Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So with the passing of the 1 year anniversary, has your opinion on the conflict changed? What are your thoughts on zelensky? Strong noble leader or a zealot hiding behind the image of the military green wearing patriot?" Personally I tend to the former " What about the blanket exclusion of all russian media? " They are at war. Seems reasonable to me "I know this has troubled me right from the off. Media sources should never be censored or blocked and we are only getting one side of the story in this part of the world. Has the ukrainian govt been indiscriminately bombing ethnic russians in Donbas prior to the current conflict?" I doubt it " Are putins actions that of a complete despot or driven by ukrainian aggression in Donbas? " That's not how I read it "And what about the role of the west in all this? How culpable are they? Lets first acknowledge that whats currently going on is horrible in every sense of the word and those victims of it should be looked after as much as is humanly. I think most if not all of us can agree on that. But looking beyond that, what are your thoughts on the above? " This last point we totally agree on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So with the passing of the 1 year anniversary, has your opinion on the conflict changed? What are your thoughts on zelensky? Strong noble leader or a zealot hiding behind the image of the military green wearing patriot? Personally I tend to the former What about the blanket exclusion of all russian media? They are at war. Seems reasonable to me I know this has troubled me right from the off. Media sources should never be censored or blocked and we are only getting one side of the story in this part of the world. Has the ukrainian govt been indiscriminately bombing ethnic russians in Donbas prior to the current conflict? I doubt it Are putins actions that of a complete despot or driven by ukrainian aggression in Donbas? That's not how I read it And what about the role of the west in all this? How culpable are they? Lets first acknowledge that whats currently going on is horrible in every sense of the word and those victims of it should be looked after as much as is humanly. I think most if not all of us can agree on that. But looking beyond that, what are your thoughts on the above? This last point we totally agree on." To clarify ... the actions of a crazed narcissist. I don't see how Ukraine had made dine anything to justify this invasion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So with the passing of the 1 year anniversary, has your opinion on the conflict changed? What are your thoughts on zelensky? Strong noble leader or a zealot hiding behind the image of the military green wearing patriot? What about the blanket exclusion of all russian media? I know this has troubled me right from the off. Media sources should never be censored or blocked and we are only getting one side of the story in this part of the world. Has the ukrainian govt been indiscriminately bombing ethnic russians in Donbas prior to the current conflict? Are putins actions that of a complete despot or driven by ukrainian aggression in Donbas? And what about the role of the west in all this? How culpable are they? Lets first acknowledge that whats currently going on is horrible in every sense of the word and those victims of it should be looked after as much as is humanly. I think most if not all of us can agree on that. But looking beyond that, what are your thoughts on the above? " Anyone who knows the history of putin's career is aware that all of the allegations against Ukraine are either exaggerated or pure nonsense and are purely made up for cassus beli. The reason I say this is Putin is imperialist as they come and has always been aggressive when it comes to war and russian expansioniaim, from his accolades on the glory of the USSR and shame that it disbanded, to the second Chechnen War when apartments in Russia mysteriously started exploding only for FSB agents (russian secret service) to be caught by local authorities smuggling white powder into buildings leading to the second Chechen War headed by the man Putin himself, if you want to research this yourself look up "Russia apartment bombings". Then we have the illegal invasion of Georgia where Putin declared war on Georgia over "supposed" killings of Russians by Georgia, funnily enough this is after Georgia begins to cooperate with NATO in military exercises, 20% of Georgia is still owned by Russia to this day. Then in 2014 we have the illegal annexation of Crimea which Putin justified by saying that Crimea was harboured by extremists that were a threat to civilians and Russia "military infrastructure". It couldn't be perhaps that Crimea is strategically important for Russia possessing black sea ports and ONCE being the crown jewel of the Russan empire, it's not like imperialists would ever justify occupying a sovereign country under such nonsense.  