Ukraine

[Ke1t]

5 minutes ago, CCB III said:

But it's a bizarre point because ultimately you're just propagandising for Ukraine if you're silencing things that you consider to be "Russian propaganda."

 

Report the facts with honesty and let people make up their own minds, you know, they call it journalism. 

That's a terrible idea. 

People are fucking retarded. 

 

[CCB III]

30 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

Ukraine hadn't applied for NATO membership, all that was said was that NATO didn't rule it out because hostile states don't get a say in who joins NATO. That's not provocation, that's telling Russia it's not in control of Western decision-making, the same way we don't tell other states who can and can't join the CSTO. 

The military industrial complex is powerful, but that's also why a handful of American weapons are smashing several Russian armies. Their role in this seems limited, however, when we see how keen Putin is to dominate his neighbours. 

As for the report, I don't believe only 30% is reaching the front line. In Afghanistan and Iraq, sure.. there was literally no enemy, and we were handing over planeloads of weapons and cash that instantly disappeared. In Ukraine there's a clear and present danger, and they're desperate to get the hardware to defend themselves. They're not pushing the Russians back for a lack of Western equipment. 

The story was probably pulled because it's a massive propaganda point for the Russians. "See, Western citizens? Your money is disappearing to who knows where. You may as well stop supplying arms to them, eh?" 

We're at a major inflection point in European history, we're already at war, and we don't need to be boosting the other side. 

 

1.) No, that's why they invaded Ukraine, basically as a "paws off" IMO. It's totally feasible they'd join Americas NATO and they almost definitely will now, Putin was preemptively trying to gain control of the region before this happened. It's failed. You simply can't look past the Warsaw Pact and all the broken promises since and conclude America has no part to play in the geopolitical aggression from Russia. "Hostile states" are who? Just states who don't how to American imperialism, or at the very least, fight for the head seat at the world table? That doesn't negate from the fact Putin is a bloodthirsty pig with egotistical reasons for the invasion. America maybe doesn't tell other states who can and can't join CTSO but it certainly meddles in other nations decisions making, particularly in South America.  
 

2.) It suits the MIC for the war to go on as long as possible, we've seen it before, flood the place with weapons, probably hope for a factional split, which there might be with those Azov slags, and you can keep manufacturing conflict that makes you bank. Surely they are involved entirely? 
 

3.) I mean you literally can't know that and neither can I. I'm sure you admit a publication in one nation being silenced by another nation, not even their own gov, is absolutely bizarre. I just can't see why they'd make up total fabrications knowing how it'd go over. In my opinion there's something there, and it's been shut down as it can be propagandised by the Russians. 
 

4.) As milne said, I think people are already there with this, with or without such a report. Cunts in this country are gonna go fuckin bankrupt just trying to keep themselves warm this winter, naturally I don't think skier give a fuck what's going on in Ukraine other than "shit that's sad." Notice since the albino gorilla resigned there's been hardly any mention of it by the scum in charge. Most civilians are safe, it's no longer a heartbreaking tragedy, it's just another background war that we've had beamed into our brains since forever. 
 

5.)  "Boosting the other side" by doing some good investigative journalism and finding something out, and reporting on it?

 

 

[Parklife]

People listen to Coldplay and voted for the nazis. You can't trust people, Consi. 

[CCB III]

8 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

That's a terrible idea. 

People are fucking retarded. 

 

Bizarre POV. 
 

Your advocating for censorship because you believe it's more important than potentially giving the Russians a minor propaganda tool? 
 

It's so weird. 

[Ramandu]

Didn't read the CBS article, so I'm not sure exactly what the claim is. But it seems reasonable to me that a lot of the weapons would not go straight to the front line. If I was fighting a war which was dragging on I'd want to make sure I had a nice big stockpile ready for when I need it in 3 months time.

I certainly wouldn't want to be in a position where every new toy I got had to go straight into battle. That'd be bad logistics.

[Ke1t]

7 minutes ago, CCB III said:

Bizarre POV. 
 

Your advocating for censorship because you believe it's more important than potentially giving the Russians a minor propaganda tool? 
 

It's so weird. 

You don't propagandise for your enemies, that's bizarre and weird. 

But again, people are gullible morons who can't be trusted to make large decision. 

Brexit, Bojo, Trump, Independence referendum... utterly clueless. 

[Ke1t]

14 minutes ago, CCB III said:

1.) No, that's why they invaded Ukraine, basically as a "paws off" IMO. It's totally feasible they'd join Americas NATO and they almost definitely will now. "Hostile states" are who? Just states who don't how to American imperialism
 

2.) It suits the MIC for the war to go on as long as possible, we've seen it before, flood the place with weapons, probably hope for a factional split, which there might be with those Azov slags, and you can keep manufacturing conflict that makes you bank. Surely they are involved entirely? 
 

3.) I mean you literally can't know that and neither can I.
 

4.) As milne said, I think people are already there with this, with or without such a report.
 

5.)  "Boosting the other side" by doing some good investigative journalism and finding something out, and reporting on it?

