this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2026
279 points (98.3% liked)
Ukraine
12791 readers
384 users here now
News related to Ukraine
Community Rules
πΊπ¦ Sympathy for invaders is prohibited.
π»π€’No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
π₯Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
π·[Combat] videos containing footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
π© No AI slop
β Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam (includes charities)
- No content against Finnish law
π³ Defense Aid π₯
π³ Humanitarian Aid βοΈβοΈ
πͺ Volunteer with the International Legionnaires
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Could you be more specific with the data you take issue with? The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense has provided the destruction tally, which is good enough for our purposes here.
Do you think air defense technology is easily replaceable by a country that can barely produce 90nm chips (current is down to ~3nm)?
I am the first person to expect relatively good quality reporting/sources, but I don't see any issues with the statements made in the article.
hot take: trusting a gov to provide war stats is silly. govs have got a documented history of fucking stats or downright lying.
It's not so much 'trust' as 'acceptance' that they are the best source available keeping realtime track of, and reporting, what they are doing. The MOD reports are understood to be the upper bound of what actually happened, not the gospel truth. Nobody will have even remotely accurate numbers until years after russia has withdrawn and the war is over, Fog of War being what it is.
Until then, saying "I don't trust these numbers" is noise. We work within the limitations of what is available. As such, the trend of an increase in reported numbers is itself a noteworthy change and supports the articles message regardless of whether it is only 75 or actually 77.
i can see that. sure. fair. but knowing that we wont know real numbers puts a clamp if distrust on all of them, to me i suppose.
knowing now that the US lied about the gulf of tonkin, back then, doesnt help me trust what they say now. they also lied about the casualty numbers and operations. (in vietnam)
anyway i appreciate the actual reply. my rambling is irrelevant. thanks!
True, but Ukraine has had a very good track record of providing correct information, usually backed up with video too.
Could they go rogue and start lying? Sure, but as it stands now (they have been reporting the truth for many years), it needs IMO something showing they actually lie. And that proof just doesn't seem to exist.
I don't trust a government involved in a war to publish trustworthy numbers. If that is really the basis for the "analysts" claims then that seems incredibly untrustworthy. Especially any numbers coming from the Ukrainian government, as they have been shown to be liberal with the truth quite often. Ghost of Ukraine amongst many others.
Hi Ivan! How's the 3 day military operation going?
"Everyone who disagrees with me is a foreigner"
Yes, how dare I not blindly believe what a government at war says about its operations, but instead ask for some corroborating information or insight into methodology? Surely I must be a dastardly foreign agent.
What youre doing is a perfect example of an ad hominem by the way.
Incredible, no other information out there to corroborate what Kyiv reports, absolutely none. No information at all. It's like a vacuum of information about what Ukraine does.
But instead it's all about you π poor thing, that's not allowed to believe whatever you feel best.
Do you struggle with reading or something? Literally the first post in this comment chain is me asking for more sources.
Okay, so you do struggle with reading? Because you somehow manage to read something I didnt write. Is it because making up a person to argue against is the only way you can win an argument, or is there some other reason you fuck up relating to what it is people say?
Ooh an ad hominem! Seems like you're the person incapable of reading as there are sources every day about how Ukraine pounds Russia. But you can only bring a horse to the water, not make him drink I guess.
Lmao all of you idiots say the same shit and you all open your mouths without understanding the words coming out. It's happening so often there is no need to write anything new, since it's all already been written:
Thats not what an ad hominem is you fucking idiot. You fool, you buffoon. Learn what the concepts you speak of mean, you absolute dolt.
An ad hominem isn't "when you get insulted." An ad hominem is when the quality of your character is tied to the quality of your argument - Something plenty of people do here all the time.
And you're even fucking it more up, because the person isn't even insulting you, unless you count yourself to be someone without a brain! Fucking incredible moronic self-own.
"You suck" is not an ad hominem. "You suck and your argument sucks" is also not an ad hominem. "You suck and therefore your statement sucks" is an ad hominem.
Now, an ad hominem does not need to make the correlation between character and argument overt. It is enough that the argument is dismissed on the basis of the person making it, though not every case where this happens will be an ad hominem.
More examples:
"Youre a Russian propagandist and I dont listen to Russian propaganda!" <- Adhummer
"Youre a bot, so I dont have to engage" <- add hummus
"Typical statement from .ml users, youre all saying silly stuff" <- alt host
Calling you brainless is just calling you brainless. It is only when the argument is dismissed directly or indirectly through this personal demeaning that it is a logical fallacy. And it doesn't even have to be an insult! But you're too fucking stupid to see that, you just throw words around that you have picked up thru cultural osmosis without ever learning them. Idiot.
Yeah ad hominem right there.
Now go cry Ivan, the first Ukrainian ballistic missile just hit Russia. Check it out, even you must be able to find the information lol.
An ad hominem isn't when I insult you you fucking idiot. Its literally right there where you quote me. Read the text you actual imbecile. Click the link to realise youre such a common halfwit that this text is a copypasta.
Cry again, wikipedia:
So if you arrack the person instead of the argument, you guessed it, ad hominem! Saying someone is a moron instead of debunking the fact he threw at you, guess what? Ad Hominem!
Learn some latin for gods sake.
Slava Ukraine πππππππΌπ₯π₯π₯
Do you read the text you're quoting?
It is making the argument about you instead of about the argument. There is no argument with an insult. It is not "making the argument about you" it's just an insult. It is only when the character is tied to the argument that you see an Ad Hominem. You monumental idiot <- Also not an ad hominem.
There's even more than one form - as I also wrote for you. Learn some basic english, for gods' sake. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/fallacies#letter-A
I'm going to block you now. You've shown yourself to be so thickheaded you can read and quote a piece of text and still not understand it. Talking to you is an embarassment, you absolute oxheaded brick.
Lol so angry because you are wrong. Yes please block me instead of trying to misinterpret one of the oldest "debating techniques" lololol ππππ€£π€£π€£ learn to be wrong little person, or stay stupid as they say!