News of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine

Source: New Cold War.

This web page may be of some interest. It claims: “News in English of Russia’s anti-militarization operation in Ukraine is scant and hard to find. The following is a summary of what is known about the situation in Ukraine and where to find current and ongoing information.”

35 thoughts on “News of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine

  1. No thanks.

    It is a laughably obvious Russian propaganda site. After having sent in thousands of goons to murder thousands of people in order to sieze parts of Ukraine, the characterization of this invasion being a “Russian anti-militarization operation” is pure nonsense for the consumption of dopes eager to be duped.

    I will trust the reporting of established European and American journalists. They may get some things wrong, but when they do they quickly correct it. The fate of those 13 defiant Ukrainians is a good example.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. “ OHCHR believes that the real figures are considerably higher, especially in Government-controlled territory and especially in recent days, as the receipt of information from some locations where intensive hostilities have been going on was delayed and many reports were still pending corroboration. This concerns, for example, the town of Volnovakha where hundreds of civilian casualties have been alleged. These figures are being further corroborated and are not included in the above statistics.”

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Fair enough. Still, not sufficient to support reckless claims about murdering “thousands of people.”

          Like

          1. Depends on whether or not you count the Russian invasion in 2014. The Russians have been fighting in Donbas since taking over Crimea. The death toll there is 14,000: 3400 civilians, 4600 Ukraine volunteers, National Guard and Armed Forces.

            Included are 400-500 Russian soldiers and the rest Russian backed separatists.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War

            So the “thousands of people”, civilians, is certainly accurate.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. RE: “Depends on whether or not you count the Russian invasion in 2014.”

            Why would we count the 2014 invasion? The post is about the current one.

            Like

          3. The invasion in 2014 never ended. Obviously.
            The new events are an escalation.

            Is that not clear or do I need to rephrase it?

            Liked by 2 people

          1. ” babbling bombastic bullshit”

            Oh, my.

            Seriously, the Russians invaded in 2014 and have stayed ever since and are now upping the ante because they want the whole pie. Those Ukrainians in Donbas did not die in skateboard accidents.

            Russian arms, Russian training, and just plain Russian soldiers… kind fits the definition of an invasion don’t you think.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. Do over?

            I was referring to the “insurrections that have been going on since 2014. Those were the goons I was thinking about. Shitheads and mercenaries. I do not think ordinary Russia soldiers are goons.

            You have never caught me with a phony claim. Not once. Unlike you people, I do not make up my own facts. I offer my opinions and support them with evidence. You should try it.

            Liked by 1 person

        1. RE: “I was referring to the many thousands of people who have been killed because of the Russian sponsored insurrections.”

          I see. You criticize the post for telling lies, and prove it by telling lies of your own.

          Like

          1. What lie am I telling?
            The death count from Putin’s attacks since 2014 ARE in the thousands.

            And if you really think that civilian deaths in this invasion are at the level claimed by Russian propaganda, tell the truth then you are a very eager dupe.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. RE: “The death count from Putin’s attacks since 2014 ARE in the thousands.”

            So you say, but the death count from Putin’s attacks since 2014 are not the subject of the post.

            Like

          3. “So you say, but the death count from Putin’s attacks since 2014 are not the subject of the post.”

            I wrote the post. I know what I was referring to. You are not willing to accept my clarification and instead call me a liar. Okay. Fine. That is the sort of behavior we have come to expect from you people.

            Liked by 1 person

  2. Bad title. “Russia’s anti-militarization operation” is what Putin-ites and Russian state TV are calling the INVASION of Ukraine.

    You want to use a source for real news, find one. Any source that starts with the Putin lie is dangerously misleading and unreliable.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. RE: “You want to use a source for real news, find one.”

      There are several listed on the web page. I have always found expanding sources of information to be a good practice. Making prejudicial assumptions contributes to ignorance.

      Like

      1. Both sides?

        One “side” is American and European journalists working for reputable news organizations. The other “side” is part of the propaganda arm of the aggressors. An aggressor who will throw you in jail or worse for simply telling ANY truth about what is going on. And you ask why not listen to both sides? With all due respect, I think that you are a “useful idiot” for Putin in every sense of those words.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. With all due respect, I think that you are a “useful idiot” for American media in every sense of those words.

          Like

      1. “What’s wrong with hearing both sides?”

        really?

        Both sides?

        One “side” is American and European journalists working for reputable news organizations. The other “side” is part of the propaganda arm of the aggressors. An aggressor who will throw you in jail or worse for simply telling ANY truth about what is going on. And you ask why not listen to both sides? With all due respect, I think that you are a “useful idiot” for Putin in every sense of those words.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Why not?

          We know the site’s limitations but we also know that we are not getting the full picture form our side either.

          So, watch the other side to keep our side honest.

          To assume without checking that we are getting the full story for either side is the real idiocy.

          Like

          1. “I would say the same of CNN and MSNBC.”

            Of course you would. You are a good little Trumpkin.

            However, the objective coverage of events in Ukraine is not limited to those two organizations. There are dozens infinitely more reliable than any Putin-controlled fake news generator. Even Fox News would be better. They still have one or two honest people around.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. “… we also know that we are not getting the full picture form our side either.”

            We do?

            “… Russia’s anti-militarization operation in Ukraine…”

            Anti-militarization operation? It is an invasion targeting civilians even after agreeing to safe passage. So this is the news from the other side you want for balanced coverage?

            Shall we call the Holocaust an inventory reduction?

            Yes, truth is the first casualty of war as oft stated. But at least we should give pure propaganda its deserved attention…zip…other than “here is an example of what Russians are told by its dictator”.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. “So, read with grain or two of salt, but there still can be some facts and insights there you will not find in the MSM.”

            And just how are you going to know which “facts and insights” are based in reality? The point is that you can’t. And that is doubly true of a site controlled by a fascist gangster who rules by fear and punishes or murders anyone who does do his bidding.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. RE: “We know the site’s limitations…”

          Every site has limitations. I haven’t seen any evidence that the one I sourced is unreliable. In fact, no one seems to have noticed that the content at the link I provided is actually from a different site altogether.

          The criticisms of the post all boil down to “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil,” as in “I don’t want to see, I don’t want to hear, and I don’t want to speak.”

          Very sad.

          Like

      2. “What’s wrong with hearing both sides?”

        When one side is based on lies and propaganda from the invading country, a country which has jailed thousands of its own citizens for protesting the invasion, a country that has shut down any and all media except that which it controls, a country that referred to its invasion of another country as a “demilitarization operation; There is no “both sides” here. THere is the truth and there is the propaganda.

        When are you going to call this whole thing what it is: A country attempting to wipe out another with ZERO provocation or justification, except for THe lies told by PUTIN TO ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY IT?

        It has become apparent here that Helsinki was only the beginning. When TFG believed Putin about election interference over the entire intelligence community, the downward spiral away from the truth from supporters of TFG has reached rock bottom.

        Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s