No, the UK Ministry of Defense is not remotely close to being a reputable source.
Their public statements are calculated, agenda-driven propaganda. While they may contain actual detail, they also knowingly parrot disinformation, exaggerate, present supposition as fact, and make purposeful omission. Their intent is to shape opinion - not to inform.
They're only slight more reliable than the Ukraine Ministry of Defense. Which is not very.
For example, today the UDF trumpeted an attack on Snake Island as "dealing a significant blow". But Maxar's satellite images show the only damage to be three areas of burned grass.
Every side in every war uses propaganda. Or they keep their mouths shut so as not to let their enemy know if they were/are being successful. It's called "The Fog of War."
After 12/7/41 we knew what our losses were, and they were severe, but did not make them public until we had some good news to report from the battle of the pacific.
That's the way war works. You'll get the good or bad news when the time is right. Not everything can be instant gratification. Yea, I know, that's what we're use to in this day and age. But when it comes to war, sometimes you have to be patient and wait for the President, Generals, Soldiers or Historians to tell us what actually occurred.
Don't look to agenda driven news organizations for facts. Most of the time they are just "Preaching to their Choirs." Sad to say, but true.
No, the UK Ministry of Defense is not remotely close to being a reputable source.
Their public statements are calculated, agenda-driven propaganda. While they may contain actual detail, they also knowingly parrot disinformation, exaggerate, present supposition as fact, and make purposeful omission. Their intent is to shape opinion - not to inform.
They're only slight more reliable than the Ukraine Ministry of Defense. Which is not very.
For example, today the UDF trumpeted an attack on Snake Island as "dealing a significant blow". But Maxar's satellite images show the only damage to be three areas of burned grass.
Well, every source I can find says you’re claims about Snake Island are wrong and that Maxar satellite images confirm that Russian equipment was destroyed. Please provide some evidence to the contrary… if there is any
As usual, claims from the Ukraine and Russian sides wildly differ.
The Maxar photos are the best evidence, which I initially cited. See above.
There as been significant damage caused buy prior Ukraine strikes. For example, a building destroyed in an earlier attack is visible, as are small patrol boats sunk while moored.
We are seeing different things.
In previously studying Side-By-Side and Sliding Overlay Before/After images, all I saw was three burned patches of grass where nothing was shown prior to the attack.
Looking at them again, I do see one instance of new damage - but not supporting Ukraine claims. A pre-war Navigation beacon was toppled.
You also have it backward. The de-facto assumption is no damage without proof of damage. Not vice versa.
Ukraine just received a generous shipment of American missiles.
Though so far they are being used to attack non-military targets.
A few days ago, a Rescue Tugboat was sunk.
Today, three Drilling Platforms were hit. Hopefully this does not result in an oil spill.
In other news, Ukraine is banning the Russian language, Russian Music, and Russian literature.
Nothing says "Democracy" like a good old-fashioned book burning.
So many lies in one short post:
The boat was a miltary target full of weapons and soldiars.
The platforms are not for oil but for gas, no oil to spill.
Those platforms were stolen from ukraine when russia invaded Crimea and probably used for staging weapons.
The Russian language isn't banned, the ban is on the works of russian citizens.
Not all Russian music is banned and it should be a crime to pay Russian artists that support the killing of Ukranians. Russian that condemn the war are not banned.