Geordies killed in plane attack

Quoted from Grimal

Sorry Maringer but don't you think the yanks havn't already got troops in the Ukraine ? They are a bankrupt country and as such had no government military might, who do you think funds their weapons and teaches them how to use them. Definitely not Russia.

Eh? The Ukraine might be bankrupt, but they've also got a large standing army (tens of thousands of troops) with plenty of Soviet-era equipment. Who do you think is fighting against the 'separatists'? Most of the separatists themselves are ethnic Russians many of whom are former (and possibly present) members of the Russian army.

The theory that the Yanks are over in Ukraine fighting is, frankly, mind-boggling.

Blimey there is some on here who hold some *ahem* interesting views.  This is one of the reasons I try to avoid mixing my love of football with my interest in politics. One thing I have always loved about football is how people from various backgrounds, political views etc. can come to be united for 90 minutes, and how as a community fans stick together.  As evidenced by Les finding those Sunderland fans raising so much money for their rivals which I think is ace. However generally I am too weak to keep up that rule so...  

The idea that the Americans are pulling all the strings strikes me as a bit far fetched, they couldn't properly organise a stable government in Iraq or Afghanistan but can without the media exposing it train and support Ukraine. Of course if Russia declared this and journalists uncovered the evidence it would destroy their plans completely. Russia would have every reason to claim this is the case as they could then support the rebels openly.  As to why a poor country like Ukraine still has strong military it is because in any government one of the last things to go is their military.  North Korea is a bankrupt nation yet has an army capable of dishing out some significant damage for example.

Responding to Kingston as to why the BBC cannot maintain a higher standard the reason is simple, read any BBC trust report.  The fact that the BBC is funded by everyone means it has to reach everyone.  The BBC is constantly getting slammed by the trust for not doing enough to engage with younger viewers, how it is in danger of being elitist compared to other channels, how it needs to be more active in reaching people from all backgrounds

Quoted from Maringer

Eh? The Ukraine might be bankrupt, but they've also got a large standing army (tens of thousands of troops) with plenty of Soviet-era equipment. Who do you think is fighting against the 'separatists'? Most of the separatists themselves are ethnic Russians many of whom are former (and possibly present) members of the Russian army.

[/b]The theory that the Yanks are over in Ukraine fighting is, frankly, mind-boggling.

[b]

Maringer,I never mentioned anything about the yanks FIGHTING in the Ukraine . Also they have a large standing army as there is still conscription in Ukraine.
Caesar, I didn't say the yanks were pulling all the strings, I said its all about money and the yanks hold the purse strings.
The yanks couldn't pull a good c0ck.

Don't forget that there are plenty of journalists around in the western part of Ukraine. If there were a lot of US folks over there (even out of uniform), I don't doubt that there would have been some mention of the fact.

Other than egging the Ukrainians on, I really don't think there is a huge amount of influence going on there.

Quoted Text

so why has this murdering Bast@rd Porochenko turned on the people of that area, I'll tell you why, it's all down to money and the yanks hold the purse strings.

Sorry for misunderstanding Grimal but when you say this it makes it seem pretty clear that you think the Americans are pulling the strings.  Ukraine are acting the way they are because of money, the money is coming from the US. So what do you mean by this if you also think the Americans are incapable of pulling all the strings?

This belief that somehow the BBC are infiltrated and controlled by lefties makes me laugh. Was anyone on here aware that about three weeks ago 50,000 marched in Central London against austerity? If you were the chances are you read the Guardian because, at the time, it was the only place it was reported. The BBC ignored it on T.V and the radio. The BBC are (rightly) crapping themselves because a Tory win in 2015 will see the end of that national institution as we know it...

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Yes tat's elitist but it's supposed to be news not a branch of the entertainment industry.

I understand what you're saying but the news IS just a peculiar form of entertainment. There are an infinite amount of things happening, and there is very little that people must know about. They have to choose to cover the stories that resonate with people. I'm not saying that they have the balance right but there is no objective order of what is more important.

If it was based purely on number of deaths then the news would literally be the same every day ie. thousands of children dead through malaria and starvation in Africa. All the conflicts combined in the world at the moment don't come close to that but it only gets a mention one night every other year on Comic Relief.

Quoted from Caesar

Blimey there is some on here who hold some *ahem* interesting views.  This is one of the reasons I try to avoid mixing my love of football with my interest in politics. One thing I have always loved about football is how people from various backgrounds, political views etc. can come to be united for 90 minutes, and how as a community fans stick together.  As evidenced by Les finding those Sunderland fans raising so much money for their rivals which I think is ace. However generally I am too weak to keep up that rule so...  

The idea that the Americans are pulling all the strings strikes me as a bit far fetched, they couldn't properly organise a stable government in Iraq or Afghanistan but can without the media exposing it train and support Ukraine. Of course if Russia declared this and journalists uncovered the evidence it would destroy their plans completely. Russia would have every reason to claim this is the case as they could then support the rebels openly.  As to why a poor country like Ukraine still has strong military it is because in any government one of the last things to go is their military.  North Korea is a bankrupt nation yet has an army capable of dishing out some significant damage for example.

Responding to Kingston as to why the BBC cannot maintain a higher standard the reason is simple, read any BBC trust report.  The fact that the BBC is funded by everyone means it has to reach everyone.  The BBC is constantly getting slammed by the trust for not doing enough to engage with younger viewers, how it is in danger of being elitist compared to other channels, how it needs to be more active in reaching people from all backgrounds

I'm not saying the BBC is being elitist. If anything it needs to be more elitist. i.e. rise above the celebrity culture/entertainment industry dominated news.

I agree they're under pressure to "reach out" to a wider audience, but ......Their mission is to "educate, to inform and to entertain". Within their vast output there is surely scope to inform about the wider world than some rich German who hurt himself having fun. I for one empathise more with some poor saps who got blown up by nutters on public transport.

Quoted from MeanwoodMariner

I understand what you're saying but the news IS just a peculiar form of entertainment. There are an infinite amount of things happening, and there is very little that people must know about. They have to choose to cover the stories that resonate with people. I'm not saying that they have the balance right but there is no objective order of what is more important.

If it was based purely on number of deaths then the news would literally be the same every day ie. thousands of children dead through malaria and starvation in Africa. All the conflicts combined in the world at the moment don't come close to that but it only gets a mention one night every other year on Comic Relief.

"Resonate" is precisely the word they used in response to a complaint I raised at the time. flipping hell, if "resonates more with the public" is the yardstick of what's newsworthy, we'd have news dominated by One Direction and Britain's Got a Brand New Voice Academy, immediately followed by programmes of a similar ilk.

I'm not even arguing for news based on what affects the greatest number of people in the world, the Beeb is actually quite good at that type of news coverage. I would argue that the murder and maiming of dozens of Russians is actually closer to us culturally than  some other disasters. Most of us have a lot more in common with folk going about their lawful business in New York, London, Madrid, Moscow, Volgograd. A little more empathy with the people who did more than any other to rid the world of the Nazis (the people not their leaders) wouldn't go amiss.

Anyway, sorry for jumping onto one of my hobby horses folks!

I got side-tracked from the main issue of 300 innocent people being shot from the skies.