Before any politician votes on a law like this, should be required to watch a video of a 9th month baby being torn limb by limb out of the womb. They jab a pick in the neck and then tear the head off first. Maybe then it would shock whatever soul they may have left!
https://twitter.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1619751231739822080?s=20&t=HRiY9mWf1Ayagb6-KG-DWw
https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1619854199159914498?s=20&t=HRiY9mWf1Ayagb6-KG-DWw
How The Media Enable Rep. Adam Schiff’s Russian Bot Conspiracy Theories
Mollie Hemingway @mzhemingway
February 21, 2018Mollie nailed it back in 2018, proven true by twitter files
1 of 2
Last week, Laurence Tribe suggested, without evidence, that a plane crash in Russia was related to fallout from the Russian dossier operation orchestrated and funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign. Tribe is a Harvard Law professor, a passionate critic of President Donald Trump, and a known Russia conspiracy theorist. So it should have been surprising that the same day he was tweeting out plane crash conspiracy theories, he also argued in a “facially absurd” op-ed in The New York Timesthat Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., should be charged with obstruction of justice — no, really — for performing congressional oversight of the FBI.
Then again, it was only last March that The New York Times published another Russia conspiracy theorist named Louise Mensch talking about Russian hacking. Yes, the same Louise Mensch who believes that the “Marshal of the Supreme Court” told Trump about his impeachment and that Steve Bannon faces the death penalty for espionage. (Forget it, she’s rolling.)
When it comes to the Russia-Trump collusion theory, a bit more journalistic rigor is in order. One of the most enthusiastic promulgators of a Russia-Trump collusion theory is Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the ranking member on Nunes’ House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. For more than a year, Schiff has been hopping around all the TV stations claiming, without benefit of specifics, the existence of a vast conspiracy between Trump and Russia.
Leaks from his committee that advance this theory frequently get published, even if they fail to hold up under scrutiny. But even his public actions shouldn’t be accepted so uncritically.
Experts Refute The Russia Charge
On January 23, public interest in the memo from the majority of the intelligence committee had been high, as evidenced by the demand to #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag on Twitter and Facebook. When the hashtag went viral, Schiff had a theory that it wasn’t the American public that was interested in abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Nope, it was Russians! Secret Russian bots were trying to make it look like Americans were interested in FISA abuse against a Trump campaign affiliate.
Schiff put out a press release pressuring private companies to investigate whether Russians using their platform were behind the spread of the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag. The letter demanded that Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg perform an “in-depth forensic examination” on the “ongoing attack by the Russian government through Kremlin-linked social media actors directly acting to intervene and influence our democratic process.”
The Daily Beast quickly put out a story with an anonymous Twitter source denying that Russian bots were behind the spread of the hashtag. The story said the theory was bunk, according to “an early in-house analysis” that concluded the hashtag was mostly pushed by eager Americans:
The online groundswell urging the release of House Republicans’ attacks on the Federal Bureau of Investigation appears thus far to be organically American—not Russian propaganda, a source familiar with Twitter’s internal analysis told The Daily Beast.
But that was just an anonymous source at Twitter. Twitter itself publicly responded on January 26 with a letter saying an investigation “has not identified any significant activity connected to Russia with respect to Tweets posting original content to this hashtag.” The letter went on to note that #ReleaseTheMemo “was also used by several prominent, verified U.S. accounts on the evening of Thursday, January 18. Typically, hashtag use by high-profile accounts, including those with high numbers of followers, plays a role in driving conversations around a hashtag on Twitter.”
Facebook responded with a letter that said this was a Twitter hashtag, not a Facebook one, and added that the company would continue to update Congress on any Russian interference. Schiff went back and asked for more information and pressured social media companies for more action.
Facebook slapped it down again, saying, “To date, our internal Information Security team has not become aware of information or activity of a sort that would prompt further review.” Facebook explained that it monitors and assesses thousands of detailed account attributes such as location information and connections to others on the platform, and it hadn’t detected any significant Kremlin activity.
Media Coverage of the Russian Bot Story
https://thefederalist.com/2018/02/21/how-the-media-enable-rep-adam-schiffs-russian-bot-conspiracy-theories/
2 of 2. Media Coverage of the Russian Bot Story
When Schiff advanced his theory that it was Russian bots — not Americans — who cared about FISA abuse, he received typical friendly media coverage. But when Twitter and Facebook refuted the claim, media outlets either downplayed it or pretended it didn’t matter.…
Politico is one outlet that heavily pushed the idea of Russian bots being behind the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag, despite the denials of officials at Facebook and Twitter. In January, PoliticoPro ran a story that acknowledged Twitter had found no evidence of any significant Russian bot activity before this odd section that pretended denial had never happened: “Schiff and Feinstein said the companies must deactivate the bot accounts if they violate user policies. They want Twitter and Facebook to notify users who may have seen posts from the bots and to describe how they’ll prevent similar foreign influence campaigns in the future.”
