The more I watch Military Summary, Weeb Union and all other net video-strategos, I am drawn more and more to the conclusion that those are very, and surely non-intentionally, misleading and assuming stuff that is not very realistic in the real world battleground.
Surely most of them do play a positive role of a commentator, an updater, and an analyst for uneducated masses in military matters.
Also, mr. Ritter, col. MacGregor, mr. Martyanov and others of that rank and level explain the overall situation much better having an "eagle view" on the conflict, not being bothered with the "Bradley Square" and how FPV drone blew some Hummvee in some field.
Trouble is, I find nobody who connects those two camps at a certain level. Closest were The Duran, with some early broadcasts, but I have an issue with a way of too long Mercouris' words juggling and retelling stories collected from various sources. Gudaze is cool and sober in explaining the SMO from RF MSM media positions. Indians are funny to watch and very straight forward anti-Ukraine, but also cynical on China.
The New Atlas is eloquent, and comes closest to explaining to a commoner both views, a military and political.
But he is not close to a current battlespace analysts and his role is more important in explaining Asian position, as he lives in the hood there.
Russians have some superb analysts outside English-speaking spectrum, but they are not as everyday shows, and reading from Rybar, Kots, Sladakov, and such on TG is exhausting as they tend to write cliffhangers and my TG ability is limited to just observing it as in channel preview.
George Galloway is talking about the substance that has some reach, The Redacted are funny trio with a correct mindset, also with a substantial reach.
Also, Down South does cool TG updates from Ukrainian critical perspective, not only, but certainly helpful stuff here.
B. our host here is a former military man, and he is to be trusted on operational systems and methods of both sides of the conflict.
There are some others, surely credible more or less, as Nightvision/Simplicius, Imetatronink, Big Serge do good job too.
But, I am a bit fed up, and possibly some barflies too, with reiterations of already known and expected positions.
I think we know only around 30% percent of what is really going on, countering the Western MSM that lives in some other space-time and creates some other realities.
What I do not get is how some are citing Telegraph, Sun, Bild etc.
as anything reliable. Those are the lowest common denominators for anything true and correct.
So I think the whole information circling around is broken and obfuscated beyond any repair.
MoA surely tries to fill those blanks somewhat with a slightly chaotic disorder that has its charm, but rare and highly valued content here.
Having written all this, I still feel that there is something missing, especially adding to the picture a bit more lucidity.
But I do not know what or who. Do you feel or see the same?
No comments:
Post a Comment