If I were the boss of NATO I would have said 3 years ago that any drones flying closer than 100 km to Ukraine’s border with NATO is a red line and if crossed, NATO troops will be moved into Ukraine to provide air defense there and secure NATO airspace before anything “accidentally” crosses into it. This would give me a loophole to put NATO troops on the ground in Ukraine, helping with logistics and securing weapon transports while not participating in the conflict or any offensive operations. The next red line would be that if any of those troops are attacked by Russia NATO would start supporting offensive operations as well. Sadly NATO chose instead to do nothing. Not 3 years ago nor today. They just say “it’s not nice and one day we may do something about it”.
This is a good idea, but they probably didn’t do it to avoid hurting any fat orange fee fees.
and if crossed, NATO troops will be moved into Ukraine to provide air defense there and secure NATO airspace before anything “accidentally” crosses into it
Great way to use a relatively cheap drone to cause NATO to spend big money on troop and air defense deployments. If you want to do asymmetric warfare, you want the costs to be the other way around.
NATO is already spending this money. They send Patriots and shitload of other equipment to Ukraine. They pretty much provide all the air defense to Ukraine, they just do it indirectly. They had to train Ukrainian troops to use NATO systems and they don’t control the supply chain once it crosses the border. That’s why they were providing more advanced weapons very gradually - they were worried were those will end up once they hand them over. Having NATO troops inside Ukraine but hundredths kilometers from the front lines would let them provide crucial support without excessive risk. Or may have stopped Russia from striking targets deep in Ukraine.
Russia was coming up with new red lines all the time. They said that if long range missiles will be provided to Ukraine they will start using ballistic missiles and they did. What red lines did NATO came up with? None. Russian drones are now regularly crossing into NATO air space and NATO still has no idea how to react.
noice
Isn’t in this sub propaganda forbidden or only matters when the propaganda is from Russia? I get bombarded daily and it’s becoming a bit ridiculus, especially because the level is really low. Is this a place for news or for people to push their own favourite propaganda outlet? I would understand if it was from reliable sources, but jeusus anything posted from a .ua domain seems to be allowed no matter what. Feels like being on reddit.
Sorry to interject, but the Ukrainian News Network is an independent outlet that exists since 2007, is one of the 10 most visited sites in Ukraine, and both the founder and the Editor in Chief have (after a quick check, let me know if you have evidence to refute that) no obvious connections to anything political.
The Article itself is also pretty factual. Romanias military has the same issue that other militaries have: Russian soldiers are undertrained if they were trained at all, drones are cheap, therefore some dumb guy in a hole in the ground loses his heading and crosses into the airspace of another nation. The default methods to shoot aerial threats down are not cheap. AIM-9X is expensive and so are fighter jet flight hours.
I propose to Romania the same thing Ukraine is doing: get a good Turboprop with a pilot and a gunner, and shoot them down WW I-style. It doesn’t get much cheaper than that.
Edit: just to save you the read (although it might be worth it), this chuds main complaint seems to be that russian propaganda isn’t as liked as ukrainian news which might contain propaganda. Either ignore or block him, like i did after this useless exchange.
The only problem with this approach could be, if the drone carries an AAM.
Yeah, i read that some of the Shaheds have been upgraded with anti-air munitions. There’s not much you can do except use interceptor drones or a missile of your own - at least in the last case it’s a 1:1 trade in Anti-Air missiles, making it financially sensible.
Also anti air guns (think Gepard or modern variants) or lasers - there was a talk about UK providing Ukraine a prototype, but then nothing afterwards.
My criticism is not about the news outlet itself, even if, as the earlier responder to my comment pointed out, they make bold and unsourced claims, which is bad journalism practice, even if very common nowadays. My point is that every day this sub is bombarded with news about the war coming from ukrainian outlets, which will be of course extremely partial, as they have to be if they want to keep writing under martial law. I never see a russian domain posting news here because they would be rightfully considered unreliable. I’m amazed that instead every single ukrainian website is allowed here even if it’s clear propaganda (euromaidanpress the worst offender) that uses as sources almost exclusively communication from the government or the state apparatus. We are being bombarded with one sided news that come directly from the Ukrainian state. That’s not less propaganda because we are sympathetic with the country that it’s producing it.
I just hoped that at least here there would be more attention, care and quality of the discussion.
I understand that we all are targets of propaganda. But the facts laid down in the article are just common sense for everyone that has interest in military things. Russia doesn’t care (they didn’t even before the war - intruding into NATO airspace to measure reaction times was a common occurrence back then, although i am sure NATO did something similar), drones are cheap and violate airspace, Air-to-Air Missiles cost 10-100 times what the drone costs.
I can’t see your earlier responder, which means he is from the fully Putin-pilled .ml instances - the only thing outside of a handful of single users i have on my blocklist. I don’t see what he wrote, but I advise you to take whatever they told you with a grain of salt - these are the instances that have proven themselves again and again as authoritarian sockpuppets.
