Do you think there's a pro-Ukrainain bias in news of the War?

Here, in the West, the Russians are the bad guys, and the Ukrainians are the good guys. They're all these stories about poor underfed, undertrained, underclothed, underweaponised Russian troops losing every battle, and the plucky, wily Ukrainians winning them all. My question is how much of the coverage is biased, and plain wishful thinking? I saw an article by a US general in the 2nd Iraq War predict the outcome of the Ukraine War. Yeah, right. The press hailed the Iraq War as supposedly a textbook way to win a war till it blew up in everybody's face, and went south. So, which is it bias or truth?
 

Here, in the West, the Russians are the bad guys, and the Ukrainians are the good guys. They're all these stories about poor underfed, undertrained, underclothed, underweaponised Russian troops losing every battle, and the plucky, wily Ukrainians winning them all. My question is how much of the coverage is biased, and plain wishful thinking? I saw an article by a US general in the 2nd Iraq War predict the outcome of the Ukraine War. Yeah, right. The press hailed the Iraq War as supposedly a textbook way to win a war till it blew up in everybody's face, and went south. So, which is it bias or truth?
I think they are, but it's because Ukraine is the underdog victims and Russia is the bad guys, the big bad wolf.
 

I'm sure the "Western" press favors the Ukraine position. However, I think Putin made a major "miscalculation" with his attack....he probably expected a quick win, and that has not happened. Huge numbers of his troops and equipment have been destroyed, and there is No end in sight. The longer this drags on, and the more aid that the Western nations send to Ukraine, the more "frustrated" he may become.

This "damage" to his image may cause him to escalate his efforts beyond Ukraine, and lead to a real mess for the entire world. The Only solution I see is for the Russians to "dethrone" him....but, that would certainly push him "over the edge". I just hope the Russians have a policy in place that would prevent him from pushing the "Nuclear Button".

https://www.yahoo.com/news/putin-secure-power-sets-stage-050155272.html
 
Last edited:
I think that the media in general are going to be sympathetic to the victims of ruthless aggression, so yes- probably some bias.

Ultimately I believe the Ukraine will be crippled and crushed to the point of no longer being able to defend themselves against Putin.
I agree that the media is taking sides, but I doubt the US will allow Ukraine to be crushed. The US wants a Ukrainian victory, and they'll make sure that happens. But the US seems to be trying it's best to avoid violating the Geneva Convention and keep within the limitations of all the agreements we've signed since 1991.

The reasons I think this is because I believe the US has already earmarked funds for reparations in Ukraine, already drawn up contracts for massive reconstruction projects there and even has a list of construction companies that might get these contracts, and are already discussing locations for US military bases and villages in Ukraine.

I'm guessing Zelenskyy isn't 100% pleased with these "concessions" because he'd rather work with France and/or Germany, and wishes it was one or more of the Baltic states or Poland. He doesn't want an American Ukraine. But he doesn't have much choice; I don't think Ukraine can defeat Russia without help from the US.
 
Do you think there's a pro-Ukrainain bias in news of the War?
Yes, and for some of the reasons already stated.

The news media has always liked a simple story, black and white, good vs evil. Of course the real world doesn't work that way, but most media outlets don't even attempt to provide the kind of detail needed to really understand things. And in this case with Putin's help they have a pretty good bad guy.
 
Last edited:
Here, in the West, the Russians are the bad guys, and the Ukrainians are the good guys. They're all these stories about poor underfed, undertrained, underclothed, underweaponised Russian troops losing every battle, and the plucky, wily Ukrainians winning them all. My question is how much of the coverage is biased, and plain wishful thinking? I saw an article by a US general in the 2nd Iraq War predict the outcome of the Ukraine War. Yeah, right. The press hailed the Iraq War as supposedly a textbook way to win a war till it blew up in everybody's face, and went south. So, which is it bias or truth?
The press was silenced in Ukraine before this started, however, Russia did invade and they're getting whipped in more often then not. However they have taken key points and they're shooting for the Donobas region.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/19/why-does-russia-want-the-donbas-region-so-much.html
 
I think that the media in general are going to be sympathetic to the victims of ruthless aggression, so yes- probably some bias.