Even after more denials from Facebook and Twitter were issued, Politico continued to go all-in on Schiff’s idea that Russian bots were behind the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag, repeating his accusations. This articlementions The Daily Beast’s anonymous Twitter source, saying Russian bots weren’t behind the hashtag, omitting the on-the-record Twitter letters saying the same thing. This article mentions the Twitter denial, but it’s placed in the middle of the story with absolutely no consequence, as if it’s irrelevant.
Natasha Bertrand, a reporter who facilitates messages from Fusion GPS, the group that authored the infamous Russia dossier on behalf of the Clinton campaign, wrote a pieceheadlined “Russia-linked Twitter accounts are working overtime to help Devin Nunes and WikiLeaks.”
Her story and many others uncritically accept and promote a secretive group’s unverified claim of a Russian conspiracy. The Alliance for Securing Democracy runs an operation called Hamilton 68 that it claims tracks Russian bots, though it’s impossible to assess the claim because of the group’s methodology. The advisory council for the alliance includes NeverTrump stalwarts such as Bill Kristol and David Kramer, the man Sen. John McCain sent to London to pick up the discredited Russian dossier from Christopher Steele.
Hamilton 68’s claim — later refuted by Twitter and Facebook — formed the entire basis of Schiff’s theory that it was Russian bots, not real Americans, who wanted to learn about FISA abuse by the FBI. Asked to respond to Hamilton 68’s claim, Twitter responded, “Because the Hamilton Dashboard’s account list is not available to the public, we are unable to offer any specific context on the accounts it includes.” They added, “We have offered to review the list of accounts contained in the Dashboard and this offer remains open.”
In other words, Hamilton 68 won’t let anyone review their dashboard to determine in any way if they’re tracking actual Russian propaganda bots, or just conservative Americans who, for instance, care about FISA abuse. Yet Hamilton 68’s claims are repeated uncritically by a media that asks no questions about the methodology.
Yesterday’s front page at The New York Timesis a great example of how much the media are willing to publicize claims they have in no way independently verified:
As journalist Glenn Greenwald of Edward Snowden fame noted:
Russian bot hysteria is taking over many in the media. This week both Newsweek and RawStory were duped by a false story alleging that Russian bots forced Al Franken from office over his sexual harassment of women.
Thankfully, some other voices are making their way in this hysterical climate. Adrian Chen wrote the definitive piece on Russian troll farms back in 2015 for the New York Times Sunday Magazine. It is well worth a read for anyone wanting a factual look at how Russian troll armies work and how to guard against them. His piece centers on the very same Internet Research Agency whose members were indicted by Robert Mueller on Friday. He knocked down the Russian bot hysteria on MSNBC:
Masha Gessen is a vehement and long-standing Putin critic. She has written a bookwarning about Putin and many articles comparing Putin and Trump. Even she, in a new article for The New Yorker, mocks the hysteria over the troll farms and says of the Russian bot operation that it was “not at all sophisticated, and about as bold as, say, keying a neighbor’s car under the cover of night.”
Russian disinformation campaigns have been a real thing going back decades, but the implication that bots are a particularly significant force in turning political debate poisonous is ridiculous. It’s juvenile enough for Schiff to peddle his conspiracy theories. Journalists should show a bit more restraint before uncritically broadcasting them further.
Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
Again, this is why I say thatno matter how much you hate large media corporations, it's not enough.
When they get caught lying, they never admit it, all while they lecture you on the evils "disinformation." It comes most from them. They used this fraud again and again:
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1619416293668716544?s=20&t=HRiY9mWf1Ayagb6-KG-DWw
Kek, now it Rolling Stone freaked out about Rumble, they wrote a 34 very large paragraph article on the dangers of Rumble(sample below). In 2021 WAPO wrote an article hating on Rumble and Glenn Greenwald backed by a “research” company funded by Google, FB and US government agencies such as DHS, etc
Far-Right Superstars Are Failing on Rumble. Who’s Winning?
