Putin: "Stick to the timeline!"

[Icarus27k]

Western media, at least in the U.S., are mostly  independent, corporate owned entities. They don't speak for the state. Russian media is an example of actual state-controlled media. You may say that Western media doesn't have differing opinions, but they do. They just don't have such drastically differing opinions that are to your liking.

The definition of a "dictator" is pretty objective, not a subjective thing that anyone can successfully label a non-dictator with. Does a leader never want to give up power, make democracy impossible, and rule by fear of literal arrest or harm? That's a dictator. That's Putin. 

 

Is one side of a war "winning"? This is not so objective. The loser always gets to decide when the war is over, as military expert Michael Kofman says. This implies that in the loser's mind, the war is never lost until they admit it. Until then, they can always say they have won or are winning. This touches on the topic of differing definitions of "winning" from the war parties. Both sides will not have the same definition. 

So, is Russia winning? Maybe according to their definition of "win", and it doesn't mean that much because everyone is a winner until someone admits they lost. 

[Distortedreasoning]

2 hours ago, scoobdog said:

You spend more time extolling how uncomplicated it is than actually explaining it in a way that isn’t riddled with logical fallacies.  Explain how Putin can invade another country without being an imperialist.

i said it already, it cant be explained if you cant put yourself in russias shoes. take all the bias you have of russia and make the analysis there. arming ukraine to the teeth, over toppling their democratically elected government making the country unstable. then killing ethnic russians out in ukraine in violation of the ceasefire, and then get ignored when you try to bring up the issue. 

[Distortedreasoning]

2 hours ago, ZoomBubba said:

I guess his logic is "they used to be part of the same state that doesn't exist anymore" and "a huge part of the country speaks Russian" I guess the same logic would make an invasion of Canada by the US OK in his book because we both used to belong to England and and a huge swath of it speaks English.

what happened last time cuba gave russia  permission to put nukes in their country? oh yeah the usa freaked out. the hypocrisy.  

[rpgamer]

How is your stance both this:

59 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

thats why i said you cant discuss anything here

And this:

30 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

i said it already, it cant be explained if you cant put yourself in russias shoes.

Kinda makes it seem like you're the one dodging discussion.

[Distortedreasoning]

18 minutes ago, Icarus27k said:

Western media, at least in the U.S., are mostly  independent, corporate owned entities. They don't speak for the state. Russian media is an example of actual state-controlled media. You may say that Western media doesn't have differing opinions, but they do. They just don't have such drastically differing opinions that are to your liking.

The definition of a "dictator" is pretty objective, not a subjective thing that anyone can successfully label a non-dictator with. Does a leader never want to give up power, make democracy impossible, and rule by fear of literal arrest or harm? That's a dictator. That's Putin. 

 

Is one side of a war "winning"? This is not so objective. The loser always gets to decide when the war is over, as military expert Michael Kofman says. This implies that in the loser's mind, the war is never lost until they admit it. Until then, they can always say they have won or are winning. This touches on the topic of differing definitions of "winning" from the war parties. Both sides will not have the same definition. 

So, is Russia winning? Maybe according to their definition of "win", and it doesn't mean that much because everyone is a winner until someone admits they lost. 

you gotta pay attention to what they say. they are supposedly all independent but somehow all cheerleading for this proxy war in the same way the have been cheering for every other war we get involved with? remember the consensus that russia would be in economic trouble after a few weeks. or that they would run out of missles and weapons. or that ukraine would turn the tide when they get tanks or whatever superweapon? who blew up the nordstream 2 pipeline? where the voices that demand realistic peace? and any voice that differs from the official narrative is somehow a putin puppet? i thought msm had lost all credibility. tho they do sometimes admit reality when it becomes impossible to ignore. 

 

im just talking about the battlefield. russia has and are holding the territory they want, they are grinding down the ukranian army, and they are dwindling the supplies of nato. they wont win the war till the ukraine surrenders and no longer poses a threat. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Distortedreasoning]

6 minutes ago, rpgamer said:

How is your stance both this:

And this:

Kinda makes it seem like you're the one dodging discussion.

given the provocation from the west, what would you do in russia's shoes? answer that from russias point of view. take away the western lens and then we can start. 

[stilgar]

Ukraine never posed a threat to Russia weirdo.

[rpgamer]

9 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

given the provocation from the west, what would you do in russia's shoes? answer that from russias point of view. take away the western lens and then we can start. 

This is the geopolitical equivalent of "What was she wearing?"

Really? Your answer to "Why did Russia initiate an attack?" is the tired old excuse of "they made me do it?" We've all been on these boards long enough to know the response to that is "No, you're the one responsible for your own actions."

[Distortedreasoning]

5 minutes ago, rpgamer said:

This is the geopolitical equivalent of "What was she wearing?"

Really? Your answer to "Why did Russia initiate an attack?" is the tired old excuse of "they made me do it?" We've all been on these boards long enough to know the response to that is "No, you're the one responsible for your own actions."

not even close.

but thank you for demonstrating you cant do something simple. 

[SwimOdin]

He believes these things. He doesn’t know why, and can’t articulate them when he contradicts himself. He literally has distorted reasoning. I would stop giving him attention at this point.

[PenguinBoss]

It's interesting to see "Ukraine is a threat" to "Russia is stomping their shit in" in the same breath.

[naraku360]

9 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

funny how putin or anyone the west doesnt agree with= crazy dictator

 

[naraku360]

8 hours ago, rpgamer said:

This is the geopolitical equivalent of "What was she wearing?"

Spoiler

 

[Icarus27k]

I do get the impression that in the U.S., officials want the war to quiet down after the Ukrainian counteroffensive culminates. It's an unspoken desire, but I think it's there. I see it in this article about the CIA Director's recent secret meeting with Zelensky.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/30/cia-director-burns-ukraine-counteroffensive/

 

The info in this article was leaked by the U.S. government for reason.

 

The U.S. doesn't share Ukraine's goal of "evicting all Russians soon". Maybe in the distant future, the U.S. can agree to that, but I don't believe we think it's possible in the near term. Instead, there is probably a desire to see, if not negotiations or a ceasefire, at least the fighting slow down to a minimum tempo. Perhaps similar to the fighting that occurred in the Donbass from 2014 to 2022. 

 

Edited July 5, 2023 by Icarus27k

[_lost_username_]

12 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

he was vp during syria and libya. did nothing to get us out of afghanistan after he got elected vp. he supported all wars we were involved in during his long ass career as a politician. supported and still supports the brutal israeli government. as president, i blame him for his leading ukraine into war with russia and pushing us closer to the brink of nuclear war.

So, you really got nothing.

Anyway, if anything, the Iraq War probably made Americans too restrained when it came to acting abroad. Kind of weird you're pointing at Syria considering that the mission against ISIS and protecting the Kurds was pretty successful until Trump decided to pull out because of his transactional politics that did not take into account the situation they'd be left with, causing one of our most consistent allies in the last 30 years to lose faith in us. You're also distorting facts by claiming the US "led Ukraine into war" overlooking the fact that Russia was the one who invaded without provocation, something they've been doing to Ukraine since 2014.

 

Quote

trying to start a war with china as well. also sanctions, which do kill people in the thousands every year. the list could go on, being the US president means supporting some brutal regimes around the world and to destabilize governments. 

No one is trying to start a war with China. China has been the aggressor in the South China Sea and Taiwan, an island that has been operating on its own for at least three generations and as a democracy since the 80s. Taiwan saw what happened to Hong Kong, they don't want that to happen to them.

You're trying to throw up a lot of "what about" strawmen, but you can't seem to get to what you're trying to actually say, which is "Putin was right." I'm pretty sure the reason is that you can't actually support that argument.

[scoobdog]

16 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

i said it already, it cant be explained if you cant put yourself in russias shoes. take all the bias you have of russia and make the analysis there. arming ukraine to the teeth, over toppling their democratically elected government making the country unstable. then killing ethnic russians out in ukraine in violation of the ceasefire, and then get ignored when you try to bring up the issue. 

Assuming all of that… it doesn’t imply an existential threat to a bigger, better armed and (supposedly) better trained military.  The argument that they have the right to defend “ethnic Russians” is no different than the United States arguing they have the right to defend American lives on foreign soil, and the last time we did that Hawaii lost its independence.  I’ll ask you again:  why is Putin not an imperialist for white knighting the Ukraine while the United States is?

[Icarus27k]

Prigozhin, master of disguise. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Icarus27k]

 

Well that's good to know.

[discolé monade]

3 minutes ago, Icarus27k said:

 

Well that's good to know.

 

[katt_goddess]

19 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

what happened last time cuba gave russia  permission to put nukes in their country? oh yeah the usa freaked out. the hypocrisy.  

If your neighbor decided to fill up their backyard with live howitzers they got from someone that hates you all aimed at your place, would you 'freak out'? If you got robbed, would you call the police to report your stuff gone and do something about getting it back or would you just say you must have provoked the thief into invading your space and trashing it by having your own space to begin with and leave the door wide open every time you leave from here on out?

Russians don't even want to be invading Ukraine. It's the state-sponsored news from Russia that tells you everyone is fine with it. Anyone that protests it gets jailed.  

 

[Seight]

3 hours ago, Icarus27k said:

Prigozhin, master of disguise. 

 

 

 

 

 

That bottom-right picture gets somebody in the Midwest/South to say something very stupid and/or awful on camera in Borat 3.

