We all have confirmation bias. We want to read only those sources who will tell us what we want to believe. But what we want to believe and reality are two different things. In the case of the war in Ukraine, it's even tougher because it's half a world away. Russia has closed down a free press long ago. Ukraine, for military reasons, imposes restrictions on what information it wants to share. Where do I get my Ukraine news?
The most reliable source is The Institute for the Study of War. It provides detailed military assessment on a near daily basis, with links to numerous open sources substantiating its assertions. For example, its February 23 assessment includes numerous maps and 75 links to open sources that confirm its conclusions. I place a high degree of confidence in what I read there.
My second source is DW News. It's a German network, but is broadcast in English and strikes me as remarkably objective. It will host Russian viewpoints so you can judge for yourself. I am more likely to get European and UN viewpoints here than anywhere else.
My third source in Ukraine is India's WION. India is a neutral who is buying Russian oil. It has no love for the US.
For an understanding of what motivates Putin, I'd recommend Frontline's Putin and the Presidents. So far, it has eight videos from experts that include Julia Ioffe and William Taylor.
For a deep understanding of what motivates Ukraine, I recommend Anne Applebaum's Red Famine, which focuses on the deliberate starvation (Holodomor) of four million Ukrainians in 1932 by Stalin.
Finally, I look at several sites on Telegram. These tend to be biased, so I am careful.
The one person who blames the West for Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and who actually makes sense at times is Professor John Mearsheimer. He thinks we made a mistake when we persuaded Ukraine to give up their nukes precisely because it would lead to Russian aggression. He argued against it long before Ukraine made the decision. Even if Russia's invasion is a result of our own mistakes, we need to help Ukraine. As a member of the realist school of thought, Mearsheiner must know that iof we fail to assist Ukraine, we are in essence giving China a green light to invade Taiwan.
Feel free to share links to what you consider good sources for news about the Ukraine War.
14 comments:
You obviously skipped John Mersheimers opinion on NATO expansion, he predicted this result if the U.S. insisted on putting arms on Russia's border.
It is important for people to realize that there are information outlets that may present a more viable news product then what we are conditioned to refer to.
Even starting with Associated Press would be an improvement for many. Another good general source is Al Jazeera.
Encouraging people to explore more accurate and hopefully less biased information and news outlets is key to furthering awareness of what is actually happening in the world.
8:09 absolutely. Reuters, BBC, and Haaretz as well
Associated Press is decidedly left-leaning and anti-Trump. At this time, Trump is the leading possibility to become next American President. Keep this this in mind when reading the Morning Call. Not suggesting the Morning Call as a reliable source of anything to do with politics, of course. The Ukraine situation is most definitely influenced, managed with an eye on political value to Washington decision makers who would never find themselves in actual hand-to-hand contact, should that become necessary.
"You obviously skipped John Mersheimers opinion on NATO expansion, he predicted this result if the U.S. insisted on putting arms on Russia's border." I specifically singled him out bc he is perhaps the only anti-war pundit who at least makes some sense and has some intellectual integrity. But he is not a news source. He is an opinion source.
I agree that BBC, Reuters, Al Jazeera and Haaretz are all good sources. BBC is a bit biased in support of Ukraine like most US sources, but I still like it bc it offers a European perspective.
This story is not about which news sources lean left or right, but which news sources actually do a good job of providing reliable information about the war in Ukraine. It is not about the upcoming presidential race.
"Washington decision makers who would never find themselves in actual hand-to-hand contact,"
Several members of Congress were soldiers who faced combat while you pranced around at flag rallies.
I miss the Globe Times
It may be time to just adjust to the new realities, a nuclear war is inevitable, we will have to make the best of it. After all, it will reverse global warming, it will reduce the population by double digit percentages. It will be most effective in destroying western European culture, the cause of all this chaos.
It will also shift the prosperity of world from the northern to the southern hemisphere for a hundred years. It seems most of those goals are what is needed and wanted by some.
We also wont be dependent on the news to see what is going on, we will all be living the new reality.
Well, if whatever news media site one uses to evaluate happenings in Ukraine leans LEFT, then decisions made by Biden and Democrat Members of Congress will be endorsed/highlighted if those decisions are complimentary to Democrat politicians, but hidden if not appearing to be positive decisions. The same is true (in reverse) when using news sources tending to lean RIGHT.
The ramifications of what’s going on NOW in Ukraine will still be a factor during the term of the NEXT President. That now appears to be either Biden or Trump. Today’s political moves happen with an eye forward politically. Staying in office is always on the mind with every vote taken.
Yes, a couple dozen Members of Congress did Military Service in the past. In the future, should America find itself in traditional combat out in the field, my guess is present Members of Congress will not be ‘shipping out’ in arms to possibly die on a battlefield.
Mersheimer places some of the blame on the U.S. and thinks this could have been avoided? He must be unpatriotic and a Putin puppet too!
The anti-Americans are unthinking people like you, who are blindly following the MAGAs without any thought or facts. You are phonies who prance around in military gear and hate our support of Ukraine bc Zelenskyy refused to allow himself to be blackmailed by Trump. You're his little bitches. You follow the cult of the leader and yearn for a time that never existed.
Mersheimer is nothing like you. He is a practitioner of realpolitik, in the same vein as Henry Kissinger. He opposed UIkraine's surrender of nukes precisely bc it opened that country up to Russian aggression. I agree with him on that point. I disagree with his assessment that Putin's goals are less than imperial. It is quite clear, from Putin's own statements that he seeks a return to the USST.
I can deal with someone who thinks. It is impossible to deal with someone who just blindly follows Putin.
I decline to host anything from Putin cheerleader Tucker Carlson. First, he has admitted in texts and emails, that all his claims about election fraud were lies. Second, when called on anything, he claims he's an entertainer, not a journalist. He is emblematic of what is wrong with Putin's little bitches, the MAGAs. Why tout this person as a news source when he is an admitted liar, soes not exist to inform aqnd only confirms your bias?
Post a Comment