I am going with it was probably disinfo. Ignore prior comment. Nothing is mistake. The press needs it to be. It needs to paint these dumb drunk Russians who are in mutiny. They can't take shit. They'll lose.
Was it a trap. They had been firing, all of sudden right when they're about to take it, out of ammo, or retreat. The retreat caused a Ukrainian charge.
Who knows unless you're Russian?
But the fact is the way it is covered by the media, has been almost baseless.
By airing okay for example the Russians are crumbling and counter offensive, did it cost more or less Ukrainians. Far more. However who knows what Ukraine is doing.
Both sides sacrifice pawns if it gets the bigger support or wins objectives. There it was just irony. Real irony, it caused what kind of Ukrainian funnelling? Had they been advancing anywhere else?
I don't care, except you can't watch it, can't read it, because it is literally stupid on providing a war brief or what we know of stardate 450 of the conflict, when it isn't even directly fighting it. It instead assumes some other victory.
This stinks of fuckery. I said disinformation comments back.
Wagner have about 90% of Bakhmut occupied. Since beginning of May. Tiny enclave holding out. It's been brutal taking it.
Press airs Counter Offensive for the Ukraine is happening in undeclared time, except is it there yet, all these weapons are gonna charge into the Crimea, freeing the slaves. First they might blast back through Bakhmut, charging Wagner with the warcrimes.
The super secret counter offensive from the pentagon documents is leaked on discord by the cult of the leaker. Last month
Wagner airs they'll retreat, and tells the day, because of ammo. Except those guns haven't stopped there. Been months of it.
Wagner is promised as much ammo as it can shoot.
Counter offensive is talked about every day this month.
Wagner has been charging down the flank and are attacking the last pocket and are making their way through the town.
Suddenly bugles sound on the day Wagner aired. The press goes wild it's a Ukrainian touchdown in supposed Russian losses, battalions are supposedly wiped out along the retreating Russian flanks.
Except they recalled and regrouped behind their fortified line.
Wagner charges back through Bakhmut to the remaining Ukrainian bastion
Ukraine tries charging at the Russian flanks to try to encircle Wagner. Incidenary shells, cavalry, drones, artillery rein down wiping out almost all the rest of Ukraine in Bakhmut. There were a few who got out.
I don't know, because the news tells me shit. Tell me that's the wrong version of events? I have no idea watching Sky. Typos phone auto correct is haywire????
You play these games yes like Starcraft. You make row of towers and go to enemy base, it has lots of troops, so you pull men back to towers, lose a few. Let enemy charge. Then go destroy base. Yes? Seriously all you need to do was say you had no ammo? The towers aren't firing, no trees? Chess you also sacrifice pieces to set up checkmate.
Who cares if it wasn't an obnoxious narrative. It was some town fought fiercely over, each staking they must have it. Except what occurred this month and previous was played up by a media straining for narratives, it wasn't factual.
Unless it was also sacrificing troops to grant a bunch more arms. A bunch more troops killed. No. It wasn't. They'd grant them anyway. Been waiting to escalate it more and more. Except it only escalates.
It's a meat grinder. Both sides throwing fodder at entrenched and fortified lines. As agenda unfolds.
But the events that transpired over its build up, namely since I started hearing about the counter offensive that's going to reclaim the Crimea freeing the Tartars from bondage, like so many others have been overly propagated by a media straining to report narratives over facts.
Here it stands to rationality a gambit was played. I am sure many have used it in every strategy or sim played. The propaganda simply caused it. Until all it costs is even more.
Possibly that was its true goal. As the ante keeps raising until where does that buck stop, today? Without its loss would f16s or otherwise go through?
Yea you're right it's easier to ignore. Except for the fact, the run off of taxation, inflation.
The freaking retard. The president is off funding, as a bastion he claimed they'd defend too, and threw far more at, fell.
It was done by hardly more than an advanced chess move. Except I beg what the propaganda did, except get far more of them, its supposed support, killed?
I am only annoyed because I have Sky and since the coronation where I wanted to watch history, because I've made it point not to watch BBC coverage unless it's not the news. They had this guy, an armchair general, dunno even know if ranked, just a jurno airing a presentation, in their war room, and it provides a daily Ukraine brief, chatting non stop shit. Meanwhile every other outlet newspaper from my App has done practically the same on so many stories.
It's the propaganda and I've said it back a year ago, it's almost worst than the conflict itself. It makes no sense outside of watching a fantasy movie after WW2 on the Germans. It strains to air something, it's often an obnoxious narrative that goes out of its way to press utter nonsense.
As far as this was to anybody else, not taking away from those efforts, is a shitty contested town on the forward lines. But not to that press who turned it into? Don't worry I am sure they're, Western Media, gonna throw more bullshit at it.
The coverage by Ukrainian sources hasn't understood warfare or contained any facts.
A few days ago. Earlier this week, this time last week, it would've appeared every single Western press outlet lied.
Today their president isn't even the Ukraine currently. Propaganda suddenly switches back to more funding.