Ultimately I believe the Ukraine will be crippled and crushed to the point of no longer being able to defend themselves against Putin.
I believe you are right. Even with the new tanks they are getting, Russia has a missile that will turn out their lights. The tanks are made not far from where I live and I went over to see it and also to watch them load the first one onto a rail car. It was a big deal in the local newspaper in the next County over and I thought it wouldn’t be many people there, but when I got there, I think there may have been close to a 1000 people that wanted to get a look at it. I couldn’t get close enough to get a picture. Dog-gone it anyway.
 
Here, in the West, the Russians are the bad guys, and the Ukrainians are the good guys. They're all these stories about poor underfed, undertrained, underclothed, underweaponised Russian troops losing every battle, and the plucky, wily Ukrainians winning them all. My question is how much of the coverage is biased, and plain wishful thinking? I saw an article by a US general in the 2nd Iraq War predict the outcome of the Ukraine War. Yeah, right. The press hailed the Iraq War as supposedly a textbook way to win a war till it blew up in everybody's face, and went south. So, which is it bias or truth?

Seems black and white to me.
 
I'm sure the "Western" press favors the Ukraine position. However, I think Putin made a major "miscalculation" with his attack....he probably expected a quick win, and that has not happened. Huge numbers of his troops and equipment have been destroyed, and there is No end in sight. The longer this drags on, and the more aid that the Western nations send to Ukraine, the more "frustrated" he may become. This "damage" to his image may cause him to escalate his efforts beyond Ukraine, and lead to a real mess for the entire world. The Only solution I see is for the Russians to "dethrone" him....but, that would certainly push him "over the edge". I just hope the Russians have a policy in place that would prevent him from pushing the "Nuclear Button".

https://www.yahoo.com/news/putin-secure-power-sets-stage-050155272.html
My thoughts exactly! He thought it would be a quick win that would solidify his image, but instead it backfired and now he's looking worse and worse, weaker and weaker. Pretty soon he will act out of desperation. He needs to be dethroned asap! Someone needs to slip something into his coffee or something. Otherwise he's going to plunge the whole world into a huge mess. :oops:
 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ear-bombers-Norwegian-Sea-north-Scotland.html

Russia has flown two supersonic nuclear bombers over the Norwegian Sea, to the north of Shetland, in a stark warning to the West.

It comes hours after Vladimir Putin deployed his strategic aircraft over the Bering Sea, the body of water separating the US state of Alaska and Russia's far-east.

The moves are seen as a display of military strength to the West as Russia prepares to mark the first anniversary of the disastrous war in Ukraine on February 24.

The giant Tu-160 White Swan flights follow ominous warnings from the Putin regime and its propagandists over the use of nuclear weapons if he loses the conventional war.

It comes as NATO defence ministers meet in Brussels this week to discuss Russia's ongoing war in Ukraine, and their commitment to defence spending.

Putin is enraged at the West's supplies of weapons to Ukraine.

His war has cost the lives of more than 100,000 Russians, it is estimated.

Earlier this week, two NATO fighter jets scrambled to intercept a formation of three Russian military aircraft near the Poland border.

Two Dutch F-35 fighters subsequently escorted the Russian planes out of the region, the Netherlands' defence ministry said in a statement late on Monday.

'The then unknown aircraft approached the Polish NATO area of responsibility from Kaliningrad,' the ministry said.
 
I believe there is bias in the war news that we hear in the USA, but I prefer to call it by its proper name propaganda and psychological warfare. Both sides of the war the Russians and the Ukrainians are deeply into the propaganda and psychological warfare. Which is nothing new, it happens all the time.
 

Do you think there's a pro-Ukrainain bias in news of the War?​

Duh, yeah. You can discuss and guess all about what is being lied about Ukraine and how the Russians (Booooooo!) are the bad guys but I've been to Ukraine. That is a suck-ass country that doesn't take care of its own population so to think the Russians are destroying a wonderful nation of "good guys" is BS, with ... capital letters.
 
My thoughts exactly! He thought it would be a quick win that would solidify his image, but instead it backfired and now he's looking worse and worse, weaker and weaker. Pretty soon he will act out of desperation. He needs to be dethroned asap! Someone needs to slip something into his coffee or something. Otherwise he's going to plunge the whole world into a huge mess. :oops:
Yes I entirely agree, this is the real worry. I absolutely believe unless he's stopped he will act out of desperation, and if it's true about his failing health, he'll possibly want to go out in a Blaze of warped Glory...
 
Haha, what a blatant cop-out. You mentioned this, not me. As I suspected, mere propaganda.
No, it was you who "mentioned it". You said (and I responded to) "I think that the media in general are going to be sympathetic to the victims of ruthless aggression", but here you are talking to me about "mere propaganda" and accusing me of using it just because I disagree with you. You've made a big mistake but it's not your fault because I set the trap and you fell into it. The bottom line is that you are a victim of your own propaganda but you haven't figured it out yet. Do you want to know more? I'm ready if you think you can take it. :giggle:
 
free-reign Nazi groups of Ukrainis victimizing the population, particularly the ethnic Russians.

...apparently you're ashamed of your "news" sources, so I'm Googling. Here is a defining article:

"
Putin's claim of fighting against Ukraine 'neo-Nazis' distorts history, scholars say


Russian President Vladimir Putin invoked World War II to justify Russia's invasion of Ukraine, saying in televised remarks last week that his offensive aimed to "denazify" the country — whose democratically elected president is Jewish, and lost relatives in the Holocaust.

"The purpose of this operation is to protect people who for eight years now have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kyiv regime," he said, according to an English translation from the Russian Mission in Geneva. "To this end, we will seek to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation."

Russian officials have continued to employ that rhetoric in recent days.

Russia's Foreign Ministry last week accused Western countries of ignoring what it called war crimes in Ukraine, saying their silence "encouraged the onset of neo-Nazism and Russophobia." Russia's envoy to the United Nations reiterated over the weekend that it is carrying out "a special military operation against nationalists to protect the people of Donbass, ensure denazification and demilitarisation."

And Putin has accused "Banderites and neo-Nazis" of putting up heavy weapons and using human shields in Ukrainian cities. Banderites is a term used — often pejoratively — to describe followers of controversial Ukrainian nationalist leader Stepan Bandera, and Ukrainian nationalists in general.

The Russian invasion, and the language of "denazification" as a perceived pretext for it, quickly drew backlash from many world leaders, onlookers and experts alike.

Criticisms of Russia's perceived hypocrisy grew even louder on Tuesday, when Russian strikes hit a memorial to Babyn Yar — the site where Nazis killed tens of thousands of Jews during World War II.

Ukraine's official Twitter account posted a cartoon of Putin and Adolf Hitler gazing lovingly into each others' eyes, writing that "This is not a 'meme,' but our and your reality right now." The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, among others, said Putin "misrepresented and misappropriated Holocaust history."

A lengthy list of historians signed a letter condemning the Russian government's "cynical abuse of the term genocide, the memory of World War II and the Holocaust, and the equation of the Ukrainian state with the Nazi regime to justify its unprovoked aggression."

They pointed to a broader pattern of Russian propaganda frequently painting Ukraine's elected leaders as "Nazis and fascists oppressing the local ethnic Russian population, which it claims needs to be liberated."

And while Ukraine has right-wing extremists, they add, that does not justify Russia's aggression and mischaracterization.
Europe
How Ukraine's history differs from Putin's version

Putin's language is offensive and factually wrong, several experts explain to NPR.

