|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On February 09 2024 22:59 2Pacalypse- wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2024 21:25 Excludos wrote:On February 09 2024 08:46 FriedrichNietzsche wrote:the propaganda thing is always amusing to me.. as if only one fraction is using propaganda The reason this propaganda piece is getting called out is because it actively tries to (and likely will succeed) tricking a number of Americans to believe these lies, by using a familiar mouth piece to the right wing extremists. This actively undermines America's interests, and he should be treated as the traitor he is I guess I'm gonna be that guy and defend Tucker Carlson again, but reading this genuinely scared me. Just to clarify, are you saying that Tucker Carlson should be treated as a traitor to the United States and presumably jailed, or worse? Attacking journalists in this way is a genuinely scary thought to me. Even if they're spewing things I don't agree with. Once you get into this territory of deciding who is undermining whose interests, you can go down some very dark paths.
Yes, but not for journalism. The guy is accepting money from a foreign entity that is acting against the interests of America, a foreign entity they are at proxy war with, to spread propaganda in behalf of said foreign entity. Tell me this shouldn't be treasonous, and tell me Putin would hesitate to do the same for much much less.
The thing that should scare you is how normalised corruption and bribery amongst US right wing fronted by Russia is, and how little is being done to stop it. It is an active attack on democracy and the free world, and we're sitting around with our thumbs far up our asses going "buh journalishm! histhory! Somethins something Hitler!"
Tucker Carlson isn't a journalist, he's a propaganda mouthpiece, and it didn't start with this interview. Tucker Carlson himself doesn't think he's a journalist either, so why should you?
|
Canada11173 Posts
I think the only interesting thing to come out of the interview is while the main discussion on the Nordstream explosion has centred around whether it was the Russians (with some attempt to make it look like the Ukrainians) or the Ukrainians, Putin blames... the CIA ???
I guess it doesn't confirm much of anything as it could be simple Putin paranoia that the CIA lives rent free in Putin's head or he so underestimates the Ukrainians and that Ukrainians covered their tracks enough that he doesn't suspect them? Hoooowever, to me this makes me lean even more into the 'Russian did it' theory as blaming the CIA smells of typical Russian government deflection. (See Americans most definitely poisoned those Russians in the UK. Definitely wasn't Russia.)
|
Zurich15302 Posts
It makes perfect sense. Admitting that Ukraine can hit Russian assets all to the bottom of the ocean makes Ukraine look strong and Russia look weak. It's in line with the continuous Russian fantasy that really they are at war with NATO, the US, or "Anglo-Saxons".
|
On February 10 2024 04:29 zatic wrote: It makes perfect sense. Admitting that Ukraine can hit Russian assets all to the bottom of the ocean makes Ukraine look strong and Russia look weak. It's in line with the continuous Russian fantasy that really they are at war with NATO, the US, or "Anglo-Saxons". yeah, can't have Ukraine appear strong and Russia weak as we enter the 3e year of the 3 day operation...
I agree with Falling here, Putin wants to sow division and reinforcing the idea that Ukraine blew up Nordstream, which is already mentioned here and there is much more useful then blaming the CIA, which absolutely no one takes serious.
|
On February 10 2024 02:24 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 00:14 Sermokala wrote:On February 10 2024 00:00 sertas wrote: zeo you have huge double standards. Every single thing you criticize ukraine for, russia does aswell, and it's confirmed. In this thread we never talk about it, but you never bring it up, why? You claim you are unbiased and since we don't in this thread talk about it, why arent you bringing it up?
You criticize ukraine that zelensky is a dictator, but you never said anything about putin, you say that ukraine is force moblizing while russia is doing it, ukraine loses an armored column on the offensive and you say it's a great strategic error but when russia loses armored columns we don't talk about it here but you don't either. And the list goes on.
So where's your criticizing of putin and russia at?
Also I like that people in europe and us who sucks russias dick would be put in prision if europe and us behaved like the russians that's the funny irony..