What does it buy?
I find it ironic. Unsubstantiated and easier maneuvering, feign withdrawal, citing ammo, press positioning, bombard center, overrun position completely. Instead the press strained Ukraine position was counter offensive. When in fact they lost far more. That ratio was in what numbers? Think about it.
Not that even matters here. But it seems and as commented on, there are no facts being aired by media straining for obnoxious narratives. Instead of objectified facts.
Took down nuclear bases? Hahahaha.
Like Chernobyl? Did the Nukes explode? Hahahaha.
No they didn't. The nukes were still operational. But not at the time of the alien activity? OK.
Has anybody else got a problem with the alien activity?
It's called the nuclear football. Aw look alien activity. It doesn't launch because the president holds a ufo. Seriously.
Thanks for the explanation.
But theoretically exposed to it, as a tank, loading crew constantly loading and handling the shells would cause long term health problems if it is providing significant gamma readings from an abundant stockpile.
Do they have the enrichment facilities? The weapon factories? This was all Soviet tech.
The conspiracies was. It was big when the USSR split was a few blackmarket nukes and materials made it onto the open market particularly from the Ukraine and other former republics. Not all the stockpile and inventory was accounted for. Of course there's a lot of room to tell tales. There was another conspiracy not all the nukes made it out after it completely devolutioned today, there were hidden facilities still in operation. These are quite possibly fantasy movies and novels. It has been a narrative in many movies and novels.
I agree they haven't got the tech. They wouldn't need all the funding and arms and munitions if they had any other notions of manufacture and production. Besides their main industrial sector in the East is currently Russian territory outside of a few other places regionally.
Can they make nukes, if they had the materials, and facilities. Currently they don't.
I understand your point. But that signature would have spiked across Europe and from the depot in the UK to the airfield. A radio active plane, train is inbound. Beeeeeeeep. Meanwhile all the handlers would be bleeding out their arse with their hair falling out. Forget sitting in a tank with it.
When did Ukraine make their own nukes?
How was those x2 explosions nuclear?
How does shell cause radiation poisoning when it's still encased?
The reading now has atmospheric radiation, but it's hardly significant of nukes or fallout, otherwise a bunch of agencies would be all over it. Somehow they'd also be accusing Russia of the warcrimes.
Ghettos. They're still shitholes. But they're shitholes the government and its corporate backers manipulate for the purpose of policing any dissent. You will not question the government media narratives. Ukraine is good for your health. You will vote for charlatans. Accepting your taxes. Seriously?
Nuke Warheads don't leave that trace. Otherwise tell me this about Crimea? Show readings over it. This you say yes. The shells leave residue spiking atmospheric readings if they have radioactive materials inside. It causes strong atmospheric readings, as soon as they're transported outside of any other shielding? Crimea would theoretically by your same assumptions have these readings. It outfits various ships with missiles some are possibly nuclear. The ships from Murmansk, have had nuclear missiles at times, if not directly at Svestapol. The reading would therefore show on transportation, recalibration, and outfitting. Yes?
As opposed to speculating they fired and tested these shells at a facility with a gun range. Perhaps they monkeyed about with them, saying, how do we fit this ammo into other guns. I know let's take it apart and put into bullets. What if the facility had a reactor in it? The grid had been strained in warfare, it needed more power. It was camouflaged attempting to hide its operations. It was obviously full of fuel and lubricants.
Who knows? I just don't buy Ukrainian nukes like silly movie. Watched that type of fantasy movie a few times. The Soviet nukes were largely accounted for, and a few got sold. How did they get others. Made them. Maybe by taking depleted ammo and putting into rockets like good monkeys.
Seriously?
It has become real obvious today what these platforms do and seek to provide. They're not a haven for debate or free speech.
They're simply about ramming advertising. It is increasing manipulated by the state driving unquestionable narratives for the purpose of rigging agenda.
If anybody knew a decade ago they'd become this. Who would've used them? Why today have they become embedded?
At what point a few decades ago would anybody have bought computers if they knew all their details would be bulk collected and spammed everywhere else, they're tracked and monitored? What has it solved.
Today it seems our generation has bent over and society has become much worse. Services. Crime. Look at it, its costs, freedoms. Having any kind of opinion, is trolled, and told you can't say that. There are more cannots than can. Meanwhile everything has gone offshore and become unrecognisable and inflated. As costs have skyrocketed.
Yet the entire time it is sold as a better solution? Yea right.
Make broadcast only channels, nitwit.
Let people, not press and gov, broadcast only, comment about what the fuck they want.
Aw but he, and the state funded A.I driven narratives don't control it.
Twitter like the rest of social media has no free speech.
Read it. He said it. His A.I driven brain fell out. He'd rather pander to state funded narratives, then let other discussion occur.
Instead of restricting those narratives to broadcast only channels. He'd rather just ban everybody else disagreeing. All so he can manipulate volume and rig the advertising.
