• KurtDunniehue@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    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?

    • CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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?

      What’s your source?

      “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

      • KurtDunniehue@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        lmao you actually think the BBC is incredible?

        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.

        • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          A multitude of perspectives? All the articles you linked were from western countries who are frothing at the mouth to go after the Russians.

          • KurtDunniehue@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            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.

            • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Almost like all the sources you linked were companies or the governments of capitalist nations, all of whom want to make money. They make money off of war-mongering

              • KurtDunniehue@ttrpg.network
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                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.

                • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  1 year ago
                  1. Singapore is one of the most capitalist nations on Earth.
                  2. Russia absolutely isn’t fascistic
                  3. China doesn’t aim for global hegemony
                  4. All of that is irrelevant to the lack of quality of sources shared.
                  • KurtDunniehue@ttrpg.network
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    China doesn’t aim for global hegemony

                    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.