Axel Springer cares fuck all about anything other than their profits, their power in German politics and being a narrative setter.

By saying „they did a very good job, …“ but after the comma instead of explaining, why you think they did a good job, you start a deflection, you immediately discredit yourself as a supposed good faith actor.

Care to try again, FactChecker?

e: oh, you‘re that kind of account. alright, bring it!

Because it’s very likely not real. These are unverifiable, imaginary numbers published by Axel Springer, the worst German journalism has to offer.

In regards to the author, the Bellingcat description says:

He was previously a freelance trainer for Bellingcat.

He is a “a trainer of media professionals specialised in new media, social media and data journalism”, “thought leader” and “visiting lector of Axel Springer Akademie in Berlin” according to this profile. He consults, teaches, sells books about his methods, but does not do investigative reporting himself (as it seems).

So, he’s legit as in that kind of way, sure is involved in stuff. But not neccessarily in a way that boosts his trustworthiness in regards of the journalistic integrity of the reporting done here.

All the students are from Axel Springer‘s trainee program, the notorious publisher known for its misinformation, slandering and yellow press. Absolutely not known for its investigative journalism, that would be a new one. Heavily biased pro capitalist, pro Ukraine, pro Israel.

The story also was published behind a paywall, around two weeks after the analysis from dronewatch.eu debunking almost all the drone sightings.

Although officials in Denmark, Germany and Belgium have repeatedly suggested Russian involvement, the data tells a different story. Only three cases involved confirmed Russian drones — all in countries bordering Ukraine: Poland, Romania and Moldova.

This means that the often-mentioned link to Russian hybrid warfare in Western Europe is still unsubstantiated. And even if, at some point, drones were observed flying in formation — as the Belgian defence minister has claimed several times — that does not automatically point to a state actor.

I press DOUBT.

To be fair, that’s called a coup and it was initiated and supported by the west. Enjoy some in depth reading through the topic page. The BBC (and other mainstream media) sadly is not a trustworthy source for reporting that’s critical of western imperialism and its war efforts (compare to highly partisan Anti-Palestine reporting).

To understand the current US-NATO war against Russia over Ukraine, it is critical to review the background and implications of the 2014 far-right coup in Kiev, which overthrew the pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych. The coup was openly supported by US and European imperialism and implemented primarily by far-right shock troops, such as the Right Sector and the neo-Nazi Svoboda Party.

deleted by creator

What a very civil answer of you. Totally not the behaviour of a ridiculously propagandised teenager, that might have had a few too many low quality vodkas themselves in their short and miserable live.

Wikipedia on the Name of Ukriane

We don’t necessarily disagree, but proclaiming disregard for Ukrainian souvereignty based on the use of a definitive article in an international forum is bad faith conduct. It’s specifically an English thing and a Ukrainian/Russian thing. There are languages that are using the definitve article based on how their languages work and these kind of usages will sometimes transfer into English.

This, again, does not mean what you trying to do, discrediting another user’s opinions or arguments based on an improper use of a foreign language. That is the opposite of civil behaviour.

As a german, I had to actively learn to not use “the” in combination with “Ukraine”. It happened because of a confrontation with clever individuals like you, but that really can be done politely hinting at the proper use in the English language and not by shaming the other person.

(reup, edited out the meany words, lol, because imagine the uncivility that might be caused in this post)

Oh my, so you first accuse someone of spouting propaganda and insult them at the same time, because you don’t like their perspective, all based off of the grammatically wrong use of an article and when you’re being confronted with your shitty behaviour you play victim, because said behaviour is ousted as being the opposite of civil and the kind of people acting like that, which includes you, are being called out as the clever individuals that they are.

Bohooo, poor little ignorant victim you are.

How about you accept, that you behaved like an asshole and throw out an excuse ­- that would be more impressive. But looks like you don’t have the character strength.

An alternative would be to actually provide some kind of arguments as to why the accused’s arguments or opinions are wrong, instead of straight up denouncing them - that would also be more impressive. But looks like you don’t have the intellectual strength.

Get lost, splendid individual.

(edited out some mean words, because of this funny line that is drawn for the very selectively applied civility rule)

Removed by mod

This is dumb. It’s dependant on the mother tongue how and if a definitive article is being used with Ukraine. In German for example, you say “die Ukraine”, and a natural translation into colloquial English results in the use of “the Ukraine”. This doesn’t mean to be a Sergei.

It’s a comparison, not whataboutism. They’re comparing similar things, they’re not trying to shift the discussion somewhere else.

See now, I tried telling you, that you’re whole thought process is taken over by the absolutely normal bias one gets from living a normal live in the west and is only mildly interested in politics. One can only think in the propagandized patterns learned from the ruling system.

Good guy Marx said: “The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class.”

You actively have to break through that, by critically open your mind for different perspectives. Here in this thread has been another conversation that also touches on your appeasement critique, I recommend you read the very thoughtful commentary of @Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com from this comment on downwards, it’s not that much and while they’re in discussion with someone else, they’re explaining it better and calmer, than I’m able to. Have a good day.

Lol, are you?

Alright, this answer has a lot of questions. They are rhetorical, tho, I want you to ask yourself these kind of questions and think about their implications. I’m not going to keep discussing this, I’d rather stop wasting my time on randos on the internet, but alas, here we go.

The long term efficient thing is to support Ukraine and continue to wear down and embarrass russia.

To what end? Have Russia collapse? Then what happens? And why do you want that? Do you want that, because you think they are evil and a shithole country? Don’t you think that’s a dumb take? What happens with the civilians, do they have it coming?

The long term efficient thing is to not be in a constant state of war. Ask: Who benefits from a constant state of war?