In the case of Turkey it was obvious who'd win. However the debate is factual everywhere else.
Overcrowding the prison systems, more taxes and utilities. More services. More funding and investment.
It hasn't got much to do with anything else. Literally this stupid system that taxes more, causing increasing debt, but causes more services and corruption. It frankly has become ridiculous today.
It is illogical in the case of first degree and multiple homicides, secondary it's harsh and shouldn't be invoked.
There are several exemptions to it. Not many. These today have vastly become status. If there is undeniable proof, it should statuary crime and punishment.
The psychology is profane. It hasn't accounted for the victims seeking justice, and it does no favours to the tax payer, and the rest of society. It hasn't brought down crime. It has increased it.
That is 100% bullshit.
Who told you these figures, and they're lying big time.
Production increases with demand. So new factories, and production increase output. They start making drones and rockets and shells. Or they make the components towards, lifting the load of other factories. You have several missile manufactures. Not just patriots. They have increased output, as Israel goes through these rapidly. Aside they're putting this patriot defense in many coalition places. Like Taiwan even. It will be real short real quick if attacked on a few fronts. The demand won't keep up with production. 250 a year. Literal disinfo from the 90s. Tell me how that works. Because it doesn't. Meanwhile it has supposedly proved stopping the hypersonic. Demand has just increased outside of its other arrangements.
So speculate here. UK has promised unlimited missiles in the latest package. It is manufacturing something. Correct? Europeans again are buying billions worth of ammo. How, if it doesn't exist?
These bullshit figures on what can be built become nonsense in increasing demand. They always have. They start making new factories, and production, and get other factories making components. Etc.
As far as archons go. It's an A.I they're communicating with. It is behind almost all evil today. Everything gets plugged into it, and it enslaves more.
Watch documentary like WW2 on V2 production. F16 programme. Etc. One factory making 250 handcrafted Rolls Royce a year. Not today.
No. These shells would leave signatures everywhere. So I doubt it was that reading, until exploded.
Drones several big manufactures, several more are starting. Turkey is huge. Iran. But there are far more start ups. Depending on types. I don't like getting into this topic. Read between the lines and use your head. Or literally watch documentaries about how stuff works.
No, it's trajectory, let's suggest a few launchers are covering an area, creating a field of fire, they are possibly being detonated like flashbangs, or countermeasures, prior to collision, the explosion causes the incoming missile to be brought down, and also firing off all the rockets to stop one. Literally what they did. Then they inserted fictious numbers of what they downed. Because they're begging for more rockets. They emptied out dozens of rockets depleting their supply, it takes how long to reload. Then they claimed they shot down loads with them. Honk.
Outside of this is the trajectory and tracking their signature. Now all the press is claiming the Russian scientists who made the hypersonics committed treason. It means they sold off key blueprints, causing competing systems to identify them. Now the trajectory is being calibrated by opposing anti-aircraft?
I am inclined to agree with radioactive something left larger atmosphere traces. I am not sure why the reading spiked prior to the explosions. How are encased shells radioactive? The debate was and is they leave traces on firing and impact. In a shell being handled and loaded, how, sounds real stupid. But exploded can possibly leave readings if that's what it was there?
Debate on artillery systems, Russia has been superior in this conflict. Look at map. But it doesn't mean much if it's just an artillery war.
Factories producing munitions and armaments are faster increasing their outputs globally for both sides.
My point was and is Nato have also been upgrading. There are much larger orders outside of the charity donations. Examples of unlimited or billions spent on rockets and ammo and drones. So what's building them? If they empty out stocks giving them to charity. They're replacing them with what. Same stock or upgrades?
The narrative is always drivel. I don't know who invents it. It's always nonsense. When a war is not directly involved but is driven by narratives. It becomes problem. Because it contains only lies. The warfare is undeniable. Except when it's not directly involved in. It's the word of mouth, he slew the mighty beast, no no no, he slew the entire Russian army. Fuck off Ukraine.
Yep. The problem is news networks and press outlets turning everything into propaganda instead of objectively airing facts.
You can understand this from direct involvement, they have reasons like morale, and seeking aid and funding, but not from other national channels and papers.
It has become absolute garbage. Just a bunch of bullshit. Constant never ending reports, stories, articles where what few facts there are, have been seeped in constant lies. Because Ukraine has drawn a narrative of unquestionable dogma. It is almost entirely bullshit.
The entire projection is based on a what if, if it could win. Those other facts speak for themselves.
Ironically warfare doesn't care.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65657621
Stupid. Unreadable. Nonsense. Look below.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65662563
Utter fucking feces. Because the media cannot stop telling lies. It has no restraint when it's bias. In less than half a day. Those headlines change as fickle and folly. No restraint. No fact.
Can somebody air those causalities? Let's speculate from when it claimed Ukraine gained ground there a few days ago. Thousands Ukrainian.
Immediately the counter propaganda then dismisses Wagner, no troops left, something something, airing its shitspewer. I don't even think they factually know who they are. Not linking it.