Russia Planned To Attack Japan in 2021: Leaked FSB Letters

Page 2 of 2 [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

21 Dec 2022, 4:57 am

Why would anyone want to open Eastern front with Japan and divert resources there?
No one wants a big war there, with North Korea throwing under-engineered nukes left and right and China introducing "peace forces".

Some nearly-surgical "special operation" would be possible but a big, resource-heavy war would benefit literally no one (maybe except for China that could enter some strategic places and force submission while presenting themselves as the peacemakers).


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


r00tb33r
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,778

21 Dec 2022, 5:03 am

magz wrote:
Why would anyone want to open Eastern front with Japan and divert resources there?
No one wants a big war there

Ukrainians will take every Hail Mary at this point.


_________________
Enjoy the silence.


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

21 Dec 2022, 5:04 am

r00tb33r wrote:
magz wrote:
Why would anyone want to open Eastern front with Japan and divert resources there?
No one wants a big war there

Ukrainians will take every Hail Mary at this point.

Not really - it would divert American support away from them.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


r00tb33r
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,778

21 Dec 2022, 5:23 am

magz wrote:
r00tb33r wrote:
magz wrote:
Why would anyone want to open Eastern front with Japan and divert resources there?
No one wants a big war there

Ukrainians will take every Hail Mary at this point.

Not really - it would divert American support away from them.

If anything, that would be an excuse for increased presence of US forces in the Pacific, despite obvious objections from China. US has interests in this as well.


_________________
Enjoy the silence.


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

21 Dec 2022, 5:28 am

US has an interest in increasing their presence in Pacific without triggering a big SHTF in which China would have clear advantages of proximity and not being engaged elsewhere.

The only one I see to benefit from publishing such information - true or false - would be Japan. To gain approval for arming themselves and developing intelligence services. Likely in anticipation of future things possibly going hot in Pacific, regardless of what happens to Russia.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


r00tb33r
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,778

21 Dec 2022, 5:38 am

^ I think you see very well that there is zero probability of this information being genuine.


_________________
Enjoy the silence.


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

21 Dec 2022, 5:53 am

MaxE wrote:


Newsweek:

Quote:
RIGHT-CENTER BIAS

These media sources are slight to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appeals to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources.

Overall, we rate Newsweek Right-Center Biased based on editorial positions that slightly favor the right. We also rate them as Mostly Factual in reported rather than high due to having to make corrections on false information after publication.


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsweek/

Nothing too weird based on this, but the article itself doesn't sound plausible to me.



magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

21 Dec 2022, 6:09 am

r00tb33r wrote:
^ I think you see very well that there is zero probability of this information being genuine.

I think it's blown out of proportion (analyses of various countries' defenses and propaganda attacks are not the same as time-tabled plans of a wide-scale invasion) and most likely it's blown by the Japanese themselves, who want to prepare for a possibility of future SHTF with North Korea and China but still have politically limited abilities after having lost WWII.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

21 Dec 2022, 6:12 am

Pepe wrote:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsweek/

Sorry but I just can't resist...
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/sky-news-australia/


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

21 Dec 2022, 6:31 am

magz wrote:
Pepe wrote:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsweek/

Sorry but I just can't resist...
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/sky-news-australia/


3 things:
1. No one, to my knowledge, has ever suggested Sky News was anything but right-wing biased.
2. I don't listen to every commentator on Sky News. You aren't suggesting "all animals are created equal", are you?
3. Who checks the fact-checkers? There have been examples of obvious bias in my eyes on occasion. I suggest ppl keep a skeptical mindset even when it comes to "Fact Checkers".

And NEVER forget, when it comes to political commentary, NEVER assume Wikipedia is unbiased.



magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

21 Dec 2022, 7:07 am

I use Wikipedia for general knowledge, like most basic history (textbook facts and dates) or what a term means.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

21 Dec 2022, 7:22 am

Wikipedia is very good. They nip speculation in the bud by emphasizing the need for corroboration through emphasizing the need for credible sources.



magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

21 Dec 2022, 7:27 am

Not all articles on Wikipedia meet its desired standards.
When something goes beyond general knowledge, looks more like commentary than information or looks suspiciously biased in other ways, it's a wise move to check the linked sources.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

21 Dec 2022, 7:31 am

That’s true. They don’t.

But the intention towards objectivity is prominent.

Yep….definitely refer to the sources listed.