• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: All things Trump + Russia Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
phiwum said:
Let's start one at a time.

When and where did the US bastards claim that Russians are to blame for the refugees? Because I'm an avid consumer of US media, but I sure as hell didn't get that point. Indeed, as you've mentioned, the refugee crisis preceded the Russian involvement in Syria.

So, do show me any US government claim or even US media claim that the Syrian refugee crisis is due to Russian involvement. Just one major news story from a respectable media outlet would do. I await with breath bated, of course.

And if you succeed in doing so, I'll be happy to say that the source cited was full of ****. And if you can't do so, well...
Click to expand...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...se-europe-nato-commander-claims-a6909241.html
 
magellan said:
Oh boy, is this really so complicated?
US tells me Russians are to blame for refugees. Obviously a lie, if time is linear.
US tells me the russians "hacked their election" Obviously an intentionally nebulous charge, so I am not going to believe them.
US (The guys who run RFE) tells me RT and Sputnik are kremlin propaganda, and I just have to take a look at it to see that that is mainly another US propaganda lie.
Click to expand...

This has, AGAIN, nothing to do with my question. I'm asking you why you trust Russian propaganda, not why you don't trust US propaganda.

Are you even capable of understanding the question? As you say, it seems very complicated to you. The only way you could think your answers satisfy my question is if you think that US media and Russian media are complementary, and that if you can't trust one you must automatically be able to trust the other. Since that would be idiotic, I don't believe that this is what you think.
 
Last edited:
Cui Bono is a simple principle when trying to understand US-Russia relations.

Russia is so hilariously underpowered in any way but nuclear compared to the US that subterfuge and espionage are about the only things they can do to hamper the only remaining superpower.
And why wouldn't they do everything to undermine democracy and fuel strive to paralyze their primary geostrategic enemy?
 
magellan said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...se-europe-nato-commander-claims-a6909241.html
Click to expand...

You were misremembering the claims, then? Your attempted reason for dismissal falls apart when actually faced with the evidence, after all. Feel free to try again or admit your mistake, though.

On the other hand, there's quotes of interest like...

In the run-up to the “temporary cessation of hostilities” that started on Saturday, Russian and Syrian forces were accused of deliberately targeting hospitals and civilian infrastructure in possible war crimes.

In a report released on Thursday, Amnesty International claimed it has “compelling evidence” of at least six deliberate attacks on medical facilities in the Aleppo governorate over the past 12 weeks.
Click to expand...

Going further, though... it looks like there's general agreement that Putin's pushing the line that any refugee crisis there is is all the fault of the US and Europe, either way. This is hardly a surprise, of course, when Human Rights Watch has specifically called Russia out for only handling about 1% of it's "fair share" of the financial burden. Far less, on the other hand, when it comes to other measures.
 
Last edited:
Since I popped in for the one, though...

magellan said:
US tells me the russians "hacked their election" Obviously an intentionally nebulous charge, so I am not going to believe them.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Usually, the smart way of dealing with such things is to first ascertain what the actual claim is and what it's based on instead of just baselessly dismissing it.


magellan said:
US (The guys who run RFE) tells me RT and Sputnik are kremlin propaganda, and I just have to take a look at it to see that that is mainly another US propaganda lie.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Those are interesting standards you've got there, especially when you're trying to single out the US and push it all on them. Either way, any and all state-owned media outlets should be expected to be pushing propaganda to some extent, really, unless the government imposes strong rules to prevent that (even then, one should be wary of it). That's something that very much applies to RT and Sputnik, of course.
 
Last edited:
Amazing. Why do you trust the Russians? Because I don't trust the US. Why don't you trust the US? Because they lie. Where did they lie? In this claim that I dismiss without checking it.

Very convincing.
 
Argumemnon said:
Amazing. Why do you trust the Russians? Because I don't trust the US. Why don't you trust the US? Because they lie. Where did they lie? In this claim that I dismiss without checking it and this source which both wasn't from the US and didn't say what I claimed it said.

Very convincing.
Click to expand...

FTFY. But yes, so very convincing.
 
I'm all for having a sceptical approach to media stories. However it's odd how many of those who dismiss mainstream media, maybe even calling them "pre$$titutes" will blindly swallow conspiracy theories and incredibly unreliable sources with no discrimination.



Similarly I have noticed that the "low information voters" who say that they "don't trust the papers because they all lie" seem to give more credence to made up stories* in the newspapers that they read than I do. It's just that the newspapers they read *are* unreliable (the Express, for example).



*Which sometimes the papers eventually accept were made up.
 
All this Russiagate waffle interferes with international trade. It's only because of some theory without facts that the Russians are supposed to have an enmity towards us, which comes from historical facts, and Ukraine, and the Russians don't support the Syrian opposition. I can't help it if Clinton lost the election. Give peace a chance I say.
 
Henri McPhee said:
All this Russiagate waffle interferes with international trade. It's only because of some theory without facts that the Russians are supposed to have an enmity towards us, which comes from historical facts, and Ukraine, and the Russians don't support the Syrian opposition. I can't help it if Clinton lost the election. Give peace a chance I say.
Click to expand...

You mean the kind of peace that leads to Russia invading and annexing parts of other countries?
 