[_lost_username_]

20 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

what happened last time cuba gave russia  permission to put nukes in their country? oh yeah the usa freaked out. the hypocrisy.  

Nobody was putting nukes in Ukraine with the intent of aiming them at Russia. Plus, considering Russia's aggression and it's past treatment of Ukraine (the Holodomor jumps to mind) gives it reason to seek both defensive arms and alliances like other former Soviet States like the Baltics and Poland.

Anyway, what's your case that "Putin was right"?

[Distortedreasoning]

13 hours ago, Icarus27k said:

I do get the impression that in the U.S., officials want the war to quiet down after the Ukrainian counteroffensive culminates. It's an unspoken desire, but I think it's there. I see it in this article about the CIA Director's recent secret meeting with Zelensky.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/30/cia-director-burns-ukraine-counteroffensive/

 

The info in this article was leaked by the U.S. government for reason.

 

The U.S. doesn't share Ukraine's goal of "evicting all Russians soon". Maybe in the distant future, the U.S. can agree to that, but I don't believe we think it's possible in the near term. Instead, there is probably a desire to see, if not negotiations or a ceasefire, at least the fighting slow down to a minimum tempo. Perhaps similar to the fighting that occurred in the Donbass from 2014 to 2022. 

 

the fighting has only slowed down because the offensive has stalled out. it seems like the usa is thinking of slowing down the fighting, but i doubt russia will give the ukraine any sort of breathing room. there is a nato summit coming up soon, so that will tell us more on what their plan is. 

[Distortedreasoning]

11 hours ago, ZoomBubba said:

So, you really got nothing.

Anyway, if anything, the Iraq War probably made Americans too restrained when it came to acting abroad. Kind of weird you're pointing at Syria considering that the mission against ISIS and protecting the Kurds was pretty successful until Trump decided to pull out because of his transactional politics that did not take into account the situation they'd be left with, causing one of our most consistent allies in the last 30 years to lose faith in us. You're also distorting facts by claiming the US "led Ukraine into war" overlooking the fact that Russia was the one who invaded without provocation, something they've been doing to Ukraine since 2014.

 

No one is trying to start a war with China. China has been the aggressor in the South China Sea and Taiwan, an island that has been operating on its own for at least three generations and as a democracy since the 80s. Taiwan saw what happened to Hong Kong, they don't want that to happen to them.

You're trying to throw up a lot of "what about" strawmen, but you can't seem to get to what you're trying to actually say, which is "Putin was right." I'm pretty sure the reason is that you can't actually support that argument.

too restrained? all we do is support other violent regimes worldwide or get in direct confrontations. the foreign policy remains the same no matter who is at the table. i feel most people here just either downplaying the role, or not really aware. either way syria was a disaster of a loss and a war crime. i brought it up since it was a major conflict. we are still in syria stealing their oil. pay attention globally, you will see our hand in conflicts all over the globe. ukraine too, they leave the situation alone *no coupe in 2014* and russia does not attack it. they were living peacefully before that event. 

 

america is most definitely trying to start a war with china. they see that china will be surpassing them in a few years as the world leading super power but cant do anything to stop it.  except to use the military. we are instigating in many different ways, sanctions, propaganda campaigns, civil unrest, and by recognizing taiwan as an independent country, which is not. taiwan sees what is happening in ukraine and does not want none of that. 

[Distortedreasoning]

7 hours ago, scoobdog said:

Assuming all of that… it doesn’t imply an existential threat to a bigger, better armed and (supposedly) better trained military.  The argument that they have the right to defend “ethnic Russians” is no different than the United States arguing they have the right to defend American lives on foreign soil, and the last time we did that Hawaii lost its independence.  I’ll ask you again:  why is Putin not an imperialist for white knighting the Ukraine while the United States is?

we are the best military, but if another country was arming our neighbors, we would act. nukes or not, its a security concern. we simply would not tolerate it. add that the west was telling ukraine that it could join nato, then it becomes an existential threat. 

 

[Distortedreasoning]

4 hours ago, katt_goddess said:

If your neighbor decided to fill up their backyard with live howitzers they got from someone that hates you all aimed at your place, would you 'freak out'? If you got robbed, would you call the police to report your stuff gone and do something about getting it back or would you just say you must have provoked the thief into invading your space and trashing it by having your own space to begin with and leave the door wide open every time you leave from here on out?

Russians don't even want to be invading Ukraine. It's the state-sponsored news from Russia that tells you everyone is fine with it. Anyone that protests it gets jailed.  

 

you conveniently forgot to mention, that we had already placed our nukes close to where they would not have any chance to react. 

