Analysis of the situation in Russia, claimed to be by an active FSB analyst

Post by rosndo » Mon, Mar 07, 2022, 6:27 AM UTC

rich_sasha wrote: post #226

rosndo wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the case with most journalism, no? Here we have a well respected journalist with a solid track record claiming that they trust their source. Doesn’t mean it’s necessarily true, but certainly lends credibility.

It is similar. I wouldn’t take at face value a journalist saying “this is what an FSB operative says, trust me”. Leaks from “senior anonymous official” are dozen a penny. Journalists typically indicate how they verified the provenance of leaks they publish, and hopefully keep the unverifiable stuff off their pages. As for the guy’s track record... this sounds like a niche source. Some fairly small slither of the popu…

Post by spacemanmatt » Mon, Mar 07, 2022, 9:59 AM UTC

throwmeariver1 wrote: post #210

spacemanmatt wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like trying to ban kindness. Oops, it's tricky.

No, it's not. Snotty comments like yours are also against the rules. There are more than enough examples of communities running without politics.

Post by misiti3780 » Mon, Mar 07, 2022, 5:57 PM UTC

kkjjkgjjgg wrote: post #128

sillysaurusx wrote: post #119

It was a tense week, but Russia has lost the war. They can drag it out, but ultimately victory will go to Ukraine. The reasons for this are subtle but obvious. The Russian military machine can't operate outside of Russia. They have no way of transporting fuel, ammunition, food, and other supplies to the front lies. This means that their effective operational capabilities are limited to five days. It's been a hobby of…

What I don't understand, though: surely they can not be so incompetent as to having forgotten that they need fuel? If all success hinged on the airport, then there should have been some plan B in case of losing the airport?

Post by jessaustin » Mon, Mar 07, 2022, 6:17 PM UTC

stjohnswarts wrote: post #258

jl6 wrote: post #245

It “smells right” to a Western audience, but seems a little too good to be true. Right now objective #1 for Ukraine is to get NATO to implement a no-fly zone. NATO are reluctant because of the risk of escalating into a direct war with nuclear-armed Russia. The payload of this letter is the claim that the Russian nuclear deterrent is in a state of disrepair, or that cooler heads will prevent it being used. And thus if…

NATO is never going to establish a no fly zone over Ukraine. Anyone who thinks that they are is living in a dream world.

Post by jessaustin » Mon, Mar 07, 2022, 6:49 PM UTC

h2odragon wrote: post #133

Reminds me of some of the Qanon greentext posts; especially "the biden HQ is falling apart we know the arrests will begin tomorrow".