RUSSIA - UKRAINE 2022 CONFLICT

[MVitaly5]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnTQ0ESmL-8&t=328s

[TangoJLB75]

Intéressant en effet

[PIERRE WOODMAN]

Oui c'est trés bon et une fois de plus démontre le monde de faux culs dans lequel nous vivons et la volonté de l'occident de maintenir cette guerre en place pour des intérets politico-financiers où les vies humaines importent peu ...

PW

[TangoJLB75]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th0nnP1x2uw

[Jean]

[BlackSon]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/12/worl ... kursk.html

[MVitaly5]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/12/worl ... kursk.html

It is clear that the article is written with a clearly biased inclination in favor of the Ukrainian side. Well, what else can you expect from this lying American information garbage? Not a single journalist from the 'NYT' was on Kursk land!!! The author of the article poses as a war correspondent, a bitch who hasn't stepped outside her office in New York. This means they selectively took information from certain (not their own) sources. All these photos were taken by other individuals! The comments on these photos are clearly biased and interpreted as conveniently as the authors of this article wish, just like the corresponding events. One question remains: 'Why did you post this here?'...

[BlackSon]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/12/worl ... kursk.html

It is clear that the article is written with a clearly biased inclination in favor of the Ukrainian side. Well, what else can you expect from this lying American information garbage? Not a single journalist from the 'NYT' was on Kursk land!!! The author of the article poses as a war correspondent, a bitch who hasn't stepped outside her office in New York. This means they selectively took information from certain (not their own) sources. All these photos were taken by other individuals! The comments on these photos are clearly biased and interpreted as conveniently as the authors of this article wish, just like the corresponding events. One question remains: 'Why did you post this here?'...

1) And you know that no one was in Kursk because...?
2) The Ukrainian government wasn't happy because of this article

[MVitaly5]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/12/worl ... kursk.html

It is clear that the article is written with a clearly biased inclination in favor of the Ukrainian side. Well, what else can you expect from this lying American information garbage? Not a single journalist from the 'NYT' was on Kursk land!!! The author of the article poses as a war correspondent, a bitch who hasn't stepped outside her office in New York. This means they selectively took information from certain (not their own) sources. All these photos were taken by other individuals! The comments on these photos are clearly biased and interpreted as conveniently as the authors of this article wish, just like the corresponding events. One question remains: 'Why did you post this here?'...

1) And you know that no one was in Kursk because...?
2) The Ukrainian government wasn't happy because of this article

Today, the commander of the special forces 'Akhmat', A. Alauddinov, officially confirmed that the American journalist from the 'NYT', Nanna Heitmann, indeed spent 6 days in the area of Sudzhi (Kursk region) in March 2025. Her arrival was under strict confidentiality, at her own initiative. She was assisted by Russian military correspondents, who asked the commander of the special forces 'Akhmat' to arrange her visit. Alauddinov agreed on the condition that the journalist would write the whole truth as she saw it, and not distort everything in her newspaper afterward. The journalist gave her honest word.

Initially, I received this article with skepticism because previously, such information outlets as the 'NYT' and similar ones never wrote the truth about this war; their correspondents were not in the combat zone, and they used other people's photos and video materials in their articles. I have gotten used to this over many years. Regarding Heitmann, I admit I was wrong. Nevertheless, I didn't like the article, but that is my personal opinion. It is clear that the editorial team worked on the article, smoothing out many sharp edges in favor of Ukraine, despite the obvious crimes of the Ukrainian army and foreign mercenaries. By the way, in the Kursk region, it was the numerous mercenaries who committed atrocities, not Ukrainians. However, the American journalist doesn't seem to write about this for some reason. There are also many dubious, in my opinion, authorial and editorial interpretations in the commentary on certain events and photographs.

Well, in any case, it is worth concluding that for the "NYT", it is already an achievement that they at least wanted to see everything with their own eyes and find out the truth. As for the Ukrainian side, it is clear that they are very dissatisfied because: 1). An American journalist from the "NYT" (a publication loyal to them) went to a territory already under the control of the Russian army and worked in cooperation with the Russian Army. 2). She wrote uncomfortable but fairly truthful facts for Ukraine and the West as a whole. 3). The Ukrainian political regime has become so brazen that it demands from Western publications only materials where they are "saints", and Russia is "bad" in everything. That’s why they got so agitated about this article, as it started to write about their crimes and the colossal military losses of the Ukrainian army and mercenaries from such military adventures as their invasion of the Kursk region (Russia).