 

 

[Icarus27k]

Russia is so great, 1 million Russians have fled the country in the past year, there is no longer a regular, standing Russian army, and an armed rebellion almost lead to tanks attacking Moscow like two weeks ago. 

[Icarus27k]

(In all seriousness, Iraq is a much better country than Russia and we fought an eight year long war there.) 

[discolé monade]

2 hours ago, Icarus27k said:

(In all seriousness, Iraq is a much better country than Russia and we fought an eight year long war there.) 

we were duped into babysitting rich men's oil fields. 

that's not a war. that's guard duty with casualties. 

[scoobdog]

12 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

we are the best military, but if another country was arming our neighbors, we would act. nukes or not, its a security concern. we simply would not tolerate it. add that the west was telling ukraine that it could join nato, then it becomes an existential threat. 

 

So, the implication of this and the "hypocrisy" of the US complaining about Cuba hosting Chinese spy operations is... the United States has the right to invade Cuba, depose it's communist leaders, and "return" the island to ethnic Americans?

[katt_goddess]

15 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

you conveniently forgot to mention, that we had already placed our nukes close to where they would not have any chance to react. 

 

 

Pretty sure Italy isn't out of reaction reach of Russia by any stretch of the 60's imagination. 

On the other hand, Cuba is technically only a little over 100 miles from US territory. 

You never answered the questions. 

[Icarus27k]

 

 

[Seight]

10 hours ago, Icarus27k said:

(In all seriousness, Iraq is a much better country than Russia and we fought an eight year long war there.) 

Full disclosure, I read that and audibly went "DAAAAMN!" 

[Icarus27k]

Pasty, bald guy in a tie with a Telegram account: "America meddles in the affairs of other countries via NGO front groups."

 

Subway sandwich artist: "Toasted or not toasted, sir?" 

[tsar4]

https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1678053168083615745

[tsar4]

Funeral for Maori Cossack in Ukraine

 

[Master-Debater131]

 

That should just about do it. Turkey was the last NATO member to hold off on Sweden after Hungary said they would approve it last week.

The most epic backfire of all time is all but complete now. Sweden will be a NATO member.

[Icarus27k]

Remember back during peacetime (1990s to 2000s, what some people dubiously call the unipolar moment) when accession to NATO was determined by the rigorous test of "eh. the more the merrier, welcome to the club guys"?

[Icarus27k]

 

 

 

[tsar4]

Lots of conflicting stories today revolving around Belarus.  

Russia has pulled nearly all its troops from Belarus.  Or...

Russia will pull their troops out of Belarus if NATO & US troops back off their borders.  Or

Wagner group is in Belarus, training Russian troops  Or...

Wagner group never went to Belarus and are still in Ukraine.  Or...

Wagner pulled out of Ukraine just before the "mutiny."

[tsar4]

BBC wins the Ukrainian war version of "Where's Waldo"

[tsar4]

Unlocked NYT video article NSFW

[Icarus27k]

 

When you know, you know. 

 

[tsar4]

Xi ain't gonna be happy

[Master-Debater131]

Theres also reports that Russia is going to consider any ship traveling to the grain ports as carrying military supplies and a legitimate military target.

Theres no possible way that could backfire.....and zero historical context that shows why that is such a bad idea......

[scoobdog]

3 hours ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Theres also reports that Russia is going to consider any ship traveling to the grain ports as carrying military supplies and a legitimate military target.

Theres no possible way that could backfire.....and zero historical context that shows why that is such a bad idea......

Lol.  The Black Sea is going to be swarming with a NATO naval flotilla.

[Master-Debater131]

10 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

Lol.  The Black Sea is going to be swarming with a NATO naval flotilla.

Turkey alone has enough navy in the area to make Russia seriously regret this sort of policy

[scoobdog]

14 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Turkey alone has enough navy in the area to make Russia seriously regret this sort of policy

I hate to say it, but Erdogan knows he has Putin over a barrel.  If he chooses to float his navy to protect grain cargo, he's got the Chinese supporting him.

[Master-Debater131]

2 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

I hate to say it, but Erdogan knows he has Putin over a barrel.  If he chooses to float his navy to protect grain cargo, he's got the Chinese supporting him.

Oh he absolutely knows he has Putin over a barrel.  He also has a history of fucking with Russia militarily. He shot down a Russian fighter jet that entered into Turkish airspace a while back, so he has a track record of this.

He could easily float his entire navy right up to Ukrainian waters and theres not a damn thing that Russia could do about it.

[scoobdog]

30 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Oh he absolutely knows he has Putin over a barrel.  He also has a history of fucking with Russia militarily. He shot down a Russian fighter jet that entered into Turkish airspace a while back, so he has a track record of this.

He could easily float his entire navy right up to Ukrainian waters and theres not a damn thing that Russia could do about it.

It's why he isn't to be trusted in the least.