Then as of now we have Ukraine, one of the biggest countries in Europe, is known to have mass natural gas reserves, one of or if not the biggest food producers in Europe, and is home to the ancestoral people of Russia the Kievan Rus. I think the gist of what I'm trying to convey is clear now. I didn't spell check so I apologise for any mistakes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So with the passing of the 1 year anniversary, has your opinion on the conflict changed? What are your thoughts on zelensky? Strong noble leader or a zealot hiding behind the image of the military green wearing patriot? What about the blanket exclusion of all russian media? I know this has troubled me right from the off. Media sources should never be censored or blocked and we are only getting one side of the story in this part of the world. Has the ukrainian govt been indiscriminately bombing ethnic russians in Donbas prior to the current conflict? Are putins actions that of a complete despot or driven by ukrainian aggression in Donbas? And what about the role of the west in all this? How culpable are they? Lets first acknowledge that whats currently going on is horrible in every sense of the word and those victims of it should be looked after as much as is humanly. I think most if not all of us can agree on that. But looking beyond that, what are your thoughts on the above? Anyone who knows the history of putin's career is aware that all of the allegations against Ukraine are either exaggerated or pure nonsense and are purely made up for cassus beli. The reason I say this is Putin is imperialist as they come and has always been aggressive when it comes to war and russian expansioniaim, from his accolades on the glory of the USSR and shame that it disbanded, to the second Chechnen War when apartments in Russia mysteriously started exploding only for FSB agents (russian secret service) to be caught by local authorities smuggling white powder into buildings leading to the second Chechen War headed by the man Putin himself, if you want to research this yourself look up "Russia apartment bombings". Then we have the illegal invasion of Georgia where Putin declared war on Georgia over "supposed" killings of Russians by Georgia, funnily enough this is after Georgia begins to cooperate with NATO in military exercises, 20% of Georgia is still owned by Russia to this day. Then in 2014 we have the illegal annexation of Crimea which Putin justified by saying that Crimea was harboured by extremists that were a threat to civilians and Russia "military infrastructure". It couldn't be perhaps that Crimea is strategically important for Russia possessing black sea ports and ONCE being the crown jewel of the Russan empire, it's not like imperialists would ever justify occupying a sovereign country under such nonsense. Then as of now we have Ukraine, one of the biggest countries in Europe, is known to have mass natural gas reserves, one of or if not the biggest food producers in Europe, and is home to the ancestoral people of Russia the Kievan Rus. I think the gist of what I'm trying to convey is clear now. I didn't spell check so I apologise for any mistakes."Interesting stuff. What are your thoughts on the banning of russian media sites in this neck of the woods? What is to be gained from that? Surely people should be allowed to consume whatever media they wish and then make up their own minds? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So NATO being in their backyard isn't a threat to Russia? Ukraine should have stayed neutral Now it be like Syria Having said that it's horrible for both Ukraine n Russian people This isn't what the people would have like " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On Russian media it's a bunch of trife that's owned by the government. Do you really except any kind of unbiased opinion from them? They even own companies that operate outside of Russia that try to covertly push Russian propaganda. The most insightful thin you can listen to in terms of "Russisan media" is the intercepted phone phone calls, it'll give you a lot of insight into the duality of opinions of the war, how patriotic Russians have been lied to, how their soldiers are being treated poorly lack of equipment, false contracts, many of them being poor and mass drafted from the "non-ethnic" Russian regions, poor leadership/low morale etc." So why not let people read it for themseleves and come to those conclusions themselves? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So NATO being in their backyard isn't a threat to Russia? Ukraine should have stayed neutral Now it be like Syria Having said that it's horrible for both Ukraine n Russian people This isn't what the people would have like " Not to be disrespectful but NATO has nothing to do with it. Once Russia illegaly annexed apart of Ukraine; Crimea the war was instigated and set in motion, even moreso when you realise Russia was using separatist regions and their green men to covertly fight Ukrainian forces and preemptively prepare for war. Ultimately Russia and Ukraine had a peace treaty where Ukraine would give up their nukes in exchange for recognition and peace with Russia, Who broke it? The Russians when they decided to illegally annex Crimea. It's only reasonable Ukraine and other countries seek to join NATO for protection against russian expansioniaim. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On Russian media it's a bunch of trife that's owned by the government. Do you really except any kind of unbiased opinion from them? They even own companies that operate outside of Russia that try to covertly push Russian propaganda. The most insightful thin you can listen to in terms of "Russisan media" is the intercepted phone phone calls, it'll give you a lot of insight into the duality of opinions of the war, how patriotic Russians have been lied to, how their soldiers are being treated poorly lack of equipment, false contracts, many of them being poor and mass drafted from the "non-ethnic" Russian regions, poor leadership/low morale etc. So why not let people read it for themseleves and come to those conclusions themselves? " I don't agree with censorship, but it's not hard to imagine why private platforms would refuse to host russian propaganda it's just bad business. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Search engines, etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On Russian media it's a bunch of trife that's owned by the government. Do you really except any kind of unbiased opinion from them? They even own companies that operate outside of Russia that try to covertly push Russian propaganda. The most insightful thin you can listen to in terms of "Russisan media" is the intercepted phone phone calls, it'll give you a lot of insight into the duality of opinions of the war, how patriotic Russians have been lied to, how their soldiers are being treated poorly lack of equipment, false contracts, many of them being poor and mass drafted from the "non-ethnic" Russian regions, poor leadership/low morale etc. So why not let people read it for themseleves and come to those conclusions themselves? I don't agree with censorship, but it's not hard to imagine why private platforms would refuse to host russian propaganda it's just bad business. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Search engines, etc." But is it not govt. restrictions that are responsible for this, as opposed to private companies. For example, RT website has nothing to do with facebook, youtube etc. Its been banned by various govts. Ive no doubt thers is propoganda galore on it but i still dont classify that as a reason for banning. Govts shouldn't be empowering themselves to that extent | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On Russian media it's a bunch of trife that's owned by the government. Do you really except any kind of unbiased opinion from them? They even own companies that operate outside of Russia that try to covertly push Russian propaganda. The most insightful thin you can listen to in terms of "Russisan media" is the intercepted phone phone calls, it'll give you a lot of insight into the duality of opinions of the war, how patriotic Russians have been lied to, how their soldiers are being treated poorly lack of equipment, false contracts, many of them being poor and mass drafted from the "non-ethnic" Russian regions, poor leadership/low morale etc. So why not let people read it for themseleves and come to those conclusions themselves? I don't agree with censorship, but it's not hard to imagine why private platforms would refuse to host russian propaganda it's just bad business. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Search engines, etc. But is it not govt. restrictions that are responsible for this, as opposed to private companies. For example, RT website has nothing to do with facebook, youtube etc. Its been banned by various govts. Ive no doubt thers is propoganda galore on it but i still dont classify that as a reason for banning. Govts shouldn't be empowering themselves to that extent" I agree with you it's far too heavy handed and totalitarian. The good thing about seeing both sides of an issue is that it helps weigh both arguments against eachother to get an objective take, if I only ever heard western propaganda on the issue for example and without my current knowledge I'd be rightfully skeptical. My point about these media companies is that they have lots of incentive to be compliant with the government & the anti war sentiment for their own sake. I also believe RT is directly paid by the Russisn government so I believe the opposition there is fair. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So NATO being in their backyard isn't a threat to Russia? Ukraine should have stayed neutral Now it be like Syria Having said that it's horrible for both Ukraine n Russian people This isn't what the people would have like " NATO has never threatened to go to war with Russia and it exists primarily as a deterrent against Russian aggression. If Russia feels threatened by NATO expansion then clearly they are wanting to commit acts of aggression against those very same countries. Ukraine was neutral, they gave up their own independent nuclear deterrent in 1993 as part of a broad-reaching cooperation agreement with Russia, whereby Russia guaranteed Ukrainian security. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On Russian media it's a bunch of trife that's owned by the government. Do you really except any kind of unbiased opinion from them? They even own companies that operate outside of Russia that try to covertly push Russian propaganda. The most insightful thin you can listen to in terms of "Russisan media" is the intercepted phone phone calls, it'll give you a lot of insight into the duality of opinions of the war, how patriotic Russians have been lied to, how their soldiers are being treated poorly lack of equipment, false contracts, many of them being poor and mass drafted from the "non-ethnic" Russian regions, poor leadership/low morale etc. So why not let people read it for themseleves and come to those conclusions themselves? I don't agree with censorship, but it's not hard to imagine why private platforms would refuse to host russian propaganda it's just bad business. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Search engines, etc." Why would any broadcaster that is required by law to be impartial allow lies to be broadcast.? You don’t have to try too hard to find out what is being broadcast in Russia and indeed Putin’s own speech just a few days ago was covered extensively - across all types of media. Gist of the Russian position… We did not invade Ukraine, we were attacked. We are defending ourselves against the West. The Special Military Operation is going to plan. Anyone who disagrees with those lines and says it in public faces arrest | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On Russian media it's a bunch of trife that's owned by the government. Do you really except any kind of unbiased opinion from them? They even own companies that operate outside of Russia that try to covertly push Russian propaganda. The most insightful thin you can listen to in terms of "Russisan media" is the intercepted phone phone calls, it'll give you a lot of insight into the duality of opinions of the war, how patriotic Russians have been lied to, how their soldiers are being treated poorly lack of equipment, false contracts, many of them being poor and mass drafted from the