I follow what happens on the battlefield in Ukraine on the regular, and the difference between the two sides is sourcing. If Ukraine claims to have destroyed an armored assault (just as they did 2 days ago), you get video evidence of the whole thing delivered with it. (could still be faked, i agree). Russia on the other side claims they have taken over Kostyantynivka months ago - such claims simply do not survive contact with reality, because in that case they would be hitting their own positions with glide bombs on purpose.
This leads to an easily understandable consequence: If one side only lies (or has delusions), and the other side tries to be as transparent as they can in a war situation, independent reporting will take communication from Ukraine a lot more serious than the unverifiable lies the Kremlin produces. Add to this that free press in Russia is defacto non-existent (the so called “mil-bloggers” of russia are very often FSB assets and just another arm of the Kremlins propaganda machinery designed to collect data on the most dangerous part of civilians to the regime - those that are interested in the war and might disagree with it), while it definitely exists in Ukraine; This situation makes russian sources nearly unusable.
It is not the fault of Ukrainian news outlets that Russian reporting can’t be used to offer a different viewpoint - that well was poisoned by Putins clique themselves.
You are still presenting a very partial viewpoint, where Ukrainian outles are considered fair and attempting to be transparent while the other sode doesn’t. I’m very interested and study “military things” and i have studied this conflict for about 7 years now, so i hope i can bring a useful viewpoint. If you actually want to study a conflict or conflicts in general, it’s fundamental to be as close as poasible to the sources and unserstand the problem of uncritically accepting the viewpoint coming from one of the two belligerants. Labelling people from an entire instance “putinist” is already a red flag for me. I’ve been called putinist a million time just because i invite people to have a more accademic and historical-based approach to this and other conflicts. My opinion of Putin doesn’t seem to interest to anyone, if i don’t glorify Ukraine and agree with every piece of propaganda they push, i’m definitely with the ebemy.
A great example is the Institute for the study of war, which is the main source for western media about Ukraine. They are a huge propaganda machine that sell themselves as neutral but it’s an absolutely pro-ukraine source. I read their reports almost daily and they tought me a great deal of the power of propaganda in war times. A great example is the recent worldwide celebration for Russia apparently not gaining as much terrain as they used to and even Ukrain gaining some. This is all over the news, but when you go look it up you find out that this reversion on the battlefield happen when the ISW added a new item to their maps: “russian infiltrations”. Now if they see only few soldiers advancing in an area is not considered an advancement, but an infiltration, which doesn’t get reported in the maps (edit: i meant to say in the final calculation of the kilometers lost/gained, not maps). No newspaper seems to be interested in pointing this out to clarify the data they give us, the same way as nobody mention that the sources of the ISW are for the almost totality either the Ukrainian defense ministry or telegram channels affiliated with combating units. None of these sources will give reliable or objective information.
I understand not trusting russian news, i don’t trudt them either, but i found way more interesting to stufy the discrepancies in the sources we are presented as reliable.
Dude, the allegiance of the .ml instances to Putins and Xi’s authoritarianism is not some kind of secret or a bias of mine, it’s been in the open for years now and is well documented. Look it up at [email protected] - it’s mostly not even worth posting about it anymore there because it’s simply a matter of fact and expected of them. Still, i have to recognize that the lemmy devs, even if they are seemingly incapable of separating funds for lemmy.ml and lemmy development, keep the politics out of the platform itself - i applaud them for that, even if their financial decisions mean i cannot provide funds for them.
Lets switch it up: What other viewpoint would you like to be represented? The reporting i watch is very critical about the situation regarding Fedorov getting removed, it’s calling out drone strikes on gas stations in russia with civilians present as war crimes, it’s calling for investigations into the corruption that seems to surround Zelensky. It doesn’t get more transparent than that in a war situation.
It doesn’t get more transparent than that in a war situation.
But all the things you listed don’t seem to have anything to do with the progress in the battlefield, but more with the politics that surround them. There are way more diverse interests when it comes to that. It’s not as important as showing Ukraine as the winning part in the war, which is fundamental to keep the public opinion on their side and therefor continue the stream of funds and armaments toward Ukraine.
I don’t know what reporting you “watch” i just hope it’s not some random youtuber, but instead you are using accademical sources or at least their methodology.
What other viewpoint would you like to be represented?
Don’t get me wrong. Anyone who studied history and a bit of military history know that propaganda from both sides is core to every single conflict that ever happened in the world. It’s natural and expected that Ukrainian propaganda is pushed ad nauseam to all allies countries in the conflict. This worked very well, because if you dare to doubt it you are immediately called a putinist, so the conversation die there. Look at propaganda posters from WWI and WWII of all sides and you will see a lot of similarities with today’s narrative or even better, look how Napoleon was presented in european propaganda in the 19th century.
