Big Language works in timescales unimaginable.

I posted this because even though I may disagree with the conclusions about evidence, it reminded me the fog of war creates the opportunities for misinformation on all fronts. Plus, I sometimes like to read things I disagree with to be tolerant of different perspectives.

I’ll remove it. Mine was the first comment, and I posted it to foster discussion. It was not my intent to offend, only to offer another perspective.

About American propaganda? I wish I were.

You seem to want to have a discussion about the merits of the war. My original comment was to bring awareness to the dis/misinformation from western media sources. We can discuss the invasion, but it might help to have some context:

A number of former US ambassadors to Moscow have also warned, at stages, about the dangers. In 1997, it was Jack Matlock, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. At the time, the Clinton administration’s recommendation to enlarge NATO membership was considered “misguided. If it should be approved by the United States Senate, it may well go down in history as the most profound strategic blunder made since the end of the Cold War.”

Eight years later, William J. Burns, then still ambassador to Russia and currently director of the CIA, shot a number of flares on the issue: “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin).”

This 37 second YouTube video shows that even Joe Biden knew it could lead to war. In 1997, he warned that NATO expansion into Baltic States could cause a response.

The point of the article isn’t to determine the truth of North Koreans in Ukraine, it’s to explain why a belief in the narrative is the goal. 🥅

Reported, corroborated, confirmed, believes – a variety of words to disguise the fact that no evidence is being presented.

It is very likely that there are North Korean troops in Russia, in various places, doing various things – training, liaison, systems maintenance, etc. – but to call this an escalation that represents the entry of a third state into the conflict is misleading because this has always been a war between Russia and NATO with Ukraine merely being the disposable tip of the essentially American spear. It is a mythical threat contrived to draw NATO into direct, rather than proxy war with Russia.

Some more info on this.

Today, we find ourselves subjected to another narrative, repeated relentlessly despite a lack of concrete evidence. As for those who call for evidence, they will quickly find the onus placed on them to prove there aren’t North Koreans in Ukraine—a task as impossible as it is absurd. In the end, the goal isn’t to share or establish the truth, but to shape public belief. And for a credulous, uncritical, and largely media-illiterate public, that goal is too easily achieved—and with far too little at that.

deleted by creator

When military coup? Asking for a friend.

I.E., we need a third party.

Is this the right way to protest climate change?

So, in the federal election without a third party under ranked choice; my options would be 1. Harris, 2. Trump.

How can you have ranked choice voting with only two parties?

Will this be the last “Black History” month?

Only Winston knows.

Are the Yankees still mad at the Cowboys?

Is he still alive?