when aired on Fox News.

www.thedailybeast.com

We heard him lying in 2016. He favored attacking Russians in Syria in 2018:

Trump's next move: 3 options for striking in Syria

Examining three options, and the Bolton factor

www.axios.com

Trump wanted tougher options on Syria all along

President Trump addressed the nation, saying the US, UK and France launched sustained airstrikes on Syria in response to a chemical attack. Here's the latest.

edition.cnn.com

Trump would also love to play war in Ukraine, thus directly attack the Russian military.

 

[toomuchtime_]

.

Not at all ... I suggest that one's voice is their voice.
None of it has to be directed by government ... Some of it is ... And some voices can be just like yours and say whatever they want.

There is nothing paranoid about understanding the depth of any real obligation to do anything.
Your desire to pretend that news organizations do not adjust content to present their point of view favorably is naive at best.

Believe what you want ... You'll probably be happier that way ...
And someone will tell you what you want to hear ...

.​

You continue to make no sense at all. There are pro Russian and pro Ukrainian stories in western media so there is no rational basis for calling western media as a group purveyors of anti Russian propaganda.