Minus Russian propaganda, what's the real story on the Ukraine?

[Johnny Brass]

So you don't know where to find a balanced news source for what's happening daily in the Ukraine....but you do know that the media coverage now is one sided based on events like that of the Maidan Revolution?? So the obvious question is where are you getting your information from to form the views you have....because if its all based on a hunch then what you actually have is just a conspiracy theory.

Re the Maidan Revolution- In 2014 the Ukrainian government voted in favour of a free trade agreement with the EU. Now for "some reason" the Ukrainian President decided he would override that and instead sign the agreement with Russian aligned Eurasian Union. Knowing how Russia works it was obvious to the people of Ukraine that the president had bowed down to pressure from Russia, so they took it to the streets protesting for months. The President responded by making protests illegal, which when you look at whats happening to the anti war protests in Russia today, it pretty obvious where he got that idea from! That decision to make protests illegal just poured fuel on the fire....and the Ukrainian president fled to surprise surprise Russia,where he was very much welcomed and still resides today. Easy to see the protesters were right about where the presidents loyalty lay

Of course if the then Ukrainian president had executed the will of the parliament,and that of the people, and signed the free agreement with the EU then you wouldn't even have to debate on where and who fired bullets in the protests.

Its also very obvious by the events of the last 2 weeks that the Ukrainians are never going to accept the Russians on their land. When they capture Kiev their battle has just begun.
Putin has miscalculated the strength of the commitment within the members of the EU and in fact he has made them even more unified to each other. Further to that they are even more committed to decreasing their reliance and exposure to Russia's exports like gas. So what has he achieved?

There's a good doco on Netflix called Winter of Fire about the Maidan Revolution.

[Paddo Colt 61]

Netflix?? I'd guess that makes its narrative pretty much believable.

As I've said many times, my source reading is johnmenadue.com, The Conversation, Crikey and Michael West media. Some Guardian reports are fair but mostly the Guardian runs a pretty conservative line which is why I don't bother to subscribe to it. It took advantage with Assange and has now disowned him.

Conspiracy theories eschew evidence. On the Menadue site, former high rank diplomats and public servants put their reputations on the line.

[Paddo Colt 61]

[QUOTE=Jacks Fur Coat;
Sadly we will never be short of Russian proper gander, or Chinese, or Souths or anti Aussie, whilever the mad fella is allowed to roam free here.

You're far too kind Jax.

All sides in a conflict use propaganda. Identifying the common misuses of English used to be a big part of the Year 11 syllabus. It defined propaganda as a mixture of fact and emotion with the latter playing the major part. Unforch, the great majority of 16/17 years olds had just about zip interest as was also the case with any study of the Constitution or Civics generally.

Most, then and now, are more than happy to tune into moronic commercial media where there is never any coverage of anything worth listening to. Consequently there's little to fall back on intellectually so the gullible mob often buy into that "Straya" rubbish that is so dear to your goodself. I loathe it. Nationalism is an old Conservative ploy which, curiously, seems to work a treat especially with that deplorable mob who managed to find their way to Canberra recently. A good dose of patriotism cures any thought of low wages, government incompetence and who's getting the biggest slice of the GDP pie.

[mightyrooster]

[QUOTE=Paddo Colt 61;n920869]

dentifying the common misuses of English used to be a big part of the Year 11 syllabus.[/B] It defined propaganda as a mixture of fact and emotion with the latter playing the major part. Unforch, the great majority of 16/17 years olds had just about zip interest as was also the case with any study of the Constitution or Civics generally.

Most, then and now, are more than happy to tune into moronic commercial media where there is never any coverage of anything worth listening to. Consequently there's little to fall back on intellectually so the gullible mob often buy into that "Straya" rubbish that is so dear to your goodself. I loathe it. Nationalism is an old Conservative ploy which, curiously, seems to work a treat especially with that deplorable mob who managed to find their way to Canberra recently. A good dose of patriotism cures any thought of low wages, government incompetence and who's getting the biggest slice of the GDP pie.

They still teach it in Year 10 History as my kids recently studied propoganda during the two World Wars, as used by the Australian Government to encourage enlistment, amongst other things. Clearly both sides use propoganda and both sides will only show their version of events. Applies equally to Putin and his little propaganda machine as well, as he tries to justify his little 'military operation' in Ukraine.

