• aleph@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hard to spin this as “admitting” anything, considering this is a widely known fact.

          • aleph@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            22
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That’s a very narrow interpretation. Those headlines do not suggest that the Western media was reporting that everything was fine in the region but then Russia attacked; it means that the conflict escalated into a full blown invasion of Ukraine instead of merely occupying Crimea/Donbas.

            Even one of the top links in your search result says:

            For eight years, brave Ukrainians fought and died for that dream after Russia invaded Crimea and the Donbas region. Today, as a result of President Putin’s flagrant disregard for human life and Ukrainian sovereignty, many more will suffer. But the dream—and America’s support for it—will never die.

            • MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              25
              ·
              1 year ago

              As you point out, to the extent the mainstream narrative acknowledges the past at all, it’s to frame it as “Russia actually invaded in 2014 and are now trying to finish the job.”

              There’s certainly no acknowledgement of NATO expansion being a legitimate concern for Russia, or the violence against ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine, or Ukraine not abiding by the terms of the Minsk agreements (much less comments from the West that those agreements were bad faith documents designed only to buy time).

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          None of these sources are talking about NATO involvement in Ukraine since 2014, nor acknowledge the role NATO played in creating the conditions for the conflict.

            • Water Bowl Slime@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              36
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I agree with you, and I appreciate the links, but I will say that this isn’t common knowledge. The prevailing narrative is something along the lines of Russia invading Ukraine in 2022 for conquest and the US + allies intervening to save democracy. Tons of people will dismiss you if you point out western involvement prior to 2022 (not on lemmygrad tho).

              • aleph@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                13
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                This seems like a bit of a strawman, tbh. It’s true that the average person in the street in the U.S. may think that the war started last year, but certainly doesn’t square with what the mainstream media have been generally reporting over the last ten years.

                • Water Bowl Slime@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  25
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No it doesn’t match our own reporting, but people really, truly believe this anyway. Go on any other Lemmy instance and talk about the 2014 Ukraine coup, Ukrainian Nazis, or Russian diplomacy and see how quickly you get dogpiled/banned. I can attest that it’s similar in real life in the US, albeit people are more polite when they’re face to face.

                • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  21
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  We’re going to have to do a media analysis to retort, but the evidence is clear - if you talk about 2014 then all social media platforms immediately respond en masse with “that’s Putinist propaganda”. If the MSM had truly been pushing this larger historical context, we wouldn’t be in this situation.

            • LarkinDePark@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Also good examples:

              https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/30/russia-ukraine-war-kiev-conflict https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/13/ukraine-us-war-russia-john-pilger

              But in fairness, this was run of the mill news that was mainly just reporting the facts and it got completely memory-holed and overwritten with the crazy slavering warmongering shit we’ve gotten all over the western media since last year. Nobody is able to remember the origins of the war. Some people still deny Ukraine’s Nazi revival.

          • aleph@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The conflict starting and NATO involvement in it are two separate things. Your post only addressed the former, not the latter. It is no secret for those who have been paying attention that the conflict did not start last year.

            What Stoltenburg said is:

            And since 2014, NATO Allies have provided support to Ukraine, with training, with equipment, so the Ukrainian Armed Forces were much stronger in 2022, than they were in 2020, and 2014. And of course, that made a huge difference when President Putin decided to attack Ukraine.

            This doesn’t seem to contradict any previous statement about NATO’s support for Ukraine that I am aware of.

              • aleph@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                1 year ago

                The point you are making is that Stoltenburg made some kind of shocking admission, when in fact he did not.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  17
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No, the point I’m making is that a lot of people are bleating that Russia invaded Ukraine completely unprovoked last year which is completely at odds with reality. The latest admissions from Stoltenberg is just another piece of evidence that the conflict was going on since the 2014 coup, and that NATO has been deeply involved in it during this whole time. While you are correct that this has been reported on previously, such reporting has completely stopped after Russia got directly involved in the war. Furthermore, people such as Jeffrey Sachs and John Mearsheimer, who point these facts out today have been completely deplatformed by the mainstream media. They now publish articles on substack instead of mainstream papers, and are reduced to giving interviews on youtube channels.

            • sinovictorchan@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              1 year ago

              The pro-NATO fake news admited that NATO allies had intervened in Ukraine in contradiction to their claim that NATO was never involved in the Euromaiden coup. Are they also impliying that Russian intervention had not existed in the 2014 coup contrary to their claim that Russians had tried to stop the coup? Their further contradicted themselves on whether Putin had started the war in 2014 or 2022, so I am not surprised that fake news in NATO countries are not creditable but they should at least not contradict their narrative every year. The narrative on Putin’s side is more consistent about the NATO intervention in the Euromaiden coup, the Kyiv government’s massacre on ethnic minority that justify Putin’s military intervention after 8 years of failed peace talk, the racism towards all Ukrainians who are ethnically Russians that were uninvolved in the conflicts, and the Putin’s success in doing what Putin said he would do (protect rebelling Ukrainian states from Kyiv state terrorism) and not what the NATO said Putin would do (takeover Ukraine).

    • AmarkuntheGatherer@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Liberal with the realest backbone. As usual their opinions change with coverage, not facts. It was just this year that we couldn’t get one of these chucklefucks to admit there was any depth to the SMO than “orkz invaded” now they all have the chronology memorised.

    • iknt
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not widely known fact. known sure.