>The 13 guards telling the Russian naval ship to fuck off (turns out they surrendered)...
... while I'm open to this being what actually happened, I can't find anything that suggests this. Even Reuters is still saying Zelensky says they died. Can you provide a source for this?
Edit: TASS, a Russian news agency, appears to report what you're saying, but that's quite a biased source and seems to be the only one I can find[1].
The site you've linked also has an article saying Biden is considering WW3 as a possible alternative to sanctions.
https://m-lenta-ru.translate.goog/news/2022/02/26/3rd/?_x_tr...
according to Western media who again has an interest in portraying Russian media as bad
This means you cannot take any sides claims at face value. At the same time, you shouldn’t just ignore them and close your eyes to propaganda, as you’ll miss important nuggets of truth that are sprinkled throughout the narrative. The more information you get, from all sides, the more likely you will be to be able to piece together what actually is going on.
Hence why the comment above said “Russian media reports”, without five paragraphs of disclaimers that this is not gospel truth, as it assumed that people are able to think for themselves, and take Russian media reports for what they are, which is, while obviously an aggressor’s propaganda, not necessarily a falsehood.
I also didn't need "five paragraphs of disclaimers". I didn't even need five words of disclaimers. A simple "They're biased but..." at the start of that original comment and I wouldn't have felt the need to respond.
You don't need to overanalyze my comment. I simply think that if someone asks for a source and your only response is a source of questionable accuracy, that you should acknowledge that the source is not authoritative. I found it funny that this was happening in a conversation that was already about how many sources can't be trusted so I commented to point these two things out. It isn't any more complicated than that.
Ukraine is busy fighting for survival.
It looks like they look equal in your eyes, so RF is very weak and Ukraine is very strong.
That said, since I live in the west, I’m overwhelmingly exposed to pro-Ukraine propaganda, and very little to pro-Russia propaganda. Almost none of it is, of course, paid for by Ukraine.
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3413919-state-border-gu...
The site seems legit despite the .net domain (cross-check with the Wikipedia article, where the URL has not been modified recently). Doubtful it got hacked as the latest articles do not have a pro-Russian angle.
RUS strategy is to flood the zone with conflicting information so as to create a 'wilderness of mirrors', create infighting in the opposition, and/or get people to give up on finding the truth.
Seriously, a broken analog clock that is correct twice per day is more trustworthy.
Indeed, but this is also Ukrainian strategy. It is in Ukrainian interest to push morale-increasing stories. Of course everything Russian media and government say needs to be taken as propaganda, but doing that while taking Ukrainian sides claims as highly accurate, is just wishful thinking.
But I will say that they are likely to be more accurate - after all, the Russians are the undisputed world champions of dezinformatsiya for at least 15 decades; Ukranians are at best their students.
And as for who is in the right and who is wrong in these events, it is 100% clear - Putin's govt and military are 100% wrong. He is an autocrat attempting to undermine a neighboring democracy, because the very idea of proper democracy at home, Putin sees as a threat to his power. He is happy to kill and gail opponents, from Navalny, to Magnitski, to Litvenienko, and the list goes on...
It is wrong, that is all there is to it. Stop trying to justify it, or play whataboutism games. Have a deep rethink.
Thank you.
We got strong beliefs that all Ukrainian defenders of Zmiiniy Island may be alive... The SBGSU and the Armed Forces, like the whole of Ukraine, have received hope that all of Zmiiny's defenders are alive.
https://www.facebook.com/100066866381279/posts/2850135637375...
But you said:
> ... turns out they surrendered...
So, in essence, you're doing the same thing you were trying to caution people about doing. People may, in fact, be spreading a story that's false, but you're also spreading a false story by saying "turns out they surrendered" when your own citation suggests they're still trying to confirm their surrender.
We all need to be diligent about confirming word-of-mouth stories and allowing time for their accuracy to be verified.