Why? Because it's now, it's hideously infected/propagandistic, lots of crucial facts aren't in yet, it's basically shite. You can't make a YouTube-palatable analysis with this.
God damn it, the tsunami of BS that came with 8/8/8 has been thoroughly debunked for 13-14 years, but it still ain't halal for these commentators to set it straight.
edit: Just let me elaborate a tiny bit... Okay, we have an ongoing conflict, which is extremely full of BS from all sides. We know that official UA and western assessments have been terribly off the mark (it is quite evident), but while it's evident that it's BS, we don't know the truth, ie to what exact extent it's BS. Without this, one cannot pretend to be an authority on the matter.
We also know that some ridiculous stuff that pertain to other recent conflicts, like Syria, Libya or Georgia (ie 8/8/8 ) has been debunked, but still not widely acknowledged as such. The sources are still kind of shit, because politically these things are still "hot" today (in the sense of being relevant to current geopolitical affairs) so an indy researcher will find him or herself in a bit of an epistemological quagmire. Any conclusions derived from what's available and permissible will be flawed by default.
It gets better the further back in history you go, the less "hot" it is. For instance, more honest assessments of the 2003 Iraqi War, the Gulf War, the Soviet Afghanistan war, the Vietnam war, the Korean War, WW2 are cropping up all the time *now*, sometimes new research completely debunks decades old and generally agreed-upon "facts" about these things.
So, it gets better over time. Until it's so far back that the material itself is lacking, of course. But when talking about 20th and 21st century conflicts, it's all shit for at least a decade. Usually several.
Last edited by Dr.Snufflebug on Wed Feb 01, 2023 7:11 pm; edited 2 times in total