[Pewty]

With that genius Biden representing the West, "our side" is in no position to be criticizing the intelligence of other world leaders.

And Putin has proven himself intelligent and well-informed on many occasions.

Your silly racism-backing comment demonstrates just how easy it is to turn people into racists, and the 1% are happy with your reaction. They would like to see you killed in a war, and you are reacting exactly as they like their cattle to react.

I meant when it comes to invading other countries. I'm sure he's quite smart when it comes to crosswords and such.

As for Biden. Sure, he's showing signs of age. Different context though. Biden gets Ukraine and Gaza mixed up in a speech. Putin invades another country and is responsible for hundreds of thousands dead.

Your silly racism comment illustrates how some people see racism from the moment they wake, to the moment they go to sleep, regardless of intent. Putin does not warrant or deserve your support or respect. It seems to me that right now he's the one who wants to see the most people killed in a war.

You are reacting exactly how he likes his cattle to react. Dumb comment, right?

[skinster]

Liberals losing their minds over this interview was hilarious. Some called for sanctioning Tucker Carlson...for doing an interview.

As expected, attempts to censor the interview resulted in the Streisand Effect and hundreds of millions ended up watching it. Which is good, since it included some important history about Ukraine.

[Pewty]

Liberals losing their minds over this interview was hilarious. Some called for sanctioning Tucker Carlson...for doing an interview.

As expected, attempts to censor the interview resulted in the Streisand Effect and hundreds of millions ended up watching it. Which is good, since it included some important history about Ukraine.

I don't think it's as much losing one's mind, as acknowledging how crap Tucker Carlson is. The entire world could watch it. He would still be crap.

Not worth sanctions, though, no.

[Rancid]

Not worth sanctions, though, no.

The suggestion to sanction him sounds like just some far off corner internet thing on twitter or whatever.

[skinster]

I don't think it's as much losing one's mind, as acknowledging how crap Tucker Carlson is. The entire world could watch it. He would still be crap.

People did lose their minds as you no doubt saw, there was tons of hysteria about the airing of this interview. Particularly because it was revealed U.S. intel authorities prevented Tucker from doing the interview previously.

[Rich]

Tucker Carlson is a great journalist. Giving Putin a chance to express his views in such a forum was very valuable. Obviously Putin was only going to allow the interview if there was some level of deference by the interviewer. Would it have been better if there could have been a more hard ball interview, potentially yes, but I don't always appreciate those interviews where the interviewer keeps interrupting and won't allow the interviewee to make his / her points. But better or not this was not going to happen.

What's amazing is how pathetic the Liberal is. How afraid he is that if people are given a chance to hear the other side his narrative will collapse. Even if you don't agree with Putin at all, it should still be useful to the intelligent person to understand exactly where their enemy is coming from.

The Liberal and Putin often have a shared interest in not talking about things. For example the Liberal keeps wanting to pretend that it was a full scale invasion. It was maybe a tenth the size of the Axis forces committed to Ukraine in Barbarossa and in 1941 even that force was not sufficient and Hitler very wisely ordered large parts of Army Group Centre's armour to help in Ukraine going over the head of Halder, who seemed to be living in some sort of logistic fantasy land. But of course it is embarrassing to Putin that the size of the forces assigned to the SMO were totally inadequate. So its not a lie that he wants to challenge either.

[QatzelOk]

I meant when it comes to invading other countries. I'm sure he's quite smart when it comes to crosswords and such.

No one is better at invading other countries than the USA and Israel. Genocides are committed by these fake entities with a big smile on their faces.

And the general ignorance of the American public regarding world affairs, means that most Americans don't understand that Ukraine's government was overthrown by neo-cons with bankster money in 2014. NOT KNOWING things is your only strenght, and it helps you to "invade contries" without any reason to do so except the lies that you gladly believe (because you don't know any history beyond NOW).

As for Biden. Sure, he's showing signs of age. Different context though. Biden gets Ukraine and Gaza mixed up in a speech. Putin invades another country and is responsible for hundreds of thousands dead.

The USA has invaded many countries in my lifetime, usually justified with lies. Killed millions of innocent civilians in the process. Russia invaded its neighbor country after watching a civil war happening there (with Western spies prominently featured) that was leading to a very unstable situation. Russia waited 8 years before intervening, and this intervention was NOT based on lies. It was based on stabilizing the region that Russia is located.

Putin does not warrant or deserve your support or respect.

Russia has all of my support and respect regarding the SMO in Ukraine, as well as his attempt to lead the world away from the USA "genocide" dollar.

[Rancid]

this intervention was NOT based on lies.

What do you make of the lie Putin told when he said he wasn't going to invade?

[Potemkin]

What do you make of the lie Putin told when he said he wasn't going to invade?

It wasn’t a lie, because it wasn’t an invasion. It was just a Special Military Operation. So that’s alright then.

[Rancid]

It wasn’t a lie, because it wasn’t an invasion. It was just a Special Military Operation. So that’s alright then.

Soooo @QatzelOk fell for Putin's marketing....

[QatzelOk]

What do you make of the lie Putin told when he said he wasn't going to invade?

And intervention "based on lies" means that the pretext to invade is a lie.

There was no "WMD" or "vile of chemical weapons" or "babies thrown from incubators" or "protect the Libyan students" lie that was used to justify this operation.

The non-stop Western hatred towards Russia and Putin are built out of mass-media racism. And going along with this racism ... means that you're just another ZOG tool.

[Rancid]

And intervention "based on lies" means that the pretext to invade is a lie.

There was no "WMD" or "vile of chemical weapons" or "babies thrown from incubators" or "protect the Libyan students" lie that was used to justify this operation.

The non-stop Western hatred towards Russia and Putin are built out of mass-media racism. And going along with this racism ... means that you're just another ZOG tool.

You'd make a great marketing director.

[skinster]

It wasn’t a lie, because it wasn’t an invasion. It was just a Special Military Operation. So that’s alright then.

Yes, actually. You don't think the Russians - who signed security agreements with both Donetsk and Lugansk before entering the territory - should've protected the Ukrainians there who were suffering genocide from the Ukrainian government for 8 years before the Russians finally entered?

[QatzelOk]

Yes, actually. You don't think the Russians - who signed security agreements with both Donetsk and Lugansk before entering the territory - should've protected the Ukrainians there who were suffering genocide from the Ukrainian government for 8 years before the Russians finally entered?

Thanks for reminding this thread that actual "Ukrainians" were being slaughtered by "Ukraine" before Russia stepped in to stop it.

And the "unprovoked" meme is very careful to avoid noticing this major feature of pre-SMO (post Nuland-coup) Ukraine.

This is the kind of "selective blindness" that propaganda is made of.

[paeng]

The public's bewildered because they were expecting more of CNN-like content, with pro-Wall street journalists. Also, they thought that the ave. national leader's like Biden or even Trump, with motherhood statements and all that.

[Rugoz]

But I felt that the German journalist who was in the DPR/LPR region that took his own poll on it and also just spoke informally on it was likely closest to the truth.

Making a representative poll is a lot of work and even then the results are subject to interpretation. I doubt that journalist managed to do that by himself.

I will be glad to read anything you write should you add something to this but I may not respond.

Since you seem to trust German sources, here's a survey from 2019:

ATTITUDES AND IDENTITIES ACROSS THE DONBAS FRONT LINE: WHAT HAS CHANGED FROM 2016 TO 2019?
https://www.zois-berlin.de/fileadmin/me ... 3_2019.pdf

Of the people in the Donbas outside of the DNR/LNR, 64.7% responded the DNR/LNR should remain a part of Ukraine like before, 30.7% said a part of Ukraine but with special autonomy status, 2.3% said a part of Russia with special autonomy status, 2.3% said a part of Russia .

Of the people in the Donbas inside the DNR/LNR, 23.5% said a part of Ukraine like before, 31% said a part of Ukraine but with special autonomy status, 18.3% said a part of Russia with special autonomy status, 27.2% said a part of Russia.

No doubt the war has caused significant sorting, hence I think it is consistent with 2014 surveys.

[Rich]

Making a representative poll is a lot of work and even then the results are subject to interpretation. I doubt that journalist managed to do that by himself.

Well here's one thing we can agree on. Determining the will of the people is a difficult thing at the best of times with both elections and referendums being far from perfect. In a situation of ethnic conflict it becomes even harder to get objective results. I tend towards sceptism of all sides claims and expend little effort on debating them. Then there's the question of how people are effected by their area changing hands. Some may react strongly against what they see as an aggressive unjustified invasion. While others who may not have wanted to change country would rather not see their city destroyed in the pursuit of liberating it. Things are further complicated by demographic changes over time.

The exception to that would be Israel where according to the Zionists we have highly reliable, objective public opinion data dating back to the second millennium BC.. Hence respect for International Law requires that Israel is restored to its legitimate 931BC borders.

[Rugoz]

Well here's one thing we can agree on. Determining the will of the people is a difficult thing at the best of times with both elections and referendums being far from perfect.

And opinion polls are worse, but the last referendum we have is from 1991 (sham referendums don't count).

In any case, the burden of proof is not on me! If you start a bloody war to "liberate" a people, killing hundreds of thousands in the process, you better have rock solid evidence that it's absolutely necessary. And I'm not talking opinion polls here (even though such polls do not exist).

And yes, Russia started this war in 2014:

"I was the one who pulled the trigger of this war," Strelkov said in an interview published Thursday with Russia's Zavtra newspaper, which espouses imperialist views.

"If our unit hadn't crossed the border, everything would have fizzled out — like in [the Ukrainian city of] Kharkiv, like in Odessa," Strelkov, who uses that nom-de-guerre meaning "Shooter" to replace his last name Girkin, was quoted as saying.

"There would have been several dozen killed, burned, detained. And that would have been the end of it. But the flywheel of the war, which is continuing to this day, was spun by our unit. We mixed up all the cards on the table," he said.

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/11/ ... ine-a41598

But what is even the point of debating this. We all know that for Putin's regime, this war is not about "liberating" anybody.

[QatzelOk]

...But what is even the point of debating this. We all know that for Putin's regime, this war is not about "liberating" anybody.

But what is even the point of debating this.

There is no point in debate. The commercial media has given us our marching orders.

We all know that for Putin's regime...

Putin has a "regime" rather than a "government." Using this word means that he is evil.

...this war is not about "liberating" anybody.

As you proved with the word "regime," Putin is evil and thus can't liberate anyone. Only good guys like NATO are able to liberate. Liberally.