If russia is allowed to expand based on violent expansionism, it will only be encouraged to do more

Would considering NATOs expansionism be marked as Russian propaganda for you? If so, why? NATO is a military alliance lead by the world hegemon, which is a hyper-aggressive bully on the world stage, projecting its power with more then 800 bases around the globe and attacks other sovereign nations at will, as a standard mode of operation; NATO countries like the USA, the UK and Germany are complicit in the abhorrent genocide against the Palestinian people; why are these nations the ones to decide, at which point they themselves are getting too close to another sovereign state and not the state that’s being cornered by them? And why are they suddenly trustworthy in regards to Ukraine/Russia? Isn’t that creating dissonance in your mind?

and that will cost Europe more in lives and resources in the long run.

It will cost Europe AND Russia more lives of the working class people to keep on fighting a war of attrition. What are they fighting for, do you have a coherent answer? Good versus Evil? Does Russia want to own all of Eurasia? Does Europe only want to “restore order”? Tell me, why you think they are at war, at all, what’s their endgame? And why do ordinary people like you and me have to die for these goals, while the military industry thrives with exploding stocks? And why do these stocks plunge, every single time when peace talks are being held?

Of course, they don’t want to slap russia too hard, or it might have a tantrum and escalate.

Escalate how, nuclear? Because either Russia is too weak to win against Ukraine or it’s such a big danger, that they might invade (western) Europe soon, which is it? They might have a tantrum and escalate, but Europe still wants to keep fighting a war against them. Dunno, seems unreasonable and incoherent.

So the slow bleeding off of its capabilities is the goal.

You don’t think Russia would know this? Why aren’t they just escalating anyway then, or change strategy? You agree, that Ukrainians are bleeding, too, right? Again, ask: Who is the beneficiary?

It really sucks for the Ukrainians, but they clearly would rather fight it, (…)

Who are “they”? The nationalist government? The men being kidnapped off the streets to be sent to the frontlines? Who wants to fight? The people of Luhansk and Donetsk? You don’t think they’d rather be alive, no matter where some random border is and which passport they have? Polls suggest, that the Ukranians are in fact not “clearly” in a mood to fight, anymore, but quite the contrary. Maybe, it’s not the Ukrainians that want to fight. Who does, tho? Who benefits from this?

(…) than become part of the shithole country that russia is.

That’s a value judgement based on your own biases. Why isn’t Ukraine a shithole country, too? Or dunno, Poland, or hell, Germany? And do you think the Russian speaking people from the Donbas region, as well as other regional minorities would rather be part of shithole Ukraine, the country that suppresses their primary language and that were at war with the Ukrainian government since the Maidan in 2014? Or should they all just be executed anyway, as they are Russian traitors to the Ukrainian nationality?

Look, this is tiresome as fuck. I’m not saying Putin a cool guy, alright? I’m not “supporting Ruzzia”, but I seriously think that a lot of you folks here on lemmy.world are only repeating what NATO-aligned media is telling you to think and that’s: WAR WAR WAR. RUSSIA BAD. CHINA BAD. It’s 100 % NATO propaganda. You are not NATO, you are not the capitalist class. You don’t have to identify with these narratives. You will not benefit from this.

You are not going to defend “your way of life”. The capitalist class is defending theirs. All there is for you is misery, stop cheering for the war machine, it’s dumb.

Stop repeating NATO propaganda, these are the voices of the war ministers!^a

NATO is already attacking Russia/China^b with their hybrid war. The capitalist system^c is pushing all these far right movements in Europe and the rest of the world. The US and its allies also attacked critical infrastrucure e.g. the north stream pipeline, the Ras Issa Port in Yemen^d, Iranian nuclear sites^e and send their drones everywhere and keep killing civilians^f. Also the US sends killers into wherever the fuck they want to kill certain individuals^g. The USA needs to feel that it can no longer do this without consequence. Europe needs to chill and leave NATO, asap.

a) Youtube: Der heimliche Aufmarsch
b) Center for Strategic and International Studies: Pivot to China
c) Science & Society, Vol. 83, No. 2, April 2019, 481–509: Global Capitalist Crisis and Twenty-First Century Fascism: Beyond the Trump Hype
d) Human Rights Watch: Yemen: US Strikes on Port an Apparent War Crime
e) Wikipedia: United States strikes on Iranian nuclear sites
f) Wikipedia: Civilian casualties from the United States drones strikes
g) Wikipedia: List of assassinations by the United States

Nice argument.

All countries are the baddies from some perspective.

It was an invitation to reflect your deranged yapping about what is morally correct and who deserves what. You’re basing your moral perspectives off of western propaganda and are unable to see through it, because you don’t even try. But morals, as I mentioned, are not part of the decision tree of imperial war efforts.

The most efficient thing to do, would be to do any and everything to stop the killing. Europe’s capitalist class is not interested in that. But me telling you that probably triggers some kind of brainrot accusation of being a Russian bot from you. Breath, don’t, I’m not, chill.

You sniffed the NATO stuff a bit too hard and fell off the deep end, my friend. Off to the front you go. It’s the only morally correct thing for you to do.

Europe is not going to defend a sovereign state. Europe is not defending itself as you understand it. Europe consistently pushes for us/them.

it was Russians who made themselves the morally corrupt ‘them’ by killing people in Europe.

Geopolitics is not about morals. But I’m sure Rheinmetall is happy to hear your perspective.

Are we the baddies?

So, it’s still in Europe. What’s your point, other then division? Stop with this us/them shit, stop supporting warmongering narratives. Geography is not interested in this bullshit and you shouldn’t be, either.

Russia is still in Europe no matter how you spin it.