Real World Event Discussions

Putin reveals Russia secret Crimea takeover in documentary

POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 19:22
VIEWED: 8841
PAGE 4 of 7

SIGNYM

Monday, March 16, 2015 9:34 PM

Quote:
Considering how few sources you actually do cite, and of those that you would actually choose to cite a world wide known Kremlin mouth piece such as RT, then yes, your use does seem "constant."

Well it may SEEM constant to you, but it isn't, in by any reasonable definitive and objective measurement. It just stands out to you because it rubs you the wrong way.

This is a pointless argument. You're wrong, take it with good grace and move on.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

1KIKI

Tuesday, March 17, 2015 9:57 AM

Kiki's linked contributions are constantly dubious ...

Because they DON'T come from RT?

It's fun watching you argue yourself in circles.

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

GEEZER

Wednesday, March 18, 2015 12:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by G:

Perhaps I should have said: Kiki's linked contributions are constantly dubious? Is that better?

I note that Kiki has no linked citations in this thread.

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

BYTEMITE

Thursday, March 19, 2015 1:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
And yeah, bring Miker back.

I've been pretty sure since THGGR joined that we don't have to go very far for that.

They did discover that neat trick about making threads hidden though. That was cool.

KPO

Friday, March 20, 2015 7:41 PM

A good article on the big Crimea 'documentary' that Putin starred in - http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2015/03/vla
dimir_putin_s_documentary_is_trying_to_rewrite_history_crimea_the_way.html

Read it to get a good idea of the talking points that Signy and kiki will be parroting in the future.

It's not personal. It's just war.

SIGNYM

Friday, March 20, 2015 8:52 PM

Quote:
Vladimir Putin’s new faux documentary is trying to rewrite the history of his own aggression.
By Lucian Kim

Vladimir Putin ended his unexplained 10-day disappearance on Sunday night by beaming himself into the living rooms of his fellow citizens. The Russian president wasn’t any more or less alive than the day before, but political reality in Russia is determined by what’s on Kremlin TV. For almost 2½ hours, Putin starred as the hero of a faux [insinuation] documentary titled Crimea: The Way Home.

Broadcast on the state-run Rossiya channel, the docufiction [more insinuation] was timed to the eve of the first anniversary of Crimea’s disputed independence referendum, held after thousands of Russian troops had seized the peninsula following the Maidan protest in Kiev. The film has little in common with journalism so [so much like wester press!] as a result, offers few new facts. Yet it provides insight into what makes Kremlin propaganda so effective—and how Putin is trying to rewrite history.

Russian propaganda has come a long way since the days of the Soviet Union. If in North Korea petrified announcers shout the day’s patriotic achievements in sing-song voices, in Russia, the news is presented no differently than in the West: by plastic anchors in sleek studios aided by fancy computer graphics. Sunday’s film was professionally made, with lots of aerial shots and a dramatic soundtrack. No expense was spared for the most comprehensive account to date of Putin’s great Crimean adventure.

The film intersperses snippets of an interview with Putin in a chronicle featuring Crimea’s leadership, Russia’s top brass, and members of the “people’s militia” who rose up against the pro-Western government in Kiev. Documentary footage is mixed with reenactments to create a collage of fact and fiction whose purpose isn’t to document what happened, but to hammer home the narrative that Russia’s lightning covert operation saved Crimea from Ukrainian “fascists,” if not direct NATO intervention.

Russian propaganda has come a long way since the days of the Soviet Union.

I was in Crimea last year as the Russian takeover began, but even as an eyewitness who could see through the film’s many distortions, I found the Kremlin’s version of events vaguely alluring. [And those distortions were...?] For someone who had not been there—and bombarded with the same message for the past year—the effect would be overpowering. Insinuation, montage, and unprovable “facts” are washing millions of brains of their critical faculties. [Just like here! So many unprovable facts!]

In the film, the commander of Crimea’s “Berkut” riot police claims the United States provided Maidan protesters with information on Ukrainian crowd-control methods gleaned during a bilateral exchange program. [What was offered as evidence, if any? Training documents? Classes held?]

Russian special forces stopped an attempt by activists from Pravy Sektor, a far-right Ukrainian group, to poison the water supply of the Crimean capital Simferopol. [Any evidence offered? If there was, was the evidence scrubbed from this review?]