[ism22]

[QUOTE=mightyrooster;n920874]

They still teach it in Year 10 History as my kids recently studied propoganda during the two World Wars, as used by the Australian Government to encourage enlistment, amongst other things. Clearly both sides use propoganda and both sides will only show their version of events. Applies equally to Putin and his little propaganda machine as well, as he tries to justify his little 'military operation' in Ukraine.

I think there's a massive difference between differences in perspective/opinion and propaganda that's coming straight from an expansionary dictatorship. In such situations an 'argument to moderation' is always heavily biased towards the aggressors as they're telling a completely fictitious story that justifies having very much intentionally invaded a country in the hope of taking it over by force.

I guess as an example (as I've taught in Japan and Australia)...
- In Australia we over-emphasise the importance of Gallipoli during WWI. That's our folk tale and we stick to it while bugles play in the background and that random guy who's smoked way too many ciggies gets to say 'lest we forget' at the end. Importantly though... media will regularly criticise the government, suggest that less glamorous stories should be celebrated and well hey... we can have these discussions on a public forum (no matter which direction they go on). Yes Fox owns most media outlets and one can argue that ABC / BBC have gotten things wrong. However political angles / personal biases aside, our media's completely open. If you want propaganda, you can go to pm.gov.au for photos of ScoMo posing as the perfect dad, a dude in army gear, an ordinary bloke who drinks beers with tradespersons...etc. You'll also see glorified stories that have been written by his PR team. That's 'propaganda', but the source and motivation are blatantly obvious.

- In Japan, the story is all about peace and how the US should never have used nuclear weapons. While they accept their wrongdoing (and people will know what happened... it isn't forbidden, it's just not celebrated), there's no 'lest we forget' style parades and the like. Media's open (like ours) and the public are able to hold whatever opinions they like.

- China/Russia/North Korea...etc? You'll see cartoon-like proud music and banners depicting their leaders as gods and there's no mention of any fark ups. All inconvenient stories are banned, media is controlled by a fascist dictator and you're gonna be locked up if you have a conversation like this online (I emphasise... with high voltage wires being prodded around your genitals).

---

In short if you were to put the truth on a scale it'd be something like this:


** Fox News**


USA


Australia / Japan

**The unedited, full, hard, objective truth**


Old Europe


South Korea / Singapore


Vietnam / Malaysia / Indonesia / Philippines...etc


















China / Russia



North Korea

---

I speak purely of the governments BTW, not people from these countries in general (who like Australia will range from being absolute fruit-loops to being extremely switched on... those who have no mouth but must speak are usually quite intelligent IMO as they're used to bottling up their thoughts and developing deeper perspective rather than talking absolute bullshyte just because they're allowed to).

[Paddo Colt 61]

[QUOTE=mightyrooster; They still teach it in Year 10 History as my kids recently studied propoganda during the two World Wars, as used by the Australian Government to encourage enlistment, amongst other things. Clearly both sides use propoganda and both sides will only show their version of events. Applies equally to Putin and his little propaganda machine as well, as he tries to justify his little 'military operation' in Ukraine.

You do well MR in keeping an eye on what your children are doing in class. Parental involvement is essential to progress at school.

You also do well in your comment until the final sentence where you qualify your earlier even handedness - your language at that point assumes negative connotations, you write "Putin and his little propaganda machine"and [B]"little military operation".[/B] As usual you accept that there may be far more to things than what the West is serving up but you'll go with it nonetheless.

And -Ism, "expansionary dictatorship" is a prime example of emotive political language. Most importantly it completely ignores context if it's Crimea that you refer to or even the present conflict. I mean it's clear that the US was/is intent in militarising territory right up to the Russian border. Who then is ultimately to blame for this Russian action. In your mind, despite evidence to the contrary it's Russia/China bad, very bad, and USA very good.

Secondly, Putin was elected, as he has been repeatedly - Russia is, thereby, one of your beloved Democracies, not ideal of course but no different to the one which we are currently fretting so much about and which imprisoned the opposition leader and his party. Not too different to the USA either - a Plutocracy where 50% don't bother to vote knowing that nothing changes - one can vote for Capitalist A or B is all.

Your "scale" of media cred is not clear to me but the idea that our media is "open" is ludicrous. You're talking about Murdoch and Co. after all and there is plenty of documentation re his disproportionate power in Australia.

