http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/29/world/europe/russia-sweden-disinformation.html?_r=0
I'm sure we are all aware of it, I didn't realize how big it was.
I'm sure we are all aware of it, I didn't realize how big it was.
-
Features
The Russian disinformation weapon
- Thread starter Loren Pechtel
- Start date
barbos
Contributor
zorq
Veteran Member
I think it's easier to target your social media disinformation in countries like Sweden because they are so much smaller and more socially homogenous than others. Of course it helps that almost anyone who was raised under friendly Russian influence seems to be primed to believe and distribute the lies that Russia's government seeds. That's more than a hundred million people. We have one or two in this very forum.
barbos
Contributor
barbos
Contributor
I want to explain where this so called "false" story comes from. It comes from baltic states which had some NATO maneuverers/training exercises this summer. NATO soldiers were not immune from prosecution......except american ones. And one Lithuanian or Latvian was killed in traffic accident caused by american soldier. So you can call it false all you want but it certainly was not false for that poor guy. Plus there were bunch of incidents involving drunk soldiers from Germany, GB, others crashing stuff.
So there is pretty huge kernel of truth in these russian propaganda false stories.
barbos
Contributor
This is pretty ironic. In an article about lies of evil russian propaganda machine use western lies
Last edited:
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
All warfare is deception Sun Tzu.
The US and UK WMD story was possibly the biggest whopper of the 21st Century so far.
The US and UK WMD story was possibly the biggest whopper of the 21st Century so far.
barbos
Contributor
At least you now know of that. There are bunch of lies you and even fucking journalists in the west still believe.
barbos
Contributor
News from today:
zorq
Veteran Member
The guy's an idiot to report Hillary's "seizure" as a serious health condition. You can't blame Huffington Post for deleting idiocy and blocking idiots from publishing on their site. That's not their target demographic. You're looking for demons in the wrong places.
I only watched to 1:05 to realize that he's an idiot. I don't know if he has anything non-idiotic to say.
barbos
Contributor
How reassuring.
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
Some still believe there are WMD's hidden somewhere. The only destructive weapons Saddam had were those supplied by the West, plus Russian Scud missiles that were hopelessly inaccurate.
4321lynx
Veteran Member
And replies from usual suspects...
So the propaganda war is in full swing.Useful to remember comments in 2010 by a knowledgeable commentator:-
http://www.spiegel.de/international...-most-cases-stunningly-ignorant-a-733079.html
Nothing has changed in the intervening 6 years, except that perhaps the US ignorance has grown deeper.
Some claryfying remarks more recently:-
http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/04/17/toward-a-global-realignment/
Worth reading.
There certainly was WMD in Iraq--we destroyed plenty of it after we invaded. The issue was whether we got all his chemicals, not whether they existed in the first place. It looks like what happened is that there were plenty of underlings who padded the figures. We destroyed the real stuff and were left with a hunt for the phantoms. Said underlings would always report having manged to keep the stuff out of the hands of the inspectors--so our intel kept reporting that the stuff was still there.
Of course we had zero success with a hunt for phantoms. That doesn't mean there never were chemical weapons.
4321lynx
Veteran Member
LP said
This will be news to most here. Care to substantiate this? Preferably not by quotes from Netanyahu & Co.
This will be news to most here. Care to substantiate this? Preferably not by quotes from Netanyahu & Co.
Hickdive
Member
There is no evidence to support the claim that there were WMD in Iraq sufficient to warrant the invasion. This is an established fact (see the Chilcot Report).
That said, raising the issue is simply to distract from the fact that there is an organised campaign of disinformation emanating from Russia at the moment. This links in with their cynical weaponisation of Syrian refugees to undermine the EU and their attacks on all Syrian rebels masquerading as attacks on ISIS. You can expect similar attacks on Kurds shortly as part of the new BFF act between Putin and Erdogan.
That said, raising the issue is simply to distract from the fact that there is an organised campaign of disinformation emanating from Russia at the moment. This links in with their cynical weaponisation of Syrian refugees to undermine the EU and their attacks on all Syrian rebels masquerading as attacks on ISIS. You can expect similar attacks on Kurds shortly as part of the new BFF act between Putin and Erdogan.
crispy
Member
The claim was he was manufacturing chemicals. On trucks. Driving around the desert...
crispy
Member
They already started attacking Kurds here and there a couple of days ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
There's so much focus on the snarc hunt phase of it that many forget there was plenty of real stuff also.
Last edited:
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
No WMDs were found and no evidence of such being destroyed was ever produced by the Bush-Blair duo. We know that Iraq had Gas, which was supplied by Germany and it is hard to believe the West did not know his intent with these (against Iran and the Kurds). This was mustard gas mustard and Tabun and also later mustard and nerve agent. They were used between 1983 and 1991
The arms it had were previously provided by the West and Russia. He may have pursued a Nuclear program but no Nuclear weapons were found or known to have been build. The Gas he had was originally with the support of the West. However the mass piles they looked for were non existent.
In 2003, Iraq did declare it had 2 bunkers filled with chemical weapons for destructions
This is cut and pasted directly from WIKI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction[/I]
In 1980, the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency filed a report stating that Iraq had been actively acquiring chemical weapons capacities for several years, which later proved to be accurate.[29] In November 1980, two months into the Iran–Iraq War, the first reported use of chemical weapons took place when Tehran radio reported a poison gas attack on Susangerd by Iraqi forces.[30] The United Nations reported many similar attacks occurred the following year, leading Iran to develop and deploy a mustard gas capability.[citation needed] By 1984, Iraq was using poison gas with great effectiveness against Iranian "human wave" attacks.[verification needed] Chemical weapons were used extensively against Iran during the Iran–Iraq War.[31][32] On January 14, 1991, the Defense Intelligence Agency said an Iraqi agent described, in medically accurate terms, military smallpox casualties he said he saw in 1985 or 1986. Two weeks later, the Armed Forces Medical Intelligence Center reported that eight of 69 Iraqi prisoners of war whose blood was tested showed a current immunity to smallpox, which had not occurred naturally in Iraq since 1971; the same prisoners had also been inoculated for anthrax. The assumption being that Iraq used both smallpox and anthrax during this war.[33] All of this occurring while Iraq was a party to the Geneva Protocol on September 8, 1931, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty on October 29, 1969, signed the Biological Weapons Convention in 1972, but did not ratify until June 11, 1991. Iraq has not signed to the Chemical Weapons Convention.
The Washington Post reported that in 1984 the CIA secretly started providing intelligence to the Iraqi army during the Iran-Iraq War. This included information to target chemical weapons strikes. The same year it was confirmed beyond doubt by European doctors and UN expert missions that Iraq was employing chemical weapons against the Iranians.[34] Most of these occurred during the Iran–Iraq War, but WMDs were used at least once to crush the popular uprisings against Kurds in 1991.[21] Chemical weapons were used extensively, with post-war Iranian estimates stating that more than 100,000 Iranians were affected Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons during the eight-year war with Iraq,[35] Iran today is the world's second-most afflicted country by weapons of mass destruction, only after Japan.[citation needed] The official estimate does not include the civilian population contaminated in bordering towns or the children and relatives of veterans, many of whom have developed blood, lung and skin complications, according to the Organization for Veterans. Nerve gas agents killed about 20,000 Iranian soldiers immediately, according to official reports. Of the 90,000 survivors, some 5,000 seek medical treatment regularly and about 1,000 are still hospitalized with severe, chronic conditions.[citation needed] Many others were hit by mustard gas. Despite the removal of Saddam Hussein and his administration by American forces, there is deep resentment and anger in Iran that it was Western nations that helped Iraq develop and direct its chemical weapons arsenal in the first place and that the world did nothing to punish Iraq for its use of chemical weapons throughout the war.[citation needed] For example, the United States and the UK blocked condemnation of Iraq's known chemical weapons attacks at the UN Security Council. No resolution was passed during the war that specifically criticized Iraq's use of chemical weapons, despite the wishes of the majority to condemn this use. On March 21, 1986 the United Nation Security Council recognized that "chemical weapons on many occasions have been used by Iraqi forces against Iranian forces"; this statement was opposed by the United States, the sole country to vote against it in the Security Council (the UK abstained).[36