The outsider streaming site that just partnered up with Donald Trump Jr. is growing — but not in the way most people think
Miles KleeJanuary 15, 2023
The outsider streaming site that just partnered up with Donald Trump Jr. is growing — but not in the way most people think
To ring in 2023, the social video site Rumbleannounced an exclusive partnership with Donald Trump Jr. Beginning in late January, the former president’s eldest son will bring to the platform a biweekly livestream show, Triggered with Don Jr., riffing on current events and, presumably, seeking to own the libs. The press release and media coverage touted the multiyear, seven-figure signing as a coup for the company, which went public last September, valued at more than $2 billion. In marketing terms, the deal conveyed momentum for an underdog business looking to disrupt Big Tech by promising freedom from censorship.
Or it could just be a huge waste of money. Trump Jr. already has 1.07 million subscribers on Rumble, which puts him among the top tier of users — in theory. The reality is that despite this formidable audience, his videos often struggle to crack 10,000 views. One of his most-watched clips in the past couple months is a ripped and re-uploaded segment from comedian Dave Chappelle’s most recent Saturday Night Live monologue, with a golden “DON JR.” watermark and about 90 seconds of Trump’s own commentary added to the footage. Other videos, like one captioned “Can’t Make This Stuff Up: Now ‘Shark Week’ Is RACIST? – OMG,” are pulling meager engagement compared to Trump Jr.’s posts on Instagram and Twitter. Rumble will no doubt throw resources into production and promotion of Triggered, so perhaps the show itself will depart from this style of low-effort clickbait.
Trump Jr., whose office did not return a request for comment, isn’t the only right-wing celebrity struggling to connect on Rumble despite boasting an army of supporters there. Follower count doesn’t automatically correlate to views, and a channel that seems moribund can score a breakout hit here and there, yet it’s hard not to notice a pattern. Dinesh D’Souza, the conspiracy theorist pardoned by President Trump for his felony conviction in an illegal campaign contribution scheme, has even more followers — 1.71 million — yet the average view count for his videos is in the low hundreds. Many of Sean Hannity’s don’t reach a thousand. Same for Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. (Both have over a million subscribers.) Steve Bannon’s channel does about as well as Trump Jr.’s, as does Rep. Matt Gaetz’s. Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert have even less traction, and paltry subscriber counts: 22,000 for Greene, under 3,000 for Boebert.
This is all rather surprising if you’ve been led to understand that Rumble is an echo chamber of far-right content, bankrolled in part by Hillbilly Elegy author J.D. Vance and tech billionaire Peter Thiel. The conservative venture capitalists came aboard as investors in May 2021, a year and a half before Vance won a Senate seat in Ohio (with Thiel backing his run to the tune of $10 million). Why wouldn’t the famous agitators on that side of our partisan divide hold sway on a “free speech” site that does little to crack down on incendiary misinformation? Perhaps because Rumble’s most active users are interested in something else. They can get the tired MAGA lines, reflexive liberal-bashing and Fox Newsorthodoxy on TV and mainstream social media. What Rumble promises is forbidden truths that some ambiguous “they” don’t want you to discover, from creators shunted aside and banned by other platforms. Above any ideological category, it is anti-establishment. It’s also growing — the site reported a new record of 78 million active users last August — though, again, not in the way you’d expect.
To quickly recap the site’s journey from unknown startup to breakout among “alt-tech” apps: Rumble debuted in 2013, with founder and CEO Chris Pavlovski, a Canadian tech entrepreneur, envisioning it as a refuge for small-time creators left in the dust as YouTube prioritized its most successful influencers…
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/rumble-spends-millions-fighting-big-tech-conspiracy-theories-1234660249/
Excellent long article
Bad News
by Joseph Bernstein
In the beginning, there were ABC, NBC, and CBS, and they were good. Midcentury American man could come home after eight hours of work and turn on his television and know where he stood in relation to his wife, and his children, and his neighbors, and his town, and his country, and his world. And that was good. Or he could open the local paper in the morning in the ritual fashion, taking his civic communion with his coffee, and know that identical scenes were unfolding in households across the country.
Over frequencies our American never tuned in to, red-baiting, ultra-right-wing radio preachers hyperventilated to millions. In magazines and books he didn’t read, elites fretted at great length about the dislocating effects of television. And for people who didn’t look like him, the media had hardly anything to say at all. But our man lived in an Eden, not because it was unspoiled, but because he hadn’t considered any other state of affairs. For him, information was in its right—that is to say, unquestioned—place. And that was good, too.