[ism22]

> And -Ism, "expansionary dictatorship" is a prime example of emotive political language.

No, it's a statement of fact.

As noted previously, an argument to moderation when trying to compare open media reporting with the propaganda arm of an expansionary dictatorship is an utter farce. By doing so, you legitimise violent actions as having some sorta credibility.

> Your "scale" of media cred is not clear to me but the idea that our media is "open" is ludicrous. You're talking about Murdoch and Co. after all...

I've put Fox at one end of the scale and North Korea's world of absolute farce at the other end. Our media's influenced by media giants... but you can also read the Guardian, the Monthly or ABC if you want (that or use dangerous, banned sites such as YouTube, Twitter and Facebook to see photos of what's going on in Russia's invasion - hence why they've switched off the internet in Russia). Reliable global sources are biased to some extent, but global media (as opposed to Russia, China and North Korea... which are in pixie land) gets 90% of the facts right. The 10% that's wrong is things like (for example) you can tell the article's written by Paul Keating (who you cite as a source of independence... I wouldn't) or as a lawyer I cringe at the way they've tried to describe how the law works. That is... people from all angles get to share opinions, you KNOW who they are, their agenda/affiliations are clear and sure some tech details can be argued on a professional basis, but it's not all red flags and celebrations of how amazing a single party state is being operated (with anybody who disagrees being locked up in a cell where their genitals keep getting zapped by high voltage torture machines).

This is why your argument to moderation falls over emphatically. You back Russia, China and North Korea and think it's 'emotional' to call them dictatorships. I mean sorry I forgot... the People's Democratic Republic of Korea is a democracy, 100% of people voted for Fatty Kim to be their supreme leader and Fox news, a PR arm of the Australian Government (including both Labor and Liberals) has us all conned into thinking it's a backwards dictatorship. Sorry for being such a sheep, but a key feature of dictatorships is that they have 'elections' where 100% of the people confirm that they back the leader (that or the opposition leader & key members of their movement are all locked up). Saying we're not 'free' in comparison to this is an absolute farce.

[mightyrooster]

[QUOTE=Paddo Colt 61;n920940]

"little military operation".[/B] As usual you accept that there may be far more to things than what the West is serving up but you'll go with it nonetheless.

And -Ism, "expansionary dictatorship" is a prime example of emotive political language. Most importantly it completely ignores context if it's Crimea that you refer to or even the present conflict. I mean it's clear that the US was/is intent in militarising territory right up to the Russian border. Who then is ultimately to blame for this Russian action. In your mind, despite evidence to the contrary it's Russia/China bad, very bad, and USA very good.

Secondly, Putin was elected, as he has been repeatedly - Russia is, thereby, one of your beloved Democracies, not ideal of course but no different to the one which we are currently fretting so much about and which imprisoned the opposition leader and his party. Not too different to the USA either - a Plutocracy where 50% don't bother to vote knowing that nothing changes - one can vote for Capitalist A or B is all.

Your "scale" of media cred is not clear to me but the idea that our media is "open" is ludicrous. You're talking about Murdoch and Co. after all and there is plenty of documentation re his disproportionate power in Australia.

Paddo, I used that last sentence as an example of how Putin uses propaganda. He classified his invasion of Ukraine as a 'special military operation' to 'denazify' and 'demilitarize' Ukraine. That, in normal speak, means to remove the existing powers that be (denazify - some strong EMOTIVE language and visual rhetoric there don't you think - thoughts of big bad scary nazis running the country?) and replace it with what? Anti-nazi democratic Russian symnathisers? Also to 'demilitarize' (another strong EMOTIVE visual image) the existing regime. Is this not a use of propaganda in the same way the US claimed they were 'searching for weapons of mass destruction' to justify their little operation in Iraq? If you can see US propaganda so clearly why do you fail to see the propaganda of Russia and Putin?

[mightyrooster]

[QUOTE=ism22;n920904]

I think there's a massive difference between differences in perspective/opinion and propaganda that's coming straight from an expansionary dictatorship. In such situations an 'argument to moderation' is always heavily biased towards the aggressors as they're telling a completely fictitious story that justifies having very much intentionally invaded a country in the hope of taking it over by force.

