Well, what do you think it is and how did you come to believe what you do? I am admitting ignorance so obviously I can't really answer that question.

What do you feel is in dispute over the 2014 Crimea invasion and annexation?

Several things are in dispute. Some people on Twitter say it didn't happen. The Russian Federation vacilates between "we've always owned crimea" and "we didn't invade, but we helped some separatists." The current Ukrainian government asserts that the Russians invaded Crimea.

I deeply respect Vladislav Surkov and his ability to weave a dazzling narrative. But at the end of the day most of the talking points he constructed regarding Ukraine and Donbas are complete BS.

> Some people on Twitter say it didn't happen.

Come on. The existence of gravity is debatable if that's your standard.

> The current Ukrainian government asserts that the Russians invaded Crimea.

If you think this is debatable, I don't know what to tell you.

Didn't mean "he current Ukrainian government asserts that the Russians invaded Crimea" was debatable, but that the Ukrainian government asserted the Russians invaded Crimea and that the Russians for quite some time claimed they didn't (and that they didn't know who the LGMs seen in Crimea were.)

But getting back to this gravity thing... sure stuff frequently falls to the ground, but have you ever SEEN gravity itself? [Yes, this is a joke, but your point is well taken, I had a comment a bit ago about how it's hard to take some twitters comments seriously and that they often seem to just spout BS. The good news is that it's not everybody spouting BS, but it often seems like most people are.]

I think you're mistaking "someone is lying" for "there is a genuine dispute".

North Korea claimed to have found a unicorn lair (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/30/unicorn-lair-d...), but the existence of unicorns is not in dispute.

Russia claimed to have no involvement in Crimea (later admitting they had); they also claimed the day before invading Ukraine they had no plans to do so. These are just bald-faced lies, and I think it's important to differentiate between that and "it's not possible to tell what the real truth is" scenarios.

Well... I wasn't in the Crimea in 2014 so I don't have direct experience. But journalists I trust from the BBC, Al Jazeera and the New York Times were there and reported directly observing irregulars with sterile uniforms (no unit or country insignia) speaking Russian with Russian equipment and weapons.

It is widely believed Russia provided arms, equipment and personnel to aid paramilitary separatists, effectively taking over Crimea in 2014.

Despite earlier attempts to hide their involvement, Russian defense minister Sergey Shoygu admitted russian forces were involved.

While I often recommend readers take Wikipedia articles with a grain of salt and try to verify citations, the "Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation" article recounts a narrative consistent with my memory.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_...

I shouldn't say Twitter sources do the exact opposite, however. Twitter is a "bullshit generator" in the way Harry Frankfort used the term. While there are many accounts on Twitter that appear to support observations in consensus reality (the sky is up, water is wet, fire is hot, Russia invaded Crimea, etc.), they are often drowned out by comments by people who don't care about the factual nature of their statements. They may say something that's externally falsifiable, or maybe they won't; demonstrable falsifiablity is not germane to their narrative. They're not actively lying, because lying involves a level of self awareness (and awareness of external reality) that they do not seem to possess.

Clearly it's not everyone on Twitter behaving this way, but enough of Twitter acts as a bullshit generator that it's hard to separate people who are right, wrong, duplicitous, ill informed or just plain spouting BS.