Today, we are lapsed. We understand the media through a metaphor—“the information ecosystem”—which suggests to the American subject that she occupies a hopelessly denatured habitat. Every time she logs on to Facebook or YouTube or Twitter, she encounters the toxic byproducts of modernity as fast as her fingers can scroll. Here is hate speech, foreign interference, and trolling; there are lies about the sizes of inauguration crowds, the origins of pandemics, and the outcomes of elections.
She looks out at her fellow citizens and sees them as contaminated, like tufted coastal animals after an oil spill, with “disinformation” and “misinformation.” She can’t quite define these terms, but she feels that they define the world, online and, increasingly, off.
Everyone scrounges this wasteland for tainted morsels of content, and it’s impossible to know exactly what anyone else has found, in what condition, and in what order. Nevertheless, our American is sure that what her fellow citizens are reading and watching is bad. According to a 2019 Pew survey, half of Americans think that “made-up news/info” is “a very big problem in the country today,” about on par with the “U.S. political system,” the “gap between rich and poor,” and “violent crime.” But she is most worried about disinformation, because it seems so new, and because so new, so isolable, and because so isolable, so fixable. It has something to do, she knows, with the algorithm.
What is to be done with all the bad content?In March, the Aspen Instituteannounced that it would convene an exquisitely nonpartisan Commission on Information Disorder, co-chaired by Katie Couric, which would “deliver recommendations for how the country can respond to this modern-day crisis of faith in key institutions.” The fifteen commissioners include Yasmin Green, the director of research and development for Jigsaw, a technology incubator within Google that “explores threats to open societies”; Garry Kasparov, the chess champion and Kremlin critic; Alex Stamos, formerly Facebook’s chief security officer and now the director of the Stanford Internet Observatory; Kathryn Murdoch, Rupert Murdoch’s estranged daughter-in-law; and Prince Harry, Prince Charles’s estranged son. Among the commission’s goals is to determine “how government, private industry, and civil society can work together . . . to engage disaffected populations who have lost faith in evidence-based reality,” faith being a well-known prerequisite for evidence-based reality.
The Commission on Information Disorder is the latest (and most creepily named)addition to a new field of knowledge production that emerged during the Trump years at the juncture of media, academia, and policy research: Big Disinfo. A kind of EPA for content, it seeks to expose the spread of various sorts of “toxicity” on social-media platforms, the downstream effects of this spread, and the platforms’ clumsy, dishonest, and half-hearted attempts to halt it. As an environmental cleanup project, it presumes a harm model of content consumption. Just as, say, smoking causes cancer, consuming bad information must cause changes in belief or behavior that are bad, by some standard. Otherwise, why care what people read and watch?…
https://harpers.org/archive/2021/09/bad-news-selling-the-story-of-disinformation/
HRC is always behind this bullshit of disinfo and misinfo, she started it because Trump won
…”?Big Disinfo has found energetic support from the highest echelons of the American political center, which has been warning of an existential content crisis more or less constantly since the 2016 election. To take only the most recent example: in May, Hillary Clinton told the former Tory leader Lord Hague that “there must be a reckoning by the tech companies for the role that they play in undermining the information ecosystemthat is absolutely essential for the functioning of any democracy.”
Somewhat surprisingly, Big Tech agrees. Compared with other, more literally toxic corporate giants, those in the tech industry have been rather quick to concede the role they played in corrupting the allegedly pure stream of American reality. Only five years ago, Mark Zuckerberg said it was a “pretty crazy idea” that bad content on his website had persuaded enough voters to swing the 2016 election to Donald Trump. “Voters make decisions based on their lived experience,” he said. “There is a profound lack of empathy in asserting that the only reason someone could have voted the way they did is because they saw fake news.” A year later, suddenly chastened, he apologized for being glib and pledged to do his part to thwart those who “spread misinformation.”
Denial was always untenable, for Zuckerberg in particular. The so-called techlash, a season of belatedlybrutal media coverage and political pressure in the aftermath of Brexit and Trump’s win,made it difficult. But Facebook’s basic business pitch made denial impossible. Zuckerberg’s company profits by convincing advertisers that it can standardize its audience for commercial persuasion. How could it simultaneously claim that people aren’t persuaded by its content? Ironically, it turned out that the big social-media platforms shared a foundational premise with their strongest critics in the disinformation field: that platforms have a unique power to influence users, in profound and measurable ways. Over the past five years, these critics helped shatter Silicon Valley’s myth of civic benevolence, while burnishing its image as the ultra-rational overseer of a consumerist future.
