Ukraine War Watch Thread

[caltrek]

...
(I still think that if you are interested, you are going to find it. If it doesn't match your colour, it doesn't matter how many links are provided... It's thedrive, anyway).

Tell us, oh all wise and wonderful computer, how exactly do you escape this confirmation bias trap?

To prevent a further derailing of this thread, try to make your response (assuming you bother to give one) relevant to our discussion of the war in the Ukraine. Perhaps by using Ukraine as an example rather than Pakistan or Iraq, etc.

This forum does feature a thread on Pakistan: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=557

[ibm9000]

Please use content that is relevant to this thread. I don't want to keep reminding you of this.

Relevant according to whom?

History repeating itself is not relevant to the war in Ukraine?
War is not relevant to the war in Ukraine?
Ukraine debt is nor relevant to the war in Ukraine?
Uploading fantasy tweets about the war in Ukraine is not relevant to the war in Ukraine?

We cannot scape bias, all we can do is try to confirm the data or, if you like a tweet, double-check that one, precisely because you like it.

[caltrek]

Please use content that is relevant to this thread. I don't want to keep reminding you of this.

Relevant according to whom?

History repeating itself is not relevant to the war in Ukraine?
War is not relevant to the war in Ukraine?
Ukraine debt is nor relevant to the war in Ukraine?
Uploading fantasy tweets about the war in Ukraine is not relevant to the war in Ukraine?

We cannot scape bias, all we can do is try to confirm the data or, if you like a tweet, double-check that one, precisely because you like it.

Ever hear of the scientific method?

[ibm9000]

Ever heard of "under siege".

Is that relevant... to the war in Ukraine?

[caltrek]

Ever heard of "under siege".

Yes. Your point?

Is that relevant... to the war in Ukraine?

I am trying to get there. It would help if you could answer a direct question with a direct answer. Instead, most of what we get from you is:

• What-about-isms

• False equivalencies

• Answering a question with a question

• Complaining about over-simplifications without seeming to pursue all links provided, including further links provided at the site to which an initial link is provide. Thus, ignoring that one has to start somewhere

Usually, I enjoy getting into a debate. In your case, you are so full of evasions that I wonder if it is really worth the effort. A good debate involves an exchange of ideas built on mutual respect. I don't mean to be disrespectful of you and your viewpoint. I am just trying to understand that viewpoint. Constant repetition of one narrowly confined theme becomes tedious and not worth the effort to read, much less formulate a response. Such constant repetition also begins to insult our audience. When a point is made concerning Ukraine, then it is time to move on to another point concerning the Ukraine. One might call that "analysis."

[ibm9000]

My point is that you seem fond of dictionary definitions but you never looked for that one.

I do complaint about this place being full of whataboutism and of being blind to equivalencies; you call them false, I don't. Who is the judge?

Is this the thread: post whatever you like but we have to like it too?

Maybe, I don't have such a high opinion of the question in the first place; maybe I see whataboutism in the question. Anybody signed a contract to do things as per your instructions?

All links? Again, everybody signed a contract to do that?, have you been checking who is doing that? Yes, like starting by posting a fantasy tweet and nobody interested in checking if there is any veracity in it; because it has the right ribbon.
Oversimplistic? Indeed, the B52 is not a dive-bomber; strategy/tactics have a very specific meaning in a war context; operational is a very fashionable word and there is no need to use it, repeatedly.

I may be wrong, again, but what you enjoy is your business, correct?

My viewpoint, again, is not important. I say that a tweet is full of fantasy: you check -if you care- if my statement is false or true; if I am drinking tea or coffee is completely irrelevant, as my viewpoint is.

You mean "a point is made" or "the correct point"?

I don't think the point is clear at all and I don't call that "analysis". One post and move on?, one fantasy post and move on? The number of Russian losses -according to Ukraine- has been posted more than once, enough of that! Is that what you are saying?, no updates?, no nuances?, no references?, no comparisons?
No History?

Me, I don't know how much, people around here know about air combat; I have never been really interested. For me, a Mig21 is just a Mig21, an upgraded Mig21, that's all. Did you know anything about Bison?, I didn't. Do you know all the capabilities of all the planes in this war?, I don't. Is that relevant... let's wait until someone decides for us.

Yes, I agree with you, a lot of what I read here -and everywhere else- is not worth reading... some years after the war, we may be able to formulate and informed opinion, based on all documents.

[raklian]

Please use content that is relevant to this thread. I don't want to keep reminding you of this.

Relevant according to whom?

History repeating itself is not relevant to the war in Ukraine?
War is not relevant to the war in Ukraine?
Ukraine debt is nor relevant to the war in Ukraine?
Uploading fantasy tweets about the war in Ukraine is not relevant to the war in Ukraine?

We cannot scape bias, all we can do is try to confirm the data or, if you like a tweet, double-check that one, precisely because you like it.

Relevant according to me, a moderator of this forum who is enforcing the forum's rules.

Had you used an example from the Ukraine-Russia War instead of one about the Pakistan F-16, that would've been perfectly fine.

Figuring out what is relevant or not is quite simple. Is your post about or overlaps the Ukraine-Russia War? If yes, it is relevant. If it doesn't mention anything about it unless you're making a logical connection, it is not relevant. Do you get it? We are kind of strict about it, so please stay on topic. If you don't want to stay on topic or discuss anything related to On Topic issues/news, that's what the Off Topic & General Discussion is for. You have that flexibility here, so use it.

[ibm9000]

Sorry, I am not used to talk to the Gods.

There is air combat in this war.
Everything related to air combat is relevant.

There are news about this war.
Everything related to how media informs is relevant.

This is a war.
Everything related to war is relevant.

Yes, quite simple.
What an enforcer decides to consider relevant, not that simple... for everybody else.

[caltrek]

Sorry, I am not used to talk to the Gods.

Better get use to it if you want to stick around.

There is air combat in this war.
Everything related to air combat is relevant.

I would suggest that if you post something about air power, you explain the relevance of that post to the Ukraine. As a hypothetical example, why talk about World War I vintage air-craft that are no longer even in service in this war?

Perhaps one has a point to make about the strategy of war fare as it relates to the current situation. In that case, make the connection for the reader in your post. Don't just rely on "well the reader can make the connection for themselves." Maybe, and maybe not. We have a pretty bright group of readers that frequent this forum. Still, they are readers of words, not of minds.

There are news about this war.
Everything related to how media informs is relevant.

There again, as another hypothetical example, don't drag in some news story about a cat rescued from the top of a tree as reported upon in your neighborhood without explicitly explaining how that example of a news story might relate to the war in the Ukraine. Using the example as a metaphor that is then applied to the war, for example, would presumably be acceptable. (Although others may still object that it does not properly apply as you have attempted it).

This is a war.
Everything related to war is relevant.

OMG, there have been so many wars waged throughout human history. Lessons can be learned and applied to how this war is conducted. Just don't try to convert this into a thread about the Peloponnesian War (another hypothetical example). If you have an example to be drawn from that war that you think illuminates something about the situation in the Ukraine, then be explicit.

Yes, quite simple.
What an enforcer decides to consider relevant, not that simple... for everybody else.

Use a little common sense. Most other posters don't complain about the standards as applied here.

Also, a suggestion that has been made over and over that you keep ignoring, participate in other threads or even start your own thread. Something like "My Thoughts.'"

It would be hard to be accused of being off topic there.

[weatheriscool]

Russia says U.S. Patriot missiles in Ukraine won't stand in its way
Source: Reuters

Russia said that Ukraine acquiring Patriot missiles from the United States, announced during President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's visit to Washington, would not help settle the conflict or prevent Moscow from achieving its goals.

Though the Patriot air defence system is widely regarded as advanced, President Vladimir Putin dismissed it as "quite old", telling reporters Moscow would find a way to counter it. At the same time, he said Russia wants an end to the war in Ukraine and that this would inevitably involve a diplomatic solution.

"Our goal is not to spin the flywheel of military conflict, but, on the contrary, to end this war," Putin said. "We will strive for an end to this, and the sooner the better, of course."

These comments drew quick U.S. scepticism. White House spokesman John Kirby said Putin had "shown absolutely zero indication that he's willing to negotiate" an end to the war.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ru ... r-AA15Auo5

[ibm9000]

be explicit.

Like talking to a 12 years old?

"It may look familiar, it is, actually, not about Ukraine and an opinion in itself; except when providing data that can be contrasted by different, independent sources.
There is an air war going on in Ukraine. Air combat is complicated. The media may not provide a truthful nor inparcial point of view, not even about the war in Ukraine. Do you want me to say that every time? (Apply the last sentence, please).
Your hypotheticals sound nice... but I posted about modern air combat and media information nowadays.

Gallum Bellicum. Those "countries" were conducting a war (strategy) and were doing things in the field (tactics, and stratagems, if you like), talking about that is relevant because those principles can still be applied today; talking about their weapons (maybe you noticed I didn't) no, but talking about the use of those weapons comparing them to the use of weapons nowadays, yes, it could be relevant.
(This kind of 12 years old talking?)

God's will be done.
I am not complaining, I am stating a fact.

I am not interested in air combat, I don't, usually, read about air combat. Why should I post in a thread I am not interested in?
(To make you happy? Not my job).

[ibm9000]

And yes, this is getting boring, but until someone decides to do something... besides the usual killing...

[caltrek]

be explicit.

Like talking to a 12 years old?

"It may look familiar, it is, actually, not about Ukraine and an opinion in itself; except when providing data that can be contrasted by different, independent sources.
There is an air war going on in Ukraine. Air combat is complicated. The media may not provide a truthful nor inparcial point of view, not even about the war in Ukraine. Do you want me to say that every time? (Apply the last sentence, please).
Your hypotheticals sound nice... but I posted about modern air combat and media information nowadays.

Gallum Bellicum. Those "countries" were conducting a war (strategy) and were doing things in the field (tactics, and stratagems, if you like), talking about that is relevant because those principles can still be applied today; talking about their weapons (maybe you noticed I didn't) no, but talking about the use of those weapons comparing them to the use of weapons nowadays, yes, it could be relevant.
(This kind of 12 years old talking?)

God's will be done.
I am not complaining, I am stating a fact.

I am not interested in air combat, I don't, usually, read about air combat. Why should I post in a thread I am not interested in?
(To make you happy? Not my job).

All well and good. Yes, like a character in the movie says, explain it to me like I am in 7th grade. That way you avoid the problem of trying to read your mind. If that is too boring for you, and you don't want to start your own "My Thoughts" type thread, then perhaps you should consider participating in a different forum.

One attended by mind readers perhaps.

P.S. No, I am not a moderator in this forum. Just one who is trying to give some helpful suggestions as to how you might more constructively participate in this forum, or at least better comply with the rules in order to not be considered a disruptive influence with little too nothing of value to say. Some of your comments are well taken. It would be a pity to lose your perspective simply because of your contrarian spirit.

[ibm9000]

You look too much at how it is said and too little at what it is said.

[caltrek]

You look too much at how it is said and too little at what it is said.

...and you keep expecting people to read your mind. Not to mention failing to realize that I understood a difference between "attack" and "siege" and therefore had no need to offer a dictionary definition.

As part of playing the "game" of debating, I also like to call people's bluff and actually provide a definition when a question comes up. If you don't like having dictionary definitions thrown at you, then stop asking rhetorical questions as to "what does ______(fill in the blank) mean?"

For one who earlier insisted on the desirability of a "negotiated solution" I would think that you would understand and appreciate that point.

Honestly, you are such contrarian. You remind me of an old friend of mine who would argue one position from the Right, and then suddenly shift the position of his argument to rhetorically question or attack me from the Left. A useful tool for fostering critical thinking, but it can result in frustration in figuring out from where you are coming. A pacifist, a partisan of Russia, one of Putin's lap dogs, etc.

[caltrek]

What’s in a Word – The End of a War?
by Radina Gigova and Rhea Mogul,
Updated December 23, 2022

Introduction:

(CNN) —
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday used the word “war” to refer to the conflict in Ukraine, the first known time he has publicly deviated from his carefully crafted description of Moscow’s invasion as a “special military operation” 10 months after it began.

“Our goal is not to spin the flywheel of military conflict, but, on the contrary, to end this war,” Putin told reporters in Moscow, after attending a State Council meeting on youth policy. “We have been and will continue to strive for this.”

Putin’s critics say that using the word “war” to describe the Ukraine conflict has effectively been illegal in Russia since March, when the Russian leader signed a censorship law that makes it a crime to disseminate “fake” information about the invasion, with a penalty of up to 15 years in prison for anyone convicted.

So Putin’s use of the word did not go unnoticed.

Nikita Yuferev, a municipal lawmaker from St. Petersburg who fled Russia due to his antiwar stance, on Thursday said he had asked Russian authorities to prosecute Putin for “spreading fake information about the army.”

Read more here: https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/22/europe/ ... ndex.html

caltrek’s comment: In a the video clip accompanying this article (see above link) there is also discussion regarding speculation as to whether Putin may be more willing to reach a negotiated settlement. The guarded hope is that he may be signaling his intention to do so to the Russian people, as well as the rest of the world. Even that his use of the word “war” was somehow intentional. After all, this does implicitly acknowledge the Ukraine as a legitimate entity to be negotiated with, as opposed to a unit of government that should be completely subordinate to Moscow and the Kremlin. Of course, there is also the point of reading too much into the slip of a tongue

[ibm9000]

You remind me of an old friend of mine

Ah!... old memories... when things were completely different... the Roman invasion of Britain...

I am a bit confused then, if you knew the right word, attack, why you were using the wrong word, siege, when talking to 7th graders?

[Time_Traveller]

Russian strikes hit Kherson, killing at least seven people and injuring dozens

24 December 2022, 13:11 GMT

Russian shells pounded the southern Ukrainian city of Kherson on Saturday, killing seven people and injuring 58 more.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who recently arrived back in the country following a short visit to the US, posted photos of the wreckage on his social media accounts.

He noted the destruction came as Ukrainians were beginning Christmas celebrations which for many Orthodox Christians will culminate in a traditional celebration on January 7.

“This is not sensitive content — it’s the real life of Kherson,” he tweeted. The images showed cars on fire, bodies in the street and building windows blown out.

https://www.upday.com/uk/russian-strike ... ing-dozens

[caltrek]

You remind me of an old friend of mine

Ah!... old memories... when things were completely different... the Roman invasion of Britain...

I am a bit confused then, if you knew the right word, attack, why you were using the wrong word, siege, when talking to 7th graders?

Go back dude.

My recollection is that I never confused the two. It was another poster who used the word "siege." I then posted about an attack on Kiev. You then indicated that "attack" was not a word you used. The reason I remember it that was from your argument. I realized that you were taking exception to the word siege. Hence no need to start throwing dictionary definitions around.

Please try to keep track of what was said by whom.

[sarcasm] Oh, that is right. Everything and everybody are equal to everything and everybody else, so why bother? [/sarcasm}]

[weatheriscool]

Shells pummel Ukraine's Kherson; 7 dead, 58 wounded
Source: AP

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Russian shells pummeled the southern Ukrainian city of Kherson on Saturday, killing seven people and injuring 58 more in the city that Moscow’s forces were forced to abandon last month.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, just back from his quick trip to Washington, posted photos of the wreckage on his social media accounts. He noted the destruction came as Ukrainians were beginning Christmas celebrations that for many Orthodox Christians will culminate in the traditional celebration Jan. 7.

“This is not sensitive content — it’s the real life of Kherson,” Zelenskyy tweeted. The images showed cars on fire, bodies on the street and building windows blown out.

The deputy head of the presidential office, Kyrylo Tymoshenko, said seven people were killed in the shelling of Kherson on Saturday and 58 were injured, at least 16 of them seriously.

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukrai ... osition_02