World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Honest question here, any website that's accurately tracking the current reality in Ukraine? Within reason of course, it's an unstable situation by definition. I see a lot of headlines that make it sound like Russia is winning, and then some articles claiming Ukraine is kicking ass hahaha. So I honestly have no idea what's going on because of the flood of propaganda.
Just in case, I really really have no horse in this race. I'm from latin america, so this only affects me via globalization. But I would love to be able to track the situation there just for morbid curiosity.
I've been using deepstatemap.live which has proven accurate and reasonably up to date in the past. When things are moving fast though it may fall behind.
There's a bit of uncertainty principle at work. The more accurate the data, the less up to date it's gonna be.
Thanks! I will check it out.
Accurate? No. You're not going to get accuracy. Not right now. Between the lack of enough impartial journalists in the field, propaganda from both sides and just the fog of war, you're not going to get it.
There's this map: https://liveuamap.com/
I haven't been following the war very closely, but AFAIK, they've been in a stalemate for many months with neither side making any significant gains.
Thank you man! This is exactly the kind of thing I was looking for.
Ukraine is absolutely not winning, but propaganda and deception is really important in war. It's important for Ukraine to have the world think they have a chance otherwise people are less likely to assist in a lost cause.
Ukraine is winning
If you saw a bar fight, one dude was 6'2", 225 and everyone thought he was a monster but he's being battered around by someone half his size you wouldn't say the big guy is winning and certainly wouldn't say the little guy is losing.
Russia takes more losses than Ukraine. Russia just has more fuel to burn.
Ukraine is fighting against the "second best army in the world". Everytime that you open a map and you see that the border didn't move, that is ukraine kicking orks asses
Russia have half a million dead, wounded or missing while holding less than 20%. They have lost control of the black sea, they lost a submarine to a force that doesnt have a navy. They have fucked their economy and made complete dicks of themselves on the world stage.
Lets not pretend there is an inevitability here, at the beginning we were told they should abandon ship, then we were told they cant hold and now the likes of you are speaking as if there is a foregone conclusion.
All of that can be true and they could still "win". A pyrrhic victory is still a victory.
But any talk of winning or losing doesn't really matter unless you can clearly define what the conditions of winning and losing are.
Russia is losing in terms of casualties suffered. Ukraine is losing in terms of actual territory lost. It just depends on how you decide to spin it.
A pyrrhic victory is absolutely not "still a victory". Russia faces long-term demographic collapse, outmoded energy infrastructure, a permanent insurgency in occupied territories, and the inability to pivot away from a wartime economy heading into a century where millions or billions of climate refugees will pop into existence, while simultaneously vast swathes of Russian land will suddenly become habitable and arable. You do the math.
That's an insult to the intelligence of the Ukrainians who have been battling against Russian incursions for the past 10 years. Even Zelensky has been left frustrated by the "just wait bro" strategy of the west. Hoping for a complete Russian collapse and withdrawal at some undetermined point in the future is a recipe for disappointment. We can also look to the past as a good indicator for the future, and Russia has for better or worse always been very resilient in times of war.
On your point about insurgency; the whole Donbass conflict arose from pro-Russian insurgents in eastern Ukraine. Donetsk PR and Luhansk PR welcomed the Russian invasion with open arms. To date, the vast majority of insurgents in Ukraine have been on Russia's side.
The foregoing was not intended as a contribution to Ukraine's strategic outlook. I think they've still got a chance at a meaningful victory and it's incredible how well they've done with the often shambolic allies they've got. My only point to be made here is that even if Russia does win in Ukraine, they're fucked beyond words in no small part due to this ill conceived war.
It's absolutely a forgone conclusion and your assertions are unhinged. Ukraine is losing eminently, and actively. They have lost, permanently a lot of territory and have trouble keeping the lights on. The economy is entirely decimated and without foreign weapons and monetary aid they would fall within weeks.
Sure thing buddy, Russia is getting bent over by China and Iran right now. Taking in weapons from North Korea, with terrible quality assurance because their own logistics, forecasting and top minds could not stand up to the results of their own actions.
Guys, I mean this what I'm talking about lol. I guess the answer to my question must be in another thread hahaha. Have fun
The only relevant answer is that nobody knows for sure. Ukraine is doing their very best but they're fighting not only Russia but also the combined effort of all the fuckwits that support Russia materially, i.e. China, Iran and North Korea etc. it's not exactly an easy position to be in, even if their tech is of lower quality than what we have in the west they're also able to churn out a lot more, and that shows.
On the other hand, it's pretty telling that Russia is resorting to what amounts to long range terror bombing in between human wave attacks. They used up a lot of manpower last summer, and it can't be easy to replace those losses. They do have access to a lot more human resources, but again, of dubious quality.
Russia is certainty hoping for another 4 years of the orange fuckwit in the White House though. That's where the real danger is. If that happens all bets are off.
I mean, you are probably right, I have no clue lol. But this entire thread is exactly what I was NOT asking about. And you guys get mad with me for pointing this out lol. I was literally asking about a place to check "raw" data about the conflict. Thankfully, some dude actually shared a site like this in a different reply. Obviously, I will have to check it to decide how reliable it's. But that was what I was asking about, not this ...
That's true, I'm sorry.
There were some twitter accounts worth following, but after what happened over there I don't know if any of them are still active. Likewise there were some subs in Reddit that had decent amounts of factual posts, but I don't know about them anymore either.
Other than that, what's wrong with piecing together news from the most reliable sources? The Guardian has excellent coverage of the war. Anything that goes on for this long will obviously suffer from some story-fatigue but they're at least more trustworthy than anything from Russia.
It's called fog of war for a reason though, you're never going to get 100% unbiased and correct information about ongoing battles, for opsec reasons if nothing else.
Thanks for a nice response! My main problem with checking news sites is that it's quite a bit of work and I'm very lazy hahaha. Specially because of what I said, for me this is mostly about my curiosity, so I can't invest the time required to properly inform myself this way. Plus there is the issue of bias, I only speak spanish and english, so my sources are biased that way by default (fuck Putin just in case anyone mistakes this for support for that prick lol).
In my naivety I was hoping to get a few websites with like a minute to minute of the developments. I remember seeing several beautiful sites like these for the Syrian civil war, and I assume there are some for this conflict too. Obviously, as you pointed out, these sites will surely be biased (some to one side, some to the other) and incomplete. But if I have a few of these, I can at least go and take a look at them everytime I see a headline like this and create my own uneducated opinion lol.
My pleasure. The great thing about The Guardian especially, besides the fact that they do try to cover the negative sides as well, is that they tend to separate ongoing events into their own pages. You can bookmark only Ukraine and check what has happened recently easily.
Granted, these days it's mostly whatever bombings Russia has done during the night sprinkled with whatever counter attacks Ukraine manages, but still. In my opinion they've been quite quick with the updates when something major has happened. They covered Prigozhin's road trip to Moscow last year very well, almost minute to minute.