Its a lot more frustrating when he goes on a tirade about people's sources and what they post in the thread we have to go on a whole run around discussing it but when he gets confronted about the shit he posts he goes silent. dudes so lost in the pro russian sauce he refuses to even call them Ukrainian troops and goes on fantasy rants about how screwed Ukraine is. Uses the terms he sees in his circle jerk telegram threads like they're widely accepted. Has the balls to talk about how "normal people" are the ones that support a guy who in court said he was not a journalist but an entertainer. dude didn't even read the thread enough to know the interview was already posted and people still treat this guy with good faith. He watches a heavily edited interview and says "ah jeeze look at this no notes guy speaking clearly and with no one helping him other than the ear piece hes wearing and anything off screen he could be useing. What even is this post? Very few people in this thread haven't already read the same tired old throw-away lines you lob now without even thinking. We've been through all this before, remember? When you said the Washington Post, New York Times ect were the same level of source as random Telegram channnels and cartoon dog X profiles with names like xxx69_orckilla_69xxx and backline grifter rats making money from donations that never make it to the Ukraininans that need them? You've already forgotten? You embarrassed yourself back then and stopped posting. Clearly you are still bothered by it, I can't see why else you would start projecting so hard out of the blue. Even if you stopped posting, who cares? We are all adults with our own lives, ohhh if I don't answer ever single post ever until the thread ends I might be perceived as losing, ohhh! If you have something to say post, if you are busy with life or feel you don't have anything to say thats ok too. I've already gone two paragraphs into answering the first sentence of your low effort ramblepost, what do you expect me to do? Write detailed novella length university lectures to everyone who shitposts and do it all over again in a week once they pretend they have forgotten everything discussed and start the cycle again? I mean, fantasy rants for you are multiple on the field journalists working on months long assignments to the front line where they have detailed interviews with the men in the trenches. Nah xxx69_orckilla_69xxx said 1000 Russians died in a missile strike, look at the pin on Google Maps, those reporters interviewing soldiers are Russian agents!!!1 Its silly. You can't even strawman properly in your last paragraph. I clearly marked that it was the X source of the video that hadn't been posted. What is the point of your post? You fail every time you try I mean have you forgotten that you quote even worse shit than that? Do you think anyone gives you any credibility at all in this thread? We point this out to you when you embarrass yourself and you stop posting. I'm sorry if I actually read articles to find out where the story comes from instead of swallowing it whole knowing that it doesn't matter because theres no objectivity to what my side says like you. No one belives your cringe rants about what is going to go wrong next for ukraine when its so dripping with how horny you are for russia. Stop projecting onto other people so clearly everyone can see through you. You can't even get through a single paragraph without trying to give yourself excuses for your behavior that you're confessing to.
You don't even answer the points anyone makes you just make up new ones. You posted the same interview from another source congrads that doesn't change how you posted the same interview on a site with well known problems differentiating between people scrolling through a feed and actually watching something. Telling someone they arn't strawmanning properly means you know they aren't strawmanning, gee I'm glad I'm finding out from the expert on it that I don't do it well what an insult.
People expect consistency and good faith to reward engaging with you. You provide neither of those and will get called out on it until you do.
|
On February 10 2024 04:09 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2024 22:59 2Pacalypse- wrote:On February 09 2024 21:25 Excludos wrote:On February 09 2024 08:46 FriedrichNietzsche wrote:the propaganda thing is always amusing to me.. as if only one fraction is using propaganda The reason this propaganda piece is getting called out is because it actively tries to (and likely will succeed) tricking a number of Americans to believe these lies, by using a familiar mouth piece to the right wing extremists. This actively undermines America's interests, and he should be treated as the traitor he is I guess I'm gonna be that guy and defend Tucker Carlson again, but reading this genuinely scared me. Just to clarify, are you saying that Tucker Carlson should be treated as a traitor to the United States and presumably jailed, or worse? Attacking journalists in this way is a genuinely scary thought to me. Even if they're spewing things I don't agree with. Once you get into this territory of deciding who is undermining whose interests, you can go down some very dark paths. Yes, but not for journalism. The guy is accepting money from a foreign entity that is acting against the interests of America, a foreign entity they are at proxy war with, to spread propaganda in behalf of said foreign entity. Tell me this shouldn't be treasonous, and tell me Putin would hesitate to do the same for much much less. The thing that should scare you is how normalised corruption and bribery amongst US right wing fronted by Russia is, and how little is being done to stop it. It is an active attack on democracy and the free world, and we're sitting around with our thumbs far up our asses going "buh journalishm! histhory! Somethins something Hitler!" Tucker Carlson isn't a journalist, he's a propaganda mouthpiece, and it didn't start with this interview. Tucker Carlson himself doesn't think he's a journalist either, so why should you? You undermined your entire argument with the sentence "tell me Putin wouldn't do this". I don't think anybody should want to put the bar as low as what Putin does to journalists.
