Ukraine War and Politics

[Havok1]

Its like Whoopi saying she wants Trump held accountable for 6JAN... She may be wrong, misguided or malicious, but opinions matter and when enough form opinions, even if they are wrongly held, actions follow.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Whoopi repeating the dem narrative and creating it are two different things. Not a single charge against Trump is because Whoopi or anyone on any talk show said it.

How about this. Facebook silenced accounts because the FBI asked them to do so, at the direction of Russians. Twitter silenced stories, because the FBI asked them to do so, which made these platforms effectively state controlled social media. The media, and politicians continuously said Trump was going to start WW3, etc. McCain sang a song about bombing another country while campaigning for President. Somehow, every post On Facebook or Twitter about war was not viewed as a statement by our government, every statement made by some random politician looking for their 5 seconds of fame was not seen as actionable. The only thing that generated any concern was McCains song, since he would actually be in a position to take action. However, even with that, nobody thought to attack us over it. There is a reason that the video clip you screenshotted is not flooding social media and the news. It’s irrelevant and nobody other than you thinks otherwise.

 

[Havok1]

As far as Tucker, he is pro America, which is what’s important, and what a few people keep having to dance around by labeling him as pro Russia, or anti Israel.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Whoopi repeating the dem narrative and creating it are two different things. Not a single charge against Trump is because Whoopi or anyone on any talk show said it.

How about this. Facebook silenced accounts because the FBI asked them to do so, at the direction of Russians. Twitter silenced stories, because the FBI asked them to do so, which made these platforms effectively state controlled social media. The media, and politicians continuously said Trump was going to start WW3, etc. McCain sang a song about bombing another country while campaigning for President. Somehow, every post On Facebook or Twitter about war was not viewed as a statement by our government, every statement made by some random politician looking for their 5 seconds of fame was not seen as actionable. The only thing that generated any concern was McCains song, since he would actually be in a position to take action. However, even with that, nobody thought to attack us over it. There is a reason that the video clip you screenshotted is not flooding social media and the news. It’s irrelevant and nobody other than you thinks otherwise.

Repeating is creating...

Make enough smoke and people will believe there is a fire. Tell people who lit the "fire" enough and they will agree...

Claim russia was tricked and cheated out of Ukriane, Finland, and Alaska enough and russians will believe they deserve the land back.

It is the hand in the glove... russia, as much as any other group, uses media to form and create their messages. Whoopi or Hannity or Tucker or Maddow are as responsible for creating the message as they are for repeating it and that why I will relentlessly dispell all the nonsense I have seen here because unopposed it BECOMES the accepted reality no matter how wrong or ignorant it may be.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

Repeating is creating...

Make enough smoke and people will believe there is a fire. Tell people who lit the "fire" enough and they will agree...

Claim russia was tricked and cheated out of Ukriane, Finland, and Alaska enough and russians will believe they deserve the land back.

It is the hand in the glove... russia, as much as any other group, uses media to form and create their messages. Whoopi or Hannity or Tucker or Maddow are as responsible for creating the message as they are for repeating it and that why I will relentlessly dispell all the nonsense I have seen here because unopposed it BECOMES the accepted reality no matter how wrong or ignorant it may be.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Yep. I repeated the Pythagorean theorem, therefore, I’m the mathematician who created it. Makes perfect sense…

There is some truth to the idea that if you repeat something enough, people may believe it is true. However, it’s not quite that simple. No matter how much you try to convince people that engaging in a proxy war is the right decision, it will really only catch on with the left who had already bought into it.

A problem with your line of thinking that the media needs to control the narrative being put out is that if the media were reported your way, it would be as biased as anywhere, except they would be reporting on what is favorable to you. So even though you think some talk show hosts opinion is relevent, it contradicts statements made by Putin.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Yep. I repeated the Pythagorean theorem, therefore, I’m the mathematician who created it. Makes perfect sense…

There is some truth to the idea that if you repeat something enough, people may believe it is true. However, it’s not quite that simple. No matter how much you try to convince people that engaging in a proxy war is the right decision, it will really only catch on with the left who had already bought into it.

A problem with your line of thinking that the media needs to control the narrative being put out is that if the media were reported your way, it would be as biased as anywhere, except they would be reporting on what is favorable to you. So even though you think some talk show hosts opinion is relevent, it contradicts statements made by Putin.

What did putin contradict?

The statements they made are perfectly innline with putin's policies and russia's actions as evidenced by the invasion of Ukriane and the needling of Finland which resulted in a closure of all land crossings between the two nations which is still in effect.

Putin's decree triggers ominous Alaska calls

The president has ordered authorities to register all Russian real estate holdings abroad, including those dating back to the Soviet and imperial eras.

www.newsweek.com

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

What did putin contradict?