Personally, i would really like that people would learn how to inform themselves, and i would like that more voice would be given to accademic experts or people that study war for a living. Instead we hear only politicians and what is convenient to hear: a lot of drones appear across Europe, everyone immediately assume they are Russian and that’s what get pushed in the news for days, but then when the military apparatus (so relatively disconnected from the political goals of the country) of some of the most anti-russian countries, like Latvia and Poland, say that the drones are actually almost entirely Ukranians, that information get posted only on specialised outlets or maximum a couple of lines in a single newspaper to never be mentioned again. Nobody seems also to care that several intelligence agencies of multiple countries (again Poland and Latvia in primis) keep saying that there are no signs of Russian preparing an attack to Europe, but still, this is not the message that we receive by our politicians and news, because it’s not politically convenient. Instead anything that gives the feeling that Russia could attack europe any second get amplified out of proportions. Isn’t the aim more than clear there?
People are not making informed choices and the information they receive is carefully crafted to go in a single direction. As i said this has been normal in every conflict that ever happend. Also the thing of thinlking ours is good propaganda and theirs is bad propaganda is regular stuff during a war. I’m personally very worried because nuclear war is right behind the corner.
Ok, i took your word until now, now i want proof.
there are no signs of Russian preparing an attack to Europe
It is a fact that Russia has been attacking and influencing the politics of it’s neighbors for the last decades, and dark money channels to far right parties in many EU countries have been exposed; It’s hard to believe that they didn’t eye the possibility of grabbing land of european countries before they got bogged down in Ukraine.
like Latvia and Poland, say that the drones are actually almost entirely Ukranians
For this i demand Sources. You seem to have them, so it shouldn’t be an issue to provide?
Also, I started out with the superior sourcing of battlefield reports, and then delivered evidence to support that there are youtubers with millions of subscribers out there that are critical of what is happening in ukraine, even if they still want them to win. I covered both the political arena and the battlefield itself.
Sadly, you‘ll hardly find the discussion you‘re longing for on here.
lemmy.world has an extreme western bias and is intolerant towards voices critical of the west.
Whatever narrative is the currently one preferred from the Zeitgeist, will get (partially pro-actively) amplified here. Arguing for the genocidal practices of Israel and excusing any kind of support from US and European states is still accepted. Being critical, doubtful or in opposition to the Ukraine war is frowned upon and will get you called names.
Repeating islamophobe, sinophobe and russophobe stereotypes is part of the etiquette.You must have magical vision because none of those things are in this article or the comments here.
Yes, I’m a Magician, let me try summoning some of this stuff with this spell:
The Ukraine war is a proxy war between NATO and Russia with the sole purpose to weaken Russia as long as it needs for the Europeans to militarize and take up Russia on their own. The Ukrainian people will have to suffer as long as it takes, as several US and European politicians have acknowledged. This is the goal, so the US can focus on the indo-pacific and ultimately, together encircle China, the main enemy, as stated in the US National Security Strategy papers 2022 and 2026. But alas, accepting that US and EU are the problem for world peace would also mean dropping the nationalist rose glasses. Or actually reading this kind of stuff.Now provide your reasonable reaction.
You realize that Russia started the war, right? I agree that it is used by Western nations to get a shot at weakening Russia now that it’s going and that the US does not want peace but neither does Russia
Okay, cool. You also realize that war is an ultima ratio, right? You surely also agree, that history didn’t start on 24 February 2022 or February 2014. Man this feels like “history didn’t start on Oct 7th” all over again. Do you also agree, that the US and the EU did have geopolitical agendas and plans long before the Krim was annexed and do you also agree, that these plans where worked at and pushed for in the real world? And could these plans involve forcing Russia into a situation where they either have NATO military on their main border towards Western Europe or act to protect their sphere of influence?
Or – do you want to tell me, that US/EU only started acting after Russia involved itself physically in Ukraine?
I hope you get lots of upvotes!
The only reasonable response to this is to ignore it.
You‘re proving my point.
The Ukraine war is a proxy war between NATO and Russia with the sole purpose to weaken Russia as long as it needs for the Europeans to militarize and take up Russia on their own
Yes, it’s all NATO’s fault that Russia decided to invade Ukraine.
Fuck off.
First off, noone aquitted Russia of their guilt, so stfu with this leap of logic. Second, stop being so whiney, NATO isn’t your Daddy.
Is your problem with the news site or the article in particular? Because the only part of the article that I’d complain about is:
At the same time, the Romanian Armed Forces will not be able to sustain this level of expenditure in the long term if Russian drones continue to violate the country’s airspace as frequently.
What’s the source of this claim? The overall assessment seems OK to me. NATO forces are regularly using high cost ammunitions to shoot down cheap drones. In the long term that’s a problem.
Romania doesn’t have the same amount of money the USA has for shooting millions of dollar of ammo to drones. Sounds right to me without sources.
Both, but i have a problem with the fact that propaganda is not supposed to be allowed here, but i see daily streams of dubious websites pushing bold and completely unsourced claims. I feel that they are allowed because that’s the propaganda people like. I really hope i would find conversations of higher level around here, but so far it has been quite disappointing