I think there's a lot wrong with Tucker Carlson interviewing Putin, but treason is a very serious crime, and I don't think this qualifies.
|
|
Russian Federation40186 Posts
Say what you will guys but that interview with Putin was prime meme material right from the "own the libs" era of his on Fox. Is it propaganda? I have seen such interpretations but they really fall flat on their face given that Putin ruined it himself. Was that a "not stupid" (wise too strong of a word to use here) move by Carlson? Nope lol, the same way it wasn't ever a wise move to officially visit Stalin era USSR in search of the truth, it is not a wise move to visit Russia and ask effing Putin on what's what. But it ended up funny.
|
|
On February 10 2024 04:21 Falling wrote: I think the only interesting thing to come out of the interview is while the main discussion on the Nordstream explosion has centred around whether it was the Russians (with some attempt to make it look like the Ukrainians) or the Ukrainians, Putin blames... the CIA ???
I guess it doesn't confirm much of anything as it could be simple Putin paranoia that the CIA lives rent free in Putin's head or he so underestimates the Ukrainians and that Ukrainians covered their tracks enough that he doesn't suspect them? Hoooowever, to me this makes me lean even more into the 'Russian did it' theory as blaming the CIA smells of typical Russian government deflection. (See Americans most definitely poisoned those Russians in the UK. Definitely wasn't Russia.) It's very simple. In Putin's mind (and that of most Russians), smaller nations have no agency. They are pawns of the few superpowers and anything happens inside their countries is due to machinations of those superpowers, be it coups, revolutions, or such. Since Ukraine is a pawn, it wouldn't possibly be able to conduct such an operation. And if it were, it would be on orders from the US. That's also why Putin would rather peace be negotiated between Russia and the US, and not Russia and Ukraine.
|
|
Canada11173 Posts
On February 10 2024 05:40 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 04:21 Falling wrote: I think the only interesting thing to come out of the interview is while the main discussion on the Nordstream explosion has centred around whether it was the Russians (with some attempt to make it look like the Ukrainians) or the Ukrainians, Putin blames... the CIA ???
I guess it doesn't confirm much of anything as it could be simple Putin paranoia that the CIA lives rent free in Putin's head or he so underestimates the Ukrainians and that Ukrainians covered their tracks enough that he doesn't suspect them? Hoooowever, to me this makes me lean even more into the 'Russian did it' theory as blaming the CIA smells of typical Russian government deflection. (See Americans most definitely poisoned those Russians in the UK. Definitely wasn't Russia.) It's very simple. In Putin's mind (and that of most Russians), smaller nations have no agency. They are pawns of the few superpowers and anything happens inside their countries is due to machinations of those superpowers, be it coups, revolutions, or such. Since Ukraine is a pawn, it wouldn't possibly be able to conduct such an operation. And if it were, it would be on orders from the US. That's also why Putin would rather peace be negotiated between Russia and the US, and not Russia and Ukraine. Well, your interpretation lines up with Putin's retelling of Maidan amongst other things.
I also think Putin's only retelling undermines his point. The Polish boogeyman supposedly stirred up Ukrainian national identity 700 years ago... that's a heck of a long time to have a continuous identity considering our understanding of national identity is really only in the last couple hundred years. Is the German national identity also not legitimate as it came long after that time period? I mean, national identity could have formed within this century and be no less legitimate, no conspiracies required.
|
On February 10 2024 06:40 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 05:40 maybenexttime wrote:On February 10 2024 04:21 Falling wrote: I think the only interesting thing to come out of the interview is while the main discussion on the Nordstream explosion has centred around whether it was the Russians (with some attempt to make it look like the Ukrainians) or the Ukrainians, Putin blames... the CIA ???
I guess it doesn't confirm much of anything as it could be simple Putin paranoia that the CIA lives rent free in Putin's head or he so underestimates the Ukrainians and that Ukrainians covered their tracks enough that he doesn't suspect them? Hoooowever, to me this makes me lean even more into the 'Russian did it' theory as blaming the CIA smells of typical Russian government deflection. (See Americans most definitely poisoned those Russians in the UK. Definitely wasn't Russia.) It's very simple. In Putin's mind (and that of most Russians), smaller nations have no agency. They are pawns of the few superpowers and anything happens inside their countries is due to machinations of those superpowers, be it coups, revolutions, or such. Since Ukraine is a pawn, it wouldn't possibly be able to conduct such an operation. And if it were, it would be on orders from the US. That's also why Putin would rather peace be negotiated between Russia and the US, and not Russia and Ukraine. Well, your interpretation lines up with Putin's retelling of Maidan amongst other things. I also think Putin's only retelling undermines his point. The Polish boogeyman supposedly stirred up Ukrainian national identity 700 years ago... that's a heck of a long time to have a continuous identity considering our understanding of national identity is really only in the last couple years. Is the German national identity also not legitimate as it came long after that time period? I mean, national identity could have formed within this century and be no less legitimate, no conspiracies required. Not just Maidan: the Orange Revolution (Ukraine), Rose Revolution (Georgia), Solidarity (Poland), as well as the revolutions in Romania, Hungary and so on. In their twisted minds those were all American plots to carve countries out from Russia's sphere of influence.
|
United States41471 Posts
Question is why would all these countries be so eager to get out from under Russian dominance.
|
On February 10 2024 04:21 Falling wrote: I think the only interesting thing to come out of the interview is while the main discussion on the Nordstream explosion has centred around whether it was the Russians (with some attempt to make it look like the Ukrainians) or the Ukrainians, Putin blames... the CIA ???
I guess it doesn't confirm much of anything as it could be simple Putin paranoia that the CIA lives rent free in Putin's head or he so underestimates the Ukrainians and that Ukrainians covered their tracks enough that he doesn't suspect them? Hoooowever, to me this makes me lean even more into the 'Russian did it' theory as blaming the CIA smells of typical Russian government deflection. (See Americans most definitely poisoned those Russians in the UK. Definitely wasn't Russia.)
Putin needs to blow up our involvement in the Ukraine war because it helps lessen the embarassment of the inability of the Russian army to win the war. We are involved sure, but we're not involved on the ground or in operations beyond supplying weapons and intelligence.
If Putin can convince his public that it's the US and NATO that he's losing to, that's a lot less embarassing than losing to just Ukraine.
He can't convince the Russian public that Ukraine is a big, bad enough enemy to provide an existential threat to them. But he can convince them that the US and NATO is.
|
Canada11173 Posts
On February 10 2024 08:08 KwarK wrote: Question is why would all these countries be so eager to get out from under Russian dominance.
Has to be one of Putin's biggest blindspots. He does not seem to fathom the idea that countries would flee from Russian hegemony. Therefore everything must be an outside plot because there is clearly no legitimate reason for the eastern nations to be anything other than friendly/ submissive to Russia wishes.
|
On February 10 2024 08:27 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 08:08 KwarK wrote: Question is why would all these countries be so eager to get out from under Russian dominance. Has to be one of Putin's biggest blindspots. He does not seem to fathom the idea that countries would flee from Russian hegemony. Therefore everything must be an outside plot because there is clearly no legitimate reason for the eastern nations to be anything other than friendly/ submissive to Russia wishes. Russians are one of the most cowed nations out there. Most of them can't comprehend the idea of other nations taking their destiny in their own hands because themselves they have outsourced all political power to the Kremlin. When you watch street interviews with average Russians on channels like 1420 or such, you'll notice how often people talk about being "apolitical" or "outside of politics". They frequently say things like "let those at the top decide, they know better".