Behold, the platforms and their most prominent critics both proclaim: hundreds of millions of Americans in an endless grid, ready for manipulation, ready for activation. Want to change an output—say, an insurrection, or a culture of vaccine skepticism? Change your input. Want to solve the “crisis of faith in key institutions” and the “loss of faith in evidence-based reality”? Adopt a better content-moderation policy. The fix, you see, has something to do, she knows, with the algorithm….
https://harpers.org/archive/2021/09/bad-news-selling-the-story-of-disinformation/
Good video revealing the elitist left and right creating infrastructure tosquash free speechintentionally. They have been at this for a long time
Glenn Greenwald
Streamed on: Jan 27, 7:00 pm EST
Revealed:Mass Media Complicity in “Russian Disinformation” Fraud, w/ Matt TaibbiSYSTEM UPDATE #30
https://rumble.com/embed/v24rr2s/?pub=4
30 Jan, 2023 15:03
Russian governor puts bounty on Western tanks
Soldiers can earn up to $43,000 for capturing a working Leopard main battle tank
The governor of Zabaikalsky Region in eastern Russia has offered soldiers from the province a chance to earn bounties onNATO tanks captured or destroyed in Ukraine. The governor’s announcement came as a private company offered a similar reward for captured Western-made armor.
In an order signed on Friday, Governor Alexander Osipov declared that any local soldier who managed to seize a Leopard tank “in working condition” could earn 3 million rubles ($42,909). A bounty of one million rubles ($14,303)will be paid to anyone who destroys one of these German tanks, while those assisting with a successful capture will be paid $7,150 and those assisting in the destruction of a Leopard will earn $2,240.
A sum of 1.5 million rubles ($21,450) will be paid for the successful capture of an American M1 Abrams tank, with destruction paying 500,000 rubles ($7,150). As with the Leopards, smaller bounties are offered to assisting soldiers.
Osipov’s order ended with a warning that soldiers seeking out tanks to destroy or capture should first and foremost work to “preserve their life and health.”
Berlin announced last week that it would supply Kiev’s forces with 14 Leopard 2s, and would give other European countries permission to export their own stocks of these tanks to Ukraine. Chancellor Olaf Scholz stated that Germany and its partners were looking to supply 112 tanks in total.
The US pledged 31 Abrams tanks but – having apparently promised to give Germany “cover”to send the Leopards – reportedly won’t be able to deliver these high-maintenance behemoths to the battlefield until at least the end of 2023.
Russian chemical firm Fores has offered a similar bounty to Osipov’s. In a statement on its website on Friday, the company said that it would pay 5 million rubles ($70,700) to any Russian serviceman who destroyed or captured either kind of tank, with 500,000 rubles ($7,070) offered for subsequent trophies.
Moscow’s position is that foreign weapons deliveries show NATO’s “direct involvement”and will only prolong the conflict in Ukraine. Western tanks, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said earlier this month, “can burn and they will burn like the rest [of the Western weapons].”
https://www.rt.com/russia/570701-russia-governor-bounty-tanks/
30 Jan, 2023 14:53
Culprit in drone strike on Iran identified – media
Early indications suggest the attack on a military complex in Isfahan was masterminded by Israel, Al Jazeera reports
The recent drone attack on an Iranian military facility was likely orchestrated by Israel, Al Jazeera reported on Monday, citing an Iranian source. So far, Tehran has stopped short of officially assigning blame.
An unnamed Iranian official quoted by the outlet, said the raid on a Defense Ministry complex in the central city of Isfahan was launched from inside the country and close to the site. He also claimed that initial data suggests that Israel was involved in the attack.
The official echoed an earlier statement by the Iranian Defense Ministry, describing the attack as unsuccessful, and claiming that Israeli efforts to portray it in a different light are “just propaganda to obscure the failure.”
On Sunday, the Jerusalem Post reported, citing Western sources, that the raid was “a tremendous success,” with the destruction being much more serious than Tehran’s authorities are willing to acknowledge. However, the Iranian Defense Ministry said the raid “did not cause any loss of life” and inflicted only “minor damage” to the roof of the military workshop.
Al Jazeera’s Iranian source said Israel’s alleged actions will not go unanswered. He added that Washington has distanced itself from the raid and will not pressure Tehran into changing its policies.
“There are those who play with fire and we have no doubt that they will be the first to burn if they decide to start a regional war,” the source told the outlet.