 

 

1. Again, not Russia's place to dictate to free and independent nations. They bear full responsibility for their invasion. Hostile states are countries that, for example, interfere with western elections and hack the defence departments of western nations, again, unprovoked actions. 

2. They're involved, not responsible. 

3. Correct, and I don't believe that figure. 

4. I agree, but that goes back to my point about people. You're at war, start acting like it. 

5. Correct. To illustrate, should British newspapers have reported, truthfully, about D-Day taking place in Normandy rather than the Pas de Calais?  And maybe translated it into German for ease of consumption by the Germans? 

[CCB III]

10 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

You don't propagandise for your enemies, that's bizarre and weird. 

But again, people are gullible morons who can't be trusted to make large decision. 

Brexit, Bojo, Trump, Independence referendum... utterly clueless. 

You chalking up the first 3 of those decisions to people being stupid, is nuts. 
 

People are angry. Pissed off. Have no power. They saw such things (BoJo not so much) as trying to claim some power back. Rightly or wrongly. They aren't stupid, just have absolutely no idea how to take control of their lives back. Look where people voted for Trump, voted for Brexit, it tells its own story. 
 

BoJo and Independence is your standard media machine slandering opposition or people who are a threat to the interest of capital. 

 

So, propagandising is doing investigative journalism and releasing your findings? 
 

That's an insane POV, for me. People can have more than one thought about the situation in Ukraine, and it's up to the "free" media to provide all the facts about the conflict. The idea that some reports should be silenced in case it plays into Russian hands is frankly, bizarre. 

 

[Ke1t]

2 minutes ago, CCB III said:

You chalking up the first 3 of those decisions to people being stupid, is nuts. 
 

People are angry. Pissed off. Have no power. They saw such things (BoJo not so much) as trying to claim some power back. Rightly or wrongly. They aren't stupid, just have absolutely no idea how to take control of their lives back. Look where people voted for Trump, voted for Brexit, it tells its own story. 
 

BoJo and Independence is your standard media machine slandering opposition or people who are a threat to the interest of capital. 

 

So, propagandising is doing investigative journalism and releasing your findings? 
 

That's an insane POV, for me. People can have more than one thought about the situation in Ukraine, and it's up to the "free" media to provide all the facts about the conflict. The idea that some reports should be silenced in case it plays into Russian hands is frankly, bizarre. 

 

The least educated elements of society (too stupid to vote for their own interests, and easily persuaded otherwise) and the top few percent who are educated enough to know which side their bread is buttered on. 

 

[CCB III]

6 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

1. Again, not Russia's place to dictate to free and independent nations. They bear full responsibility for their invasion. Hostile states are countries that, for example, interfere with western elections and hack the defence departments of western nations, again, unprovoked actions. 

2. They're involved, not responsible. 

3. Correct, and I don't believe that figure. 

4. I agree, but that goes back to my point about people. You're at war, start acting like it. 

5. Correct. To illustrate, should British newspapers have reported, truthfully, about D-Day taking place in Normandy rather than the Pas de Calais?  And maybe translated it into German for ease of consumption by the Germans? 

1.) America interferes with elections all the time, on record. Are they not a hostile state also? To be worried about by people in the global south? 
 

2.) I'm not saying they started it but it's not outwith the realms of possibility this all goes on years longer than needed as long as the cheques are rolling. I'd actually suggest it's pretty likely. 
 

3.) Ok, you don't believe it, people should be able to review it and make their own minds up. 
 

4.) Ukrainians are at war, Russians are at war, we're at war with fuck all. 
 

5.) Should journalists be providing people with objective facts and impartial reporting regardless of political usefulness? Yeah, I think so. 

[Ke1t]

1 minute ago, CCB III said:

1.) America interferes with elections all the time, on record. Are they not a hostile state also? 
 

2.) I'm not saying they started it but it's not outwith the realms of possibility this all goes on years longer than needed as long as the cheques are rolling. I'd actually suggest it's pretty likely. 
 

3.) Ok, you don't believe it, people should be able to review it and make their own minds up. 
 

4.) Ukrainians are at war, Russians are at war, we're at war with fuck all. 
 

5.) Should journalists be providing people with objective facts and impartial reporting regardless of political usefulness? Yeah, I think so. 

1. Yes. 

2. Usually as long as is feasible for all parties. 

3. I don't think they should in a time of war. 

4. You're supplying weapons to Ukraine. Do you think Putin does or does not consider you to be at war? If the answer is yes then you are at war. 

5. So you'd have provided details on the invasion of France, knowing it materially aids your enemies, in the spirit of journalistic integrity... keeping in mind journalistic integrity doesn't exist. 

[Misers Hill]

48 minutes ago, CCB III said:

Bizarre POV. 
 

Your advocating for censorship because you believe it's more important than potentially giving the Russians a minor propaganda tool? 
 

It's so weird. 

 

16 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

1. Yes. 

2. Usually as long as is feasible for all parties. 

3. I don't think they should in a time of war. 

4. You're supplying weapons to Ukraine. Do you think Putin does or does not consider you to be at war? If the answer is yes then you are at war. 

5. So you'd have provided details on the invasion of France, knowing it materially aids your enemies, in the spirit of journalistic integrity... keeping in mind journalistic integrity doesn't exist. 

NrAt...?

You pair thought o running when Joe goes?

[CCB III]

1 hour ago, Ke1t said:

The least educated elements of society (too stupid to vote for their own interests, and easily persuaded otherwise) and the top few percent who are educated enough to know which side their bread is buttered on. 

 

People who are kept deliberately ignorant and propagandised to vote against their best interests. 
 

Classist as fuck is your POV. 
 

 

[CCB III]

57 minutes ago, Misers Hill said:

 

NrAt...?

You pair thought o running when Joe goes?

Might just do that...would you vote for me for ACC?

[CCB III]

1 hour ago, Ke1t said:

1. Yes. 

2. Usually as long as is feasible for all parties. 

3. I don't think they should in a time of war. 

4. You're supplying weapons to Ukraine. Do you think Putin does or does not consider you to be at war? If the answer is yes then you are at war. 

5. So you'd have provided details on the invasion of France, knowing it materially aids your enemies, in the spirit of journalistic integrity... keeping in mind journalistic integrity doesn't exist. 

1.) Glad you agree. 
 

2.) Wishful thinking 

 

3.) Ridiculous libtard shit 

 

4.) If argue they are involved in the war on that premise normally, but what does America actually stand to lose if Russia gains some Ukrainian territory, genuinely? The minute it becomes inconvenient or no longer profitable for America they'll dip out support as fast as they did in the Middle East. 
 

5.) You're talking about a world war and specific circumstances regarding a battle and location. CBS simply wished to show American citizens where their chronically misspent tax money was going. 
 

You're saying on one hand that people are too stupid to make decisions but have also decided it's ok to keep them uninformed. 
 

Makes sense. 
 

"Hey, we're spending billions on foreign wars that I see only downsides to, and I still have to pay a fortune for my healthcare!?"

 

"No, shhh shhh shut up. We're at war you see, big time war, thousands of miles from you but seriously don't ask for such things"

[Misers Hill]

15 minutes ago, CCB III said:

Might just do that...would you vote for me for ACC?

Elorabate??Party ehs ehs

[Ke1t]

18 minutes ago, CCB III said:

1.) Glad you agree. 
 

2.) Wishful thinking 

 

3.) Ridiculous libtard shit 

 

4.) If argue they are involved in the war on that premise normally, but what does America actually stand to lose if Russia gains some Ukrainian territory, genuinely? The minute it becomes inconvenient or no longer profitable for America they'll dip out support as fast as they did in the Middle East. 
 

5.) You're talking about a world war and specific circumstances regarding a battle and location. CBS simply wished to show American citizens where their chronically misspent tax money was going. 
 

You're saying on one hand that people are too stupid to make decisions but have also decided it's ok to keep them uninformed. 
 

Makes sense. 
 

"Hey, we're spending billions on foreign wars that I see only downsides to, and I still have to pay a fortune for my healthcare!?"

 

"No, shhh shhh shut up. We're at war you see, big time war, thousands of miles from you but seriously don't ask for such things"

Use that imbecilic word again in discussion with me and you're blocked, no questions asked. 

[CCB III]

9 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

Use that imbecilic word again in discussion with me and you're blocked, no questions asked. 

I think it's a pretty good word. 
 

I've decided to take it off the far right and reappropriate it's for libs that make libtard points. 

[RedArmyFakshun]

estonia in a fortnight

a hundred miles from the border

i need an angle to get past the doorman

[Misers Hill]

1 hour ago, CCB III said:

Might just do that...would you vote for me for ACC?

Vast ist?

[RedArmyFakshun]

The average bill to heat a St Petersburg apartment this winter will be less than $80 a month

And they prime us for winter blackouts so that psychologically we accept hyperinflation

Cos they are shit scared that we all just stop paying

 

[Ke1t]

39 minutes ago, CCB III said:

I think it's a pretty good word. 
 

I've decided to take it off the far right and reappropriate it's for libs that make libtard points. 

So you'd rather be disrespectful to someone who's being respectful to you in a discussion.

Well, you won't be doing it with me. 

 

[maryhilldon]

 Kelt v Consi live.  Only on TheHaTVj 

[Beachend Bootboy]

7 hours ago, Ke1t said:

Use that imbecilic word again in discussion with me and you're blocked, no questions asked. 

Bet you don't.

He is a nause like.

[Studebaker-90]

NRT

[Ke1t]

10 hours ago, Beachend Bootboy said:

Bet you don't.

He is a nause like.

It's done. 

You owe me, let's say, fifty quid. 

??

[Beachend Bootboy]

2 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

It's done. 

You owe me, let's say, fifty quid. 

??

Ok pal.  Nice one.

[Redforever86]

The N the N the N-R-A!

[Redforever86]

 

[CCB III]

On 8/21/2022 at 11:47 PM, Redforever86 said:

The N the N the N-R-A!

Would be sick if it was true