It's a harmful distortion and dilution of history, they say, even though many people appear not to be buying it this time around.

Laura Jockusch, a professor of Holocaust studies at Brandeis University in Massachusetts, told NPR over email that Putin's claims about the Ukrainian army allegedly perpetrating a genocide against Russians in the Donbas region are completely unfounded, but politically useful to him.

"Putin has been repeating this 'genocide' myth for several years and nobody in the West seems to have listened until now," she says. "There is no 'genocide,' not even an 'ethnic cleansing' perpetrated by the Ukraine against ethnic Russians and Russian-speakers in the Ukraine. It is a fiction that is used by Putin to justify his war of aggression on the Ukraine." "
 
...apparently you're ashamed of your "news" sources, so I'm Googling. Here is a defining article:

"
Putin's claim of fighting against Ukraine 'neo-Nazis' distorts history, scholars say


Russian President Vladimir Putin invoked World War II to justify Russia's invasion of Ukraine, saying in televised remarks last week that his offensive aimed to "denazify" the country — whose democratically elected president is Jewish, and lost relatives in the Holocaust.

"The purpose of this operation is to protect people who for eight years now have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kyiv regime," he said, according to an English translation from the Russian Mission in Geneva. "To this end, we will seek to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation."

Russian officials have continued to employ that rhetoric in recent days.

Russia's Foreign Ministry last week accused Western countries of ignoring what it called war crimes in Ukraine, saying their silence "encouraged the onset of neo-Nazism and Russophobia." Russia's envoy to the United Nations reiterated over the weekend that it is carrying out "a special military operation against nationalists to protect the people of Donbass, ensure denazification and demilitarisation."

And Putin has accused "Banderites and neo-Nazis" of putting up heavy weapons and using human shields in Ukrainian cities. Banderites is a term used — often pejoratively — to describe followers of controversial Ukrainian nationalist leader Stepan Bandera, and Ukrainian nationalists in general.

The Russian invasion, and the language of "denazification" as a perceived pretext for it, quickly drew backlash from many world leaders, onlookers and experts alike.

Criticisms of Russia's perceived hypocrisy grew even louder on Tuesday, when Russian strikes hit a memorial to Babyn Yar — the site where Nazis killed tens of thousands of Jews during World War II.

Ukraine's official Twitter account posted a cartoon of Putin and Adolf Hitler gazing lovingly into each others' eyes, writing that "This is not a 'meme,' but our and your reality right now." The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, among others, said Putin "misrepresented and misappropriated Holocaust history."

A lengthy list of historians signed a letter condemning the Russian government's "cynical abuse of the term genocide, the memory of World War II and the Holocaust, and the equation of the Ukrainian state with the Nazi regime to justify its unprovoked aggression."

They pointed to a broader pattern of Russian propaganda frequently painting Ukraine's elected leaders as "Nazis and fascists oppressing the local ethnic Russian population, which it claims needs to be liberated."

And while Ukraine has right-wing extremists, they add, that does not justify Russia's aggression and mischaracterization.
Europe
How Ukraine's history differs from Putin's version

Putin's language is offensive and factually wrong, several experts explain to NPR.

It's a harmful distortion and dilution of history, they say, even though many people appear not to be buying it this time around.

Laura Jockusch, a professor of Holocaust studies at Brandeis University in Massachusetts, told NPR over email that Putin's claims about the Ukrainian army allegedly perpetrating a genocide against Russians in the Donbas region are completely unfounded, but politically useful to him.

"Putin has been repeating this 'genocide' myth for several years and nobody in the West seems to have listened until now," she says. "There is no 'genocide,' not even an 'ethnic cleansing' perpetrated by the Ukraine against ethnic Russians and Russian-speakers in the Ukraine. It is a fiction that is used by Putin to justify his war of aggression on the Ukraine." "
.... and you don't see this written specifically for western eyes as side-stepping propaganda, right?
 


Back
Top