Commandos from the FSB, the successor agency to the KGB, politely replaced a door they had broken down while storming a Ukrainian military base in Crimea. [Was this videoed and in the documentary?]

The film’s creator, Rossiya news presenter Andrei Kondrashov, makes no effort to present the other side—

[Well, shut my mouth! When was the last time you saw western media attempting to portray the Russia side? Russian media is held to a higher standard that western media??? WHOODA THUNK?] not even to get a lazy “no comment” from the Ukrainian or U.S. embassies in Moscow.

Kondrashov was reportedly one of more than 300 Russian journalists who received a medal from Putin for “objective coverage of events in Crimea” last year. [Is there any indication that he wasn't objective? Did he report event on the ground as they happened ... as opposed to western reporters who reported on Donbas from Kiev?] The Ukrainian go

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

GEEZER

Friday, March 20, 2015 9:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

The film has little in common with journalism so [so much like wester press!] as a result, offers few new facts. Yet it provides insight into what makes Kremlin propaganda so effective—and how Putin is trying to rewrite history.

Where's your cite for this?

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

SIGNYM

Friday, March 20, 2015 9:18 PM

I cite the very article that was linked. It's an exquisite expose of the crap that the western press regularly spews, which you (and people like you) lap up and think is beef stew.

You should learn to do your own deconstruction of news stories.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

SECOND

Friday, March 20, 2015 9:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

It seems if I want to know anything about what's happening in Russia I'll have to go to Russian sources because the western press simply can't run an honest discussion.

Really? You want to throw away all of Russian history and concentrate on what is in the Russian news media? Since when has news, typically thrown together in a rush at the last moment and then broadcast or printed, been the route to understanding anything but traffic accidents, celebrity gossip, patriotic Russian bullshit, and bank robberies? Anything more complicated, the Russian news can't handle.

The Russian strategy, both at home and abroad, is to say there is no such thing as truth. 'The Americans are bad, we're bad, and everyone's bad, so what's the big deal about us being a bit corrupt? You know our democracy's a sham, their democracy's a sham.'

It's a sort of cynicism that actually resonates very powerfully in the West nowadays with this lack of self-confidence after the Iraq War, after the financial crash - and that's what the Russians are hoping for, just to take that cynicism and then use that in a military environment. www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31020283

Maskirovka: Deception Russian-Style www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b050674y
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/radio4/analysis/analysis_20150126-
2100a.mp3

'Maskirovka' is the Russian military strategy of deception, involving techniques to surprise and deceive the enemy. Lucy Ash looks back over its long history from repelling invading Mongols in the 14th Century, to its use to confound the Nazis in World War II, to the current conflict in Ukraine. Translated literally maskirovka means "a little masquerade", but it also points to strategic, operational, physical and tactical duplicity. When heavily-armed, mask-wearing gunmen - labelled the 'little green men' - took over government buildings in Crimea last year, was this a classic example of maskirovka in the 21st century? All nations use deception as a strategy in war, but Analysis asks whether any other nation has pursued guile as an instrument of policy so long and so ardently as Russia.

KPO

Friday, March 20, 2015 10:21 PM

Quote:
[Well, shut my mouth! When was the last time you saw western media attempting to portray the Russia side?]

Every BBC article I read gives the Russian side, e.g: 'The Russian government strenuously denies Western accusations of involvement in the conflict'

Quote:
[What was offered as evidence, if any? Training documents? Classes held?]

Lol, if there were any evidence that the US had coached Maidan protesters, or that the Right Sector had tried to poison Crimea's water supply, we would have heard about it. You would have started threads about it.

Quote:
Is there any indication that he wasn't objective? Did he report event on the ground as they happened

Nothing to do with objectivity, not what the word means.

Quote:
I'd love to see a list of facts that the author thinks were missing, and a list of the allegations raised in the documentary along with whatever evidence was brought forth, and then whatever evidence the author thinks is missing.

Why don't you watch the documentary and post a list of the evidence that was presented, and that was hidden by the article, since you think there was some?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3a8_1426713567

Quote:
It seems if I want to know anything about what's happening in Russia I'll have to go to Russian sources because the western press simply can't run an honest discussion.

LOL!

It's not personal. It's just war.