His comments echo an earlier Wall Street Journal report claiming that Israel was behind the attack. Al-Arabiya TV said that theUS Air Force and “one more country” were involved in the raid, which allegedly targeted an Iranian ballistic missile depot. While the Pentagon denied any involvement, Israel refrained from commenting on the matter.
The incident comes amid heightened tensions between Iran and Israel over Tehran’s nuclear program. While Israeli officials have repeatedly warned that Iran is seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, Tehran has dismissed the allegations, arguing that its nuclear program serves only peaceful purposes.
https://www.rt.com/news/570696-iran-drone-strike-israel/
30 Jan, 2023 14:02
Tehran summons Ukrainian diplomat – media
Iran has officially decried comments by a Zelensky aide approving a drone attack inside the country, ILNA news agency has said
Tehran has protested to Ukraine’s charge d'affaires over a statement by a senior Kiev adviser on a recent drone strike at an Iranian military facility. The official suggested the raid was connected to the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev, local media said on Monday.
On Sunday, Mikhail Podoliak, a top aide to Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, commented on the Saturday attack on an Iranian defense ministry complex in the central city of Isfahan by tweeting: “War logic is inexorable and murderous. It bills the authors and accomplices strictly…Explosive night in Iran – drone and missile production, oil refineries. Ukraine did warn you.”
Kiev and its Western allieshave repeatedly accused Iran of supplying Russia with drones to be used in the Ukraine conflict. Both Russia and Iran deny the allegations. At the same time, Tehran has admitted that it sent some drones to Moscow, but stressed that the delivery took place before the current hostilities dating from February 2022.
According to Iran’s ILNA news agency, following Podoliak’s tweet, said to demonstrate “the tacit acceptance of [Kiev’s] participation in the attack…the Ukrainian charge d'affaires was summoned to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,” where he was asked to explain, the report said.
The Iranian Defense Ministry described Saturday’s raid as “unsuccessful,” and said there were no casualties. The drones managed to cause only “minor damage to the workshop’s roof,” the ministry said.
While Tehran stopped short of assigning blame, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing sources, that the strike was orchestrated by Israel. Meanwhile, an Al-Arabiya report suggested that the US Air Force and “one more country” took part in the attack. While the Pentagon has denied any involvement, Israel has refrained from any comment on the matter.
https://www.rt.com/news/570692-iran-summons-ukraine-envoy-drone-attack/
30 Jan, 2023 11:29
US skeptical of UK military – Sky News
The report, citing defense sources, claims that a top US general privately shared the assessment with Britain’s defence secretary
A senior US military official confidentially told British Defence Secretary Ben Wallace that the UK’s armed forces are no longer on par with those of the leading world powers, Sky News claims. The broadcaster, citing anonymous defense sources, said that years of cost-cutting measures by successive governments havemade the country’s military a “hollow force.”
The report, which came out on Monday, alleges that the unnamed American general had a frank conversation with Wallace and several other British officials last fall. The conclusion of the US general regarding the UK’s fighting capabilities was unsettling for London: “You haven’t got a tier one. It’s barely tier two.”
According to Sky News, the general classed the armed forces of the US, China, Russia, and France as tier-one powers, with Germany and Italy representing tier-two armies.
Several unnamed British defense sources confirmed to the broadcaster that the nation’s military is currently in a sorry state.
One official was quoted as saying: “It’s an entire service unable to protect the UK and our allies for a decade.”
The UK military would reportedly run out of ammunition “in a few days” if a conflict broke out. Moreover, the armed forces would likely be unable to defend the skies against the level of missile and drone strikes currently seen in Ukraine, the broadcaster claimed.
The report said that 10 Downing Street has repeatedly cut the defense budget following the end of the Cold War, leaving the British army with hardware that is at least 30 years old and in dire need of replacement.
London’s active role in supplying Ukraine with weapons over the past 11 months has further diluted its own fighting capabilities, the news outlet said.
Another major issue highlighted by anonymous defense sources is chronic staffing shortages.With only 76,000 personnel, the British armed forces are less than half the size they were in 1990, Sky News claims.
However, according to the government’s plans,the military will shed 3,000 more troopsdown the road, while new weaponry is not expected to be procured for a few years, the report notes.
(Scott Ritter has been saying this for a year or two)
https://www.rt.com/news/570680-us-uk-military-assessment-sky-news/
Good idea though
Ukraine is creating more enemies as they tweet and speak. No one in the EU likes them, US using them. Remember Jankowitz trained them in propaganda