The @nytimes has published sensitive tactical details about the US arms deliveries to #Ukraine which leads to very specific risks of Russia intercepting these deliveries. Is this necessary? I don't think so.

https://www.dialog.ua/war/294421_1714936204

@ukraine

all 12 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Sir_Simon_Spamalot@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago (1 children)

yes, nyt is shit. however it's important we ask ourselves questions:

where did they get this info?
how sensitive are this info anyway? aren't they available to public?

also, i got blocked by the site. do they have the article in question in there?

[–] tearsintherain@leminal.space 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

None of this is 'sensitive information'. Its not as though the nyt got some scoop about weapon deliveries and against US gov wishes printed it.

Considering that NYT is liberal, often the target of conservatives and republicans. And that it has been many conservatives and republicans who seem to practically be rooting for Putin. Conservatives and republicans who caused the delay for funding Ukraine, this whole piece seems off the mark and somewhat paranoid.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Harm limitation is for real journalists not for whatever NYT "reporters" do.

[–] tearsintherain@leminal.space 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Certainly not Fox News, MTG, Tucker Carlson, and what Trump would do right? The political groups and associations who seem to be rooting for Putin, causing delays in funding UA are republican and conservative. You may as well be rooting for Putin who locks up opposition and journalists that aren't state sanctioned while you're at it.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Did I mention any of those in a positive light anywhere? The news was about the NYT and I'm not going to give them a pass just because there's worse media.

[–] mapto@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Yup, @tearsintherain@leminal.space, what you're engaging in here is pure whataboutism. Fox, Carlson and company would've happily helped here, but they didn't. NYT did.

[–] tearsintherain@leminal.space 0 points 6 months ago

There's nothing to give them a pass for amigo. 'Poland' and 'Spain' are location giveaways? NYT: They would be at the Ukrainian front soon, a senior Spanish official said. Thats a big giveaway? I don't hear the US govt complaining about these 'details' anywhere.

[–] tearsintherain@leminal.space 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

What is sensitive about these details? The NYT cutout in the link lists deliveries after they've been made, so how would they be intercepted?

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Maybe the problem is that if Russia knows where and when ammunition was received, even if it's a few days ago, they can intercept it on its way to the frontlines?
I can't read the article, maybe someone else can give better explanation?

[–] mapto@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Researching on time and place of arrival is a nice gift for anyone who wants to intercept these and is being cut off from doing this research themselves.

[–] tearsintherain@leminal.space 1 points 6 months ago

Haha, This commentary is paranoid nonsense. Intercept deliveries after they're made? Russia now has time travel? Locations named like 'Poland', 'Spain'? Oh wow, thats some serious location giveaway. If the war is going bad, don't make excuses for hypothetical security concerns which somehow got past the US govt and Pentagon from a newspaper?? If anything focus on who caused the delays for those weapons to arrive which is an actual issue, no time travel need.