Henri McPhee said:
All this Russiagate waffle interferes with international trade. It's only because of some theory without facts that the Russians are supposed to have an enmity towards us, which comes from historical facts, and Ukraine, and the Russians don't support the Syrian opposition. I can't help it if Clinton lost the election. Give peace a chance I say.
Click to expand...

A theory without facts that comes from historical facts?
 
Henri McPhee said:
All this Russiagate waffle interferes with international trade. It's only because of some theory without facts that the Russians are supposed to have an enmity towards us, which comes from historical facts, and Ukraine, and the Russians don't support the Syrian opposition. I can't help it if Clinton lost the election. Give peace a chance I say.
Click to expand...

No, it's obvious that Putin regards international relations as a zero sum game - that what is good for one country is obviously bad for others.

If you take that view, then weakening the US and Europe are good for Russia.

If you take the view that mutual benefit is possible, than that is not the case - however if you are dealing with someone who doesn't subscribe to that philosophy (Putin, Trump - and many Brexit campaigners IMO) then a zero-sum approach is the only one that will work with them. ]]

Russia is our rival because of Putin's actions.
 
thaiboxerken said:
A theory without facts that comes from historical facts?
Click to expand...

I agree that Britain and America never expected Eastern Europe to be annexed as Soviet administrations after the second world war, and that we should not drop our guard. I just think all this talk by Congressmen and women in America about Russia meddling in elections in Europe is hysterical, and even untrue. The Russians are semi- Asiatic. They will probably always be suspicious of Britain and America, perhaps with good reason. It's possible that there are Russians who had a preference for Trump over Obama and Clinton, but that's no excuse for nuclear war. America trades very little with Russia, while Europe does.

There is some historical background to this which I posted on another thread on this forum:

There is a bit of background to all this in a book called the Russian Outlook by Lieutenant-General Sir Giffard Martel published in 1947:

Quote:

From their point of view they looked back on a very grim period as regards their relations with our country Without going into full details of this past record, we can see clearly enough the sort of unpleasant thoughts that remained uppermost in their minds. While the British Empire was expanding in the last century we had consistently opposed any expansion on their part. We had resisted Russian influence in Persia and Turkey. We had opposed the opening of a Russian warm-water port in the Persian Gulf. We intervened in their country and tried to re-establish the East front in Russia towards the end of the First World War. In doing so we brought chaos and internal strife to Russia. They were not asked to attend at Versailles..............

In July 1940, when the Germans were fully occupied in the West, she took the opportunity to march into the Baltic states, and thus regain former Russian provinces under the guise of protective custody. In a similar way, she entered Bessarabia in August, and completed the restoration of the major portion of her old western boundary.

On June 22nd, 1941, Germany broke her treaty with Russia and invaded her country. Whatever our views may be about the propriety of this Russian treaty with the Germans, the fact remains that it was strictly adhered to by the Russians. This was merely one more case added to the long list of treaties broken by Germany.
Click to expand...
.
 
o.O

A US general testifying before congress is no longer a US source?
Because he is also SACEUR? (Btw: He's USEUCOM too)

And he is not blaming russia when he says they are "weaponizing refugees" and "drive" them?

Ok. I'm done here. Be sure to get the champagne for when Manafort is hit with the full extent of the law and has to pay 10.000$ for failing to register as a foreign agent.
 
Ok EC, let's try this again. I think there are parallel "threads" here, please feel free to clarify.

1. Do you acknowledge that leaks about an investigation don't necessarily come from Mueller? And that the target might be the source of the leak?

2. What do you mean when you say...?
Emily's Cat said:
Wouldn't that then imply that all of the "unnamed source" material was BS and not legitimate?
Click to expand...
If there are particular mainstream news stories concerning Trump+Russia investigation that you claim are illegitimate, can you please cite one or more so we can examine? Especially any such stories that have been shown to be false since publication.
 
Last edited:
Putting this here but equally relevant in other threads

A depressing read on Vox

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/2/16588964/america-epistemic-crisis

America is facing an epistemic crisis
Click to expand...

The incentives facing GOP politicians are not good
For Mueller’s findings to have any effect, they will have to break some part of the basic dynamic on the right. Here’s how it works:

Pundits and yellers in right-wing media compete to freak out the base and reinforce its allegiance to Donald Trump. The base leans on politicians. And most elected GOP officials are in seats safe enough that they fear a primary challenge from the base more than a Democratic challenger. The only way to stave off a primary is to pay obeisance.
Click to expand...
 
magellan said:
o.O

A US general testifying before congress is no longer a US source?
Because he is also SACEUR? (Btw: He's USEUCOM too)
Click to expand...

The Independent isn't US media, which makes it fairly irrelevant to your claim about US media.

magellan said:
And he is not blaming russia when he says they are "weaponizing refugees" and "drive" them?
Click to expand...

My, those goal posts of yours are quite mobile.

magellan said:
Ok. I'm done here.
Click to expand...

Yes, run away when you can't defend your claims, no one will notice.

magellan said:
Be sure to get the champagne for when Manafort is hit with the full extent of the law and has to pay 10.000$ for failing to register as a foreign agent.
Click to expand...

Oh, and throw a cheap, empty parting shot. Yeah, that'll make everything better! I'm reminded of a Republican friend of mine who tried to back up his claim of a county scale Democratic fraud with an article about a lady in a different state who had trouble with a screen that needed recalibrated, but managed to vote for the candidate that they wanted to anyways.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom