Ukrainian barrier troops in action

submitted by weavilsatemyface from (self.WarWatch)

Simplicius has video of what looks like Ukrainian barrier troops shooting at retreating Ukrainian regular forces, who return fire.

all 17 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]binaryblob 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sputnik_(news_agency) claims (verifiably) that Sputnik spreads fake news. So, are you retarded /s/weavilsatemyface?

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

There is not a single news source that does not spread fake news.

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Write a program selecting every news source on Wikipedia which does not contain "false" or "fake news" and output the surrounding text for each occurrence, if you want to prove that assertion somewhat.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Wikipedia is very biased

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I agree with that, but there are degrees of fake news. Russia is known for its barrier troops. As such, a story of Ukraine doing the same thing would be suspect, especially since Russia has staged incidents in the past. No sane news agency would report this, if they didn't have their own people film it.

If you were just saying academically that trusting Wikipedia is wrong, then sure, but you should acknowledge that Sputnik would be among the least reliable sources of information.

[–]weavilsatemyface[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Russia is known for its barrier troops.

Only by those whose only knowledge of the Russian armed forces comes from dim memories of the movie "Enemy At The Gate" (a decent enough movie but historically about as accurate as a cardboard battleship) and Ukrainian propaganda.

The Red Army used blocking detachments, but they rarely performed summary executions in the field, and never forced troops into battle as shown in the movie. So have most armies, they just call them "military police" when it's our side, and one of their jobs is to catch deserters.

There's no hard evidence that Russia uses blocking detachments beyond a handful of dubious accusations made by Ukraine and anti-Putin opposition. Remember: Ukraine always accuses Russia of doing what they themselves, Ukraine, are doing. Without fail.

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Unless you are claiming these are actors, there is harder evidence than what you have shown: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/27/russian-soldiers-commanders-used-barrier-troops-stop-retreating.

I know credible people claimed Russia has barrier troops, which I assume they would only say based on classified intel. Indeed, I have no spy drones operational in Ukraine, so I don't know, but I have to believe something and I think it makes more sense for Russia to do such things, because I do know that Russia is a shithole.

[–]weavilsatemyface[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I know credible people claimed Russia has barrier troops, which I assume they would only say based on classified intel.

"Credible people" in US military intelligence? In other words, liars.

mislabeling of video footage happened a bit too often by the Russians

😂 😂 😂 😂 😂

Riiiiiiiight, it's the Russians who are mislabelling videos 🙄

I suppose you think this is a Khinzal too.

I do know that Russia is a shithole.

You're funny. Imagine an American thinking another country is a shithole.

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I am not an American; I defined shitholes relative to https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/hdi-by-country.

[–]weavilsatemyface[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I am not an American

Sorry. You act like an American.

[–]weavilsatemyface[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The Human Development Index is a very blunt knife indeed. Do you know how it is calculated? Quote: "The HDI simplifies and captures only part of what human development entails. It does not reflect on inequalities, poverty, human security, empowerment, etc."

And no surprise, the calculation is biased to give western cultures artificially high scores:

  • Counting mean of years of schooling artificially inflates the score of western countries where large numbers of people go on to do meaningless, pointless tertiary education courses (often getting deeply in debt).
  • And of course the Gross Domestic Income is based on the GDP, plus income taxes (plus a few other things), so countries with high income taxes is considered a plus as far as GDI is concerned.
  • And GDP itself is severely biased towards western financial markets and against countries like China that actually make things.

But even if we take the HDI seriously, the HDI of some individual US states are comparable to places like Sri Lanka and Venezuela.

Shall we talk about Los Angeles, the city with the second highest GDP in the US?

Overall, 21% of US adults are illiterate and 54% have a low literacy proficiency. Of those, two-thirds were born in the USA. US college students can graduate with a tertiary degree despite being almost functionally illiterate and innumerate. (That study was from 2006, but I doubt its any better now.)

And I haven't even mentioned the US health system and prison-industrial complex.

[–]weavilsatemyface[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Wikipedia is completely colonised by wokies, western intelligence agencies and spooks pushing American propaganda. Any source that goes against the western neoliberal globalist agenda gets mislabelled "unreliable" and "disinformation", while western state-affiliated and -run media like Reuters, the BBC, the NY Times and the WaPo are treated as first-rate reliable sources no matter how often they spread disinformation (Saddam's WMD, the Covid panic, "safe and effective", Trump's "insurrection", etc) on behalf of globalists.

Wikipedia quotes Neil MacFarquhar, who isn't one of the worst globalist pro-American shills, but having him cast judgement on Sputnik while still working for the NY Times is hypocritical.

Wikipedia is great for neutral topics like maths and pop culture, moderately reliable when it comes to ancient history, but it spreads toxic globalist propaganda when it comes to recent events.

[–]weavilsatemyface[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So you're going to reject the evidence of the video you can see with your own eyes because you don't like the source?

You can watch the video for yourself. There are three groups of soldiers, one Russian and two Ukrainian. The Russian group storms a trench, the first group of Ukrainians attempt to retreat to another trench, where the second group of Ukrainians fire at them, they fire back and try to flee, and finally the third group gets hit by a drone.

If you don't want to call the third group "barrier troops", what do you think they should be called?

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think the mislabeling of video footage happened a bit too often by the Russians, such that I don't believe anything coming from Russia anymore. There's a story about that called "The Boy who cried wolf". Perhaps Russia wants to learn from that, if it still exists in the next war.