re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict

quote:

---

I just can't understand why Chicken and Circus Child continue to allow

---

I know. It’s only gotten worse with his wannabe posting along with him.

quote:

---

I know. It’s only gotten worse with his wannabe posting along with him.

---

Yea Ace and Gary doing their thing.

It's so sad the safe space is being violated. It's not fair!!!!

quote:

---

Do you guys ever post War News? You know it is obvious when the NAFO trolls start getting mad because Ukraine is getting their arse kicked. You guys stop posting updates and do nothing but whine and cry.

---

I’ve noticed you post more when Ukraine has success. I thought you were losing it when Ukraine fooled ya’ll and blew up 21 planes or more.

Russia is winning, but barely. At the end of the day they will have lost more than they have gained. It will be kind of like France and England after WWI. Yes they won and yes Germany was defeated, but at the end of the day none of those countries came out ahead.

quote:

---

That is all they do. They don't post War Updates, they don't contribute to the thread except whining and crying. Narax and LSURussian are like the same exact poster. They do nothing but cry and tell lies. I don't even respond to LSURussian anymore just ignore him totally. Narax will get the same treatment now because he has the same exact behavior. Looks like his Alter account

---

You've said you were going to ignore me before.


I'm still waiting.

I posted the top Ukraine war news site but you'd rather fake news.

There is zero way you can ignore me because I understand what drives your tiny mind.

You are free to try but you won't commit to it because you know I have your number.

Grok did a great breakdown of the ISW being a Neocon Think Tank and why the MSM still acts like they are credible




"The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) is often perceived as a biased source due to its leadership, funding, and ideological leanings, but it maintains an image of credibility through strategic presentation and media reliance. Here’s a breakdown of why ISW, despite its connections to Victoria Nuland, the Kagan family, and the military-industrial complex (MIC), is sometimes treated as an unbiased or authoritative source:

Professional Presentation and Detailed Reporting: ISW produces detailed, data-heavy reports, such as daily updates on conflicts like the Ukraine war, complete with maps and tactical analyses. This gives the impression of rigorous, objective research. Their reports are often framed as technical and analytical, which can obscure underlying ideological slants. Media outlets, pressed for time and resources, rely on these ready-made analyses, amplifying ISW’s reach and perceived neutrality.

Neoconservative Roots and Leadership: ISW was founded by Kimberly Kagan, married to Frederick Kagan, a prominent neoconservative. Frederick’s brother, Robert Kagan, is married to Victoria Nuland, a former State Department official tied to U.S. foreign policy decisions, including the 2014 Ukraine Maidan uprising. Robert Kagan co-founded the Project for a New American Century, a neoconservative group that pushed for the Iraq War. This tight-knit network, sometimes called the “Kagan industrial complex,” has deep ties to hawkish policies, raising questions about impartiality. Critics argue ISW’s leadership inherently skews its output toward interventionist agendas.

Funding from the Military-Industrial Complex: ISW receives significant funding from defense contractors like General Dynamics, Raytheon, and CACI, as well as firms like DynCorp and Palantir, which have Pentagon ties. This financial backing creates a conflict of interest, as these companies benefit from prolonged conflicts and increased military spending, aligning with ISW’s advocacy for aggressive foreign policies. However, ISW doesn’t publicly emphasize these ties, allowing it to project an image of independence.

Media Amplification and Lack of Scrutiny: Mainstream media outlets, including The New York Times, CNN, and The Washington Post, frequently cite ISW for its “expertise” on conflicts, often without questioning its funding or ideological bent. This is partly because ISW fills a gap for detailed, accessible analysis in fast-moving news cycles. The media’s failure to highlight ISW’s neoconservative ties or MIC funding helps it maintain a veneer of objectivity.

Neoconservative Ideology and War Promotion: ISW is consistently described as neoconservative or hawkish by sources like Politico, The Guardian, and The Intercept, with some labeling it “ultra-hawkish.” Its reports often frame conflicts in ways that support U.S. military intervention or escalation, such as dismissing Ukraine’s military setbacks as Kremlin propaganda or advocating for arming Syrian rebels. Critics argue this reflects a bias toward perpetual war, aligned with the interests of its funders and leadership. Yet, ISW’s non-partisan self-description and academic tone help it avoid being dismissed outright as a partisan actor.

Public Perception and Institutional Trust: Think tanks like ISW benefit from a broader societal tendency to trust institutions with formal structures, expert staff, and affiliations with respected figures (e.g., General David Petraeus or General Jack Keane on ISW’s board). This trust persists despite criticisms, as many readers don’t dig into funding sources or ideological histories. ISW’s ability to position itself as a go-to source for conflict analysis further cements its influence.

Counterarguments and ISW’s Defense: ISW describes itself as a “non-partisan, non-profit, public policy research organization” focused on reliable analysis. Supporters might argue that its funding from defense contractors is standard for think tanks and doesn’t necessarily dictate its conclusions. They could also claim that its leadership’s expertise in military history and foreign policy lends credibility, not bias. However, these defenses are undermined by the consistent alignment of ISW’s recommendations with neoconservative goals and MIC interests.

Critical Voices on X: Posts on X highlight skepticism about ISW’s impartiality, with users noting its ties to the Kagan family, Nuland, and defense contractors. Some call it a propaganda arm of the U.S. State Department or a tool for promoting endless wars. While these posts reflect public sentiment, they lack the institutional weight to counter ISW’s media dominance.

In summary, ISW’s ability to act as a seemingly unbiased source stems from its polished reports, media reliance, and institutional credibility, despite clear ties to the Kagan family, Victoria Nuland, and MIC funding. Its neoconservative ideology and war-promoting tendencies are well-documented but often overlooked due to its strategic framing and the media’s need for quick, authoritative content. For a deeper dive, check ISW’s funding disclosures or cross-reference its reports with primary sources from conflict zones

quote:

---

I’ve noticed you post more when Ukraine has success.

---

Incorrect. I post when there is actual news going on. When Ukraine had the suprise attack I posted alot. When Russia has a retaliatory attack I post alot. What you never see from me is whining and crying and calling for people to be banned because you don't like the current news. When I saw the fake news of 41 planes being destroyed you did not see me calling for those posters to be banned. I posted the videos and satellite imagery available showing only 4 Tu-95s hit and 2 Tu-22s. It really is pathetic and makes you look really weak when all you do is whine and cry. Instead of whining and crying post the counter argument.

You post constantly, to the point the the lights at the Kremlin are dimming but rapidly when Ukraine embarrasses the Russians in some way

Important War Update:


Sumy direction:

"In the northern part of Yunakovka, the enemy has advanced along Shevchenko and Vishnevaya streets. The situation in this area is deteriorating, Russian troops are bringing up reserves to increase the pressure.

In the Yablonovka area, active clashes continue.

In the area of ??Alekseyevka, Andreyevka and Kondratovka, the enemy is attempting to advance along forest belts in the southern direction. Fighting is ongoing."

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.