Far From the Front Lines, Javelin Missiles Go Unused in Ukraine

No, Yovanovitch did not say the javelins were not on hold; she said they were on hold. Obama also sent Humvees and various supplies for self-defense.

 

I am saying the javelins need to be closer to the potential battlefield if they are ever needeed.

 

That's for the military to decide.

 

An hour is a long time if Russia decides to attack. An hour is enough to take out substantial Ukranian defenses.

 

No, Trump created the stipulation. Members Ukranian military leadership do want them closer.

 

Have you personaly asked them?

 

Shows what you know. The Javalins couldn't be on hold since there was no hold on the Javalins. The hold was on one of the two funding avenues and not the funding for Javalins. Ukraine uses the funding to purchase Javalins.

 

You have proof that Trump created the stipulation and not the military or others? This is very sensitive. So sensitive that Obama feared the Russians so did not provide lethal assistance.

 

Without funding to pay for javelins Ukraine cannot get javelins. I actually watched the entire hearing of Yovanovitch; you apparently didn't.

 

They got the funding so...

 

Yes, read the Foreign Policy article.

 

Not until after the quid pro quo sooo...

 

So you don't know what they say, only what someone else has reported.

 

What quid pro quo? That's appears to be the huge fault in the dem clown show narrative. There was never any quid pro quo.

 

What they say is discussed. Obviously I'm not there on the ground in Ukraine, but I still know what they are saying from unbiased sources.

 

The evidence is in the phone call.

 

What evidence? You still cannot outline any quid pro quo. Ukraine got the funding and there was no investigation announced by Ukraine. Even Yovanovitch couldn't explain why the investigation into Burisma was stopped but Biden sure can.

 

Everybody is biased.

 

Mulvaney himself admits it. Trump is encouraging staff to ignore subpoenas, Biden did nothing illegal, and this is a smear campaign to bring the focus off of Trump. Hunter Biden is just a distraction created by Trump's team.

 

There are different kinds and degrees of bias. Fox news is 99% biased while Foreign Policy is like 1% with a very slight right bias. Tremendous difference.

 

You mean that Fox is 99% biased for a side you don't like while Foreign Policy is 99% biased for the side you like.

 

Foerign Policy Journal:

LEFT BIAS


These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Left Bias sources.

• Overall, when covering political issues Foreign Policy Journal has a far left bias in story selection and we rate them factually Mixed due to promotion of conspiracy theories.

Detailed Report
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180

 

The referendum in Crimea was "reputable" - at least according to this comprehensive article.

https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/the-ukraine-crisis-why-and-how-it-has-come-to-this

 

No, I am not using Foreign Policy Journal. I am using Foreign Policy, so here is the rating for Foreign Policy:

Home » Foreign Policy

Foreign Policy

Share:
FacebookTwitterPinterestEmailTumblrRedditLinkedInFlipboardGoogle BookmarksShare157
LEAST BIASED
These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes). The reporting is factual and usually sourced. These are the most credible media sources. See all Least Biased sources.

• Overall, we rate Foreign Policy Least Biased due to balanced reporting with a very slight lean right and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record.

Detailed Report

Factual Reporting: HIGH
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 48/180

History

Foreign Policy is an American news publication, founded in 1970 and focused on global affairs, current events, and domestic and international policy. It produces content daily on its website and in six print issues annually.

Since 2003, Foreign Policy has been nominated for eight National Magazine Awards, winning six – three for its print publication, and three for its digital publication at ForeignPolicy.com. FP is the only independent magazine that has won consecutive digital national magazine awards every year from being established in 2009. The current editor is Jonathan Tepperman

Funded by / Ownership

Foreign Policy was owned by the Post Co (Washington Post), which then became the Graham Holdings Company. Foreign Policy is funded through advertising and subscription fees.

Analysis / Bias

In review, Foreign Policy covers news related to foreign affairs with minimal bias. Headlines are generally free from loaded words, though at times moderate such as this: Bernie Sanders Still Doesn’t Pass the Commander-in-Chief Test (anti-progressive) and this Trump Doesn’t Want to Play Peacemaker (anti-Trump). Both of these articles are properly sourced. In general, Foreign Policy is slightly right leaning in their news coverage, but balanced in reporting and well sourced.

A factual search reveals a clean fact check record.

Overall, we rate Foreign Policy Least Biased due to balanced reporting with a very slight lean right and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. (D. Van Zandt 6/16/2016) Update (3/5/2019)

Source: https://foreignpolicy.com/

Here is the link of the rating: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/foreign-policy/

I also use Foreign Affairs which received a similar rating.

I also use WSJ which is biased right.

 

With no investigation how do you know Biden did nothing illegal. Hunter made over 3 million off a corrupt gas company while Biden was VP.