This is consistent with the data from independent polling organizations. Depending on how you phrase the question, you can find the vast majority of Russians either supporting the war ("Do you support the actions of the Russian Armed Forces in Ukraine?") or in favor of peace talks ("Would you support the Kremlin in pursuing peace talks with Ukraine?"; can't find the link right now). Most Russians will support whatever decision the Kremlin makes regarding the war. You have roughly 15-20% of rabid nationalists of different flavors, 15-20% staunchly against the war, and 60-70% in that apolitical blob accepting whatever the Kremlin does. Most of those are still imperialists, ranging from patronizing to outright xenophobic.
|
On February 10 2024 03:38 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 03:31 FriedrichNietzsche wrote:kudos for ignoring what I write and focusing on the meme picture.. I never said Im going to do historical research here & now (with that post in particular).. I didnt ask for a debate either.. USA is (pretty much unarguably) the most powerful entity for the last ~ 7 centuries. If you cant see how power could at least have sth. to do with also (ab)using that said power I'm sorry - we live on different intellectual planets, apparently. I think I will try to be a bit more friendly than you and just accept that we could agree to disagree. Nothing like "Idiot" needed there on my part Fine with me. I hope you mean decades. Also, I'd say that is undisputable for 30-40 years, but the balance of power with the soviet union was more even in the 50s-70s.
yeah I misswrote I meant decades ofc lol
|
On February 10 2024 18:57 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 08:27 Falling wrote:On February 10 2024 08:08 KwarK wrote: Question is why would all these countries be so eager to get out from under Russian dominance. Has to be one of Putin's biggest blindspots. He does not seem to fathom the idea that countries would flee from Russian hegemony. Therefore everything must be an outside plot because there is clearly no legitimate reason for the eastern nations to be anything other than friendly/ submissive to Russia wishes. Russians are one of the most cowed nations out there. Most of them can't comprehend the idea of other nations taking their destiny in their own hands because themselves they have outsourced all political power to the Kremlin. When you watch street interviews with average Russians on channels like 1420 or such, you'll notice how often people talk about being "apolitical" or "outside of politics". They frequently say things like "let those at the top decide, they know better". This is consistent with the data from independent polling organizations. Depending on how you phrase the question, you can find the vast majority of Russians either supporting the war ("Do you support the actions of the Russian Armed Forces in Ukraine?") or in favor of peace talks ("Would you support the Kremlin in pursuing peace talks with Ukraine?"; can't find the link right now). Most Russians will support whatever decision the Kremlin makes regarding the war. You have roughly 15-20% of rabid nationalists of different flavors, 15-20% staunchly against the war, and 60-70% in that apolitical blob accepting whatever the Kremlin does. Most of those are still imperialists, ranging from patronizing to outright xenophobic.
That is what you get when having an opinion that is not the Kremlin opinion gets you into trouble.
I'd probably be "apolitical" too. At least that way i don't have to feel responsible for the shit Putin is doing.
|
I consider myself apolitical, and most people I know in Russia - i.e. "my circle" - are (or at least were) mostly apolitical too. If you live there you learn fast to separate Russia as a state/government and Russians as people around you.
Out of a few dozens people I know pretty well and talked to often (so I know their opinions), maybe one or two - both are 60+ years old - actually support the war, they watch TV and believe everything. But most of them (people I know) are against the war, and many are really against it. Those who could leave, they left, but many cannot for different reasons.
Most of them are apolitical because they learned their voices/votes mean nothing with the system that has been in place long before they could vote. It doesn't mean they're imperialists inside or anything. It's learned helplessness more than anything.
|
|
|
|