The statements they made are perfectly innline with putin's policies and russia's actions as evidenced by the invasion of Ukriane and the needling of Finland which resulted in a closure of all land crossings between the two nations which is still in effect.

Putin's decree triggers ominous Alaska calls

The president has ordered authorities to register all Russian real estate holdings abroad, including those dating back to the Soviet and imperial eras.

www.newsweek.com

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Maybe you should go watch the trucker interview instead of just having other people tell you what to think about it.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Maybe you should go watch the trucker interview instead of just having other people tell you what to think about it.

Stop gaslighting.
Stop continually try to make this about me or go back under your bridge.

I did watch putin's speech on Tucker's show. The logic putin presented is consistent with both the decree here:

Putin's decree triggers ominous Alaska calls

The president has ordered authorities to register all Russian real estate holdings abroad, including those dating back to the Soviet and imperial eras.

www.newsweek.com

And the talk show that is creating public opinion to match the official desire of the russian dictator. Which is that "places that were at some time in history under russian control should return to russia".

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

Stop gaslighting.
Stop continually try to make this about me or go back under your bridge.

I did watch putin's speech on Tucker's show. The logic putin presented is consistent with both the decree here:

Putin's decree triggers ominous Alaska calls

The president has ordered authorities to register all Russian real estate holdings abroad, including those dating back to the Soviet and imperial eras.

www.newsweek.com

And the talk show that is creating public opinion to match the official desire of the russian dictator. Which is that "places that were at some time in history under russian control should return to russia".

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

We know Putin’s stance on Poland, or at least those of us who paid attention to the interview do. Your Newsweek articles are panic porn that is more about a blogger than Putin. Not the first time Newsweek has put out trash to stir the pot about Russia.

 

[cycleguy2300]

We know Putin’s stance on Poland, or at least those of us who paid attention to the interview do. Your Newsweek articles are panic porn that is more about a blogger than Putin. Not the first time Newsweek has put out trash to stir the pot about Russia.

Obfuscation^^

What is putin's stance on Poland?
What supporting statements or actions are there?

State Department responds to Putin on Alaska: ‘Certainly he’s not getting it back’

The State Department on Monday brushed off reports of Russian President Vladimir Putin ordering his government to look into the nation’s former “real estate” abroad, saying Alaska…

thehill.com

US laughs off reports of Putin eyeing Alaska as Russia's 'former real estate': 'Not getting it back'

The State Department rejected the notion of Russia reclaiming Alaska centuries after the 1867 purchase amid reports Russian President Vladimir Putin was eyeing former "real estate."

www.foxnews.com

The statements by Solovyov were not made in a vacuum and Solobyov is far from just some no-name talk show host, he is the mouthpiece of the regime and his positions are that of his patron putin. When Solovyov says russia should take back Poland, Finland, Alaska and California, it is the regime using him to generate public support.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

Still dancing around the fact that Putin already spoke on the Poland narrative. Your argument is a dead end.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Still dancing around the fact that Putin already spoke on the Poland narrative. Your argument is a dead end.

This is onerous for no reason... no facts, statements or support from even reasonable opinions from people knowledgeable innthe subject.

putin has made it clear by word and deed he wants to rebuild and expand the territories of russia. He IS actively doing it with the invasion of Ukriane

He has made it clear russia wants to reclaim lands that the russian federation, the soviet republic or the empire had held at one time or another.

Are you saying arguing with you is a dead end or that the argument is dead in light of facts you have yet to actually present?

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Armybrat]

My Brit friend (ex-RAF and Falklands veteran) just sent me this one….

 

[cycleguy2300]

Corruption plagued the post soviet world... Ukriane threw off the final ties to the soviet past in 2014 and got invaded by a man wanting to rebuild the soviet empire.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

This is wrong no matter what russian sympathizers say to try to excuse it. Their argument boils down to the globalist rationalization of "just the cost of doing business" for russia expanding its borders.



I saw first hand the places russia targeted, I say the shops and apartments buildings that had been attracted, I walked over cluster bomb craters in the streets, I felt and heard the rockets missles and bombs hit and kill They were far removed from any legitimate military targets. russia is killing and destroying because the destruction of Ukriane and the idea of Ukrainian nationalism and the replacement with russian globalism is their end goal.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

And yet it is still a known fact that Ukrainians were basically using civilians as human shields. No matter how shitty it may be for a country to invade another, if the US had been invaded(in a manner other than the current of course) we would never find it acceptable for our military to be setting up in civilian areas.