I guess as an example (as I've taught in Japan and Australia)...
- In Australia we over-emphasise the importance of Gallipoli during WWI. That's our folk tale and we stick to it while bugles play in the background and that random guy who's smoked way too many ciggies gets to say 'lest we forget' at the end. Importantly though... media will regularly criticise the government, suggest that less glamorous stories should be celebrated and well hey... we can have these discussions on a public forum (no matter which direction they go on). Yes Fox owns most media outlets and one can argue that ABC / BBC have gotten things wrong. However political angles / personal biases aside, our media's completely open. If you want propaganda, you can go to pm.gov.au for photos of ScoMo posing as the perfect dad, a dude in army gear, an ordinary bloke who drinks beers with tradespersons...etc. You'll also see glorified stories that have been written by his PR team. That's 'propaganda', but the source and motivation are blatantly obvious.

- In Japan, the story is all about peace and how the US should never have used nuclear weapons. While they accept their wrongdoing (and people will know what happened... it isn't forbidden, it's just not celebrated), there's no 'lest we forget' style parades and the like. Media's open (like ours) and the public are able to hold whatever opinions they like.

- China/Russia/North Korea...etc? You'll see cartoon-like proud music and banners depicting their leaders as gods and there's no mention of any fark ups. All inconvenient stories are banned, media is controlled by a fascist dictator and you're gonna be locked up if you have a conversation like this online (I emphasise... with high voltage wires being prodded around your genitals).

---

In short if you were to put the truth on a scale it'd be something like this:


** Fox News**


USA


Australia / Japan

**The unedited, full, hard, objective truth**


Old Europe


South Korea / Singapore


Vietnam / Malaysia / Indonesia / Philippines...etc


















China / Russia



North Korea

---

I speak purely of the governments BTW, not people from these countries in general (who like Australia will range from being absolute fruit-loops to being extremely switched on... those who have no mouth but must speak are usually quite intelligent IMO as they're used to bottling up their thoughts and developing deeper perspective rather than talking absolute bullshyte just because they're allowed to).

All governments and political parties use propaganda. Even the 'good guys' use propaganda.

Propaganda - information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view. Call it information management, media management or whatever, it's propaganda. Souffs spread propaganda about the Roosters. They try to make out they are the 'pride' of the league. The Roosters on the other hand are the big, bad, cap cheating rorters who push brown paper bag under the table and have refs in their pockets etc etc. Amazingly, it's been said so often, most non-Roosters fans actually believe it!

The US, Australia, the West, our governments use propaganda to get the public on side to garner support and get them re-elected. - to gain and maintain power. Over the years they have driven fear into people over reds under our beds, the domino effect, weapons of mass destruction, boat people, terrorists, GST, super taxes, inflation, unemployment. I'm sure there's more I've forgotten. I don't see this simply as a difference of opinion or perspective, it is political propaganda.

But as you say, propaganda is a major danger in the hands of an expansionary dictator. What we don't know is what Putin will do next after Ukraine, that is if he even wins the battle there. Is this just about warning the west to keep away from his backyard or does he actually want to expand further and re-create the Russian Empire? It's like how the US claimed if Vietnam fell it would have a domino effect and the rest of the world would become vulnerable to a communist takeover. This was one of their arguments for going in there.

I just don't know how this will end.

[Paddo Colt 61]

[QUOTE=mightyrooster;

Paddo, I used that last sentence as an example of how Putin uses propaganda. He classified his invasion of Ukraine as a 'special military operation' to 'denazify' and 'demilitarize' Ukraine. That, in normal speak, means to remove the existing powers that be (denazify - some strong EMOTIVE language and visual rhetoric there don't you think - thoughts of big bad scary nazis running the country?) and replace it with what? Anti-nazi democratic Russian symnathisers? Also to 'demilitarize' (another strong EMOTIVE visual image) the existing regime. Is this not a use of propaganda in the same way the US claimed they were 'searching for weapons of mass destruction' to justify their little operation in Iraq? If you can see US propaganda so clearly why do you fail to see the propaganda of Russia and Putin?

Maybe you not placed any importance on what has been said about Nazi influence in the Ukraine. I have mentioned its Fascist bent (particularly in the western areas) which manifested itself during WW2 when the first stage of the Holocaust began right there in Ukraine. Going on to 2014, the "coup" was the result of the US backing that same Nazi element which attacked the democratically elected government forcing it to flee to safety. Since then, that same ultra right wing presence has been engaged in the process of persecuting ethnic Russians with the notorious Azov Battalion active with ethnic cleansing in the Donbass region on the Russian border. These Fascist elements are influential in the government there.

Clearly the "Nazi" thing is real, not a fabrication, not propaganda because it is real its eradication is one of Russia's war aims along with demilitarisation. "Demilitarise" is not emotive btw - emotive synonyms might be "enfeeble"or "render helpless" . Demilitarise is an objective descriptor.

[mightyrooster]

I think you are being very selective with your pedantic application of the term Nazi. Also, how do you think Putin would react if another country decided to conduct a special operation in Russia in order to demilitarise it? Would that trigger an emotional reaction from him?

As for my inaccurate use of grammar, I will concede to your superior knowledge. English was not one of my strongest subjects.

[ism22]

> Maybe you not placed any importance on what has been said about Nazi influence in the Ukraine.

Because it's a complete fabrication that was designed to distract from the fact that an expansionary dictatorship has just invaded a neighbouring country (which is never justified, regardless of your newfound strong opinions about the Ukraine's internal politics/leadership).

Love how you're the one asserting we're all cr@p at English and can't identify credible news sources. However, all you can do is regurgitate Russian propaganda as though it's fact rather than fiction.

[A Country Member]

A US point of view from 2.5 years ago. Nov 2019

Why has the US been involving itself in Ukraine’s affairs?

The short but essential answer is Washington’s decision, taken by President Bill Clinton in the 1990s, to expand NATO eastward from Germany and eventually to Ukraine itself. Ever since, both Democrats and Republicans have insisted that Ukraine is a “vital US national interest.” Those of us who opposed that folly warned it would lead to dangerous conflicts with Moscow, conceivably even war. Imagine Washington’s reaction, we pointed out, if Russian military bases began to appear on Canada’s or Mexico’s borders with America. We were not wrong: An estimated 13,000 souls have already died in the Ukrainian-Russian war in the Donbass and some 2 million people have been displaced.

Things are likely to get worse.

They did get worse. It was all so avoidable.

[ism22]

Just confirming... this is all about Russia invading the Ukraine in an attempt to steal the country. This is illegal and it's why lotsa people are getting killed.

PS - Paddo can you please stick to the one account? Thanks mate.

[Paddo Colt 61]

[QUOTE=mightyrooster; I think you are being very selective with your pedantic application of the term Nazi. Also, how do you think Putin would react if another country decided to conduct a special operation in Russia in order to demilitarise it? Would that trigger an emotional reaction from him?
As for my inaccurate use of grammar, I will concede to your superior knowledge. English was not one of my strongest subjects.

No MR, your language usage is very good.

The effective teaching of writing has largely gone to pot in modern schools though kids now read a lot more (on devices). Young teachers (and most older ones) don't know how to approach writing improvement systematically while also focusing on the strengths and weaknesses of individuals in a class of 30. As things are, most sit the HSC with the writing skill that they brought from primary. It yet remains to be seen whether the increased reading on devices shows up in Naplan literacy scores.

Fascism (or Nazism) is not difficult to define. Its characteristics are extreme nationalism (xenophobia), racist attitudes, anti Left phobia (because the Left is Internationalist), authoritarian and anti Democratic - the individual is subservient to the Fascist state.

The Nazi party was Fascist but the attitude didn't die out with them, the philosophy has endured for millennia - The Fasces was the symbol of the Roman state.

The social nucleus of Fascism is the lower middle class - the petty bourgeoisie - small business, farmers, tradies. People of modest education but big material aspirations who are interested in their own betterment but are often disappointed. Looking for scapegoats they focus on Unions that prevent (or try to prevent) labour exploitation), progressive government, minorities and external "enemies".

Fascism also appeals to the upper class - anti communist themselves but educated and often unwilling to support the extremism of the Petty Burgers they nonetheless seek to use those grievances to their own purposes - Johnny Howard and his tacit support for One Nation (a classic Fascist manifestation).

The dumber elements of the working class can also be attracted to it despite the fact that there's nothing in it for them - dumb xenophobia, confusion, gullibility and a militaristic talisman like ANZAC all help.

Finally, we're now seeing how "Russia would react if another country decided....to demilitarise it" - that other country is the US via its proxy, Ukraine and Russia has responded emphatically.