 

[Dakar34]

What Russia Sanctions Failure Says About the Future

The U.S. risks being caught off-guard if it expects the ’90s to last forever.

www.theamericanconservative.com

 

[cycleguy2300]

And yet it is still a known fact that Ukrainians were basically using civilians as human shields. No matter how shitty it may be for a country to invade another, if the US had been invaded(in a manner other than the current of course) we would never find it acceptable for our military to be setting up in civilian areas.

It is not a known fact because it is not fact. It is repeated by without reliable evidence, facts or data to support the claim.

I have presented facts, data and eye-witness accounts to describe who russia is targeting civilians and non-legitimate targets.

No one should not find it acceptable for any nation to recklessly attack targets that would place gross risk of substantial civilian casualties.

How many missles, bombs and rockets have to kill families, children, wives and husbands sleeping in their beds, playing at a park, getting coffee or working to provide at a regular normal job, before you can say "russia is wrong to not safeguard civilians better" at the very least?

The seed of the myth of Ukriane using civilians as human shields was started hours after the invasion, by putin himself.

On February 25, just hours after the invasion began, Russian President Vladimir Putin appealed directly to the personnel of the armed forces of Ukraine: “Do not allow neo-Nazis and [Ukrainian right-wing radical nationalists] to use your children, wives and elders as human shields.”

As reported: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/4/3/why-we-need-to-challenge-russias-human-shields-narrative

Interestingly, russia HAS clearly and verifiably used Ukrainian civilians as human shields

On April 7, the BBC reported that it had found “clear evidence of Russian troops rounding up Ukrainian civilians and using them as human shields.” According to the report, Russian soldiers in Obukhovychi, a town near Belarus, were under attack by Ukrainian forces. Going door to door, they forced residents into the town’s school, which the Russians were using as a headquarters, in an effort to deter Ukrainian attack.

As reported: https://lieber.westpoint.edu/weaponizing-civilians-human-shields-ukraine/

Even Amnesty International (who I despise) doesn't provide examples of any use of civilians as human shields.

"We have documented a pattern of Ukrainian forces putting civilians at risk and violating the laws of war when they operate in populated areas" said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General. Being in a defensive position does not exempt the Ukrainian military from respecting international humanitarian law.

But they add

Such violations in no way justify Russia’s indiscriminate attacks, which have killed and injured countless civilians

As found: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/n...krainian-fighting-tactics-endanger-civilians/

AT WORST Ukriane, in a time of war, not of their choosing, when civilians refuse to evacuate, sometimes operate nearby, but the onus is still on russia to protect civilians.

ALL THREE LINKS PROVIDE EXTREMELY USEFUL INFORMATION I HIGHLY SUGGEST ANYONE INTERESTED READ ALL THREE.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Johnny Diamond]

It is not a known fact because it is not fact. It is repeated by without reliable evidence, facts or data to support the claim.

I have presented facts, data and eye-witness accounts to describe who russia is targeting civilians and non-legitimate targets.

No one should not find it acceptable for any nation to recklessly attack targets that would place gross risk of substantial civilian casualties.

How many missles, bombs and rockets have to kill families, children, wives and husbands sleeping in their beds, playing at a park, getting coffee or working to provide at a regular normal job, before you can say "russia is wrong to not safeguard civilians better" at the very least?

The seed of the myth of Ukriane using civilians as human shields was started hours after the invasion, by putin himself.


As reported: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/4/3/why-we-need-to-challenge-russias-human-shields-narrative

Interestingly, russia HAS clearly and verifiably used Ukrainian civilians as human shields


As reported: https://lieber.westpoint.edu/weaponizing-civilians-human-shields-ukraine/

Even Amnesty International (who I despise) doesn't provide examples of any use of civilians as human shields.



But they add

As found: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/n...krainian-fighting-tactics-endanger-civilians/

AT WORST Ukriane, in a time of war, not of their choosing, when civilians refuse to evacuate, sometimes operate nearby, but the onus is still on russia to protect civilians.

ALL THREE LINKS PROVIDE EXTREMELY USEFUL INFORMATION I HIGHLY SUGGEST ANYONE INTERESTED READ ALL THREE.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Brother.....you're wasting your time, even though I agree, and know that you won't stop. I salute you.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[studenygreg]

I see we are working on another Ukraine war fund. Serious question. How much money would it take for Ukraine to defeat Russia? The reason I ask is if we aren't going to pro ide enough support to win, then why provide any at all. I don't understand us slow rolling their bank accounts with tons of cash just to lose.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Brother.....you're wasting your time, even though I agree, and know that you won't stop. I salute you.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

I have long since stopped doing it for him, but instead do it to simply not let lies and mistruths, that may prevent good people from supporting a good cause, go unopposed.

I wont stand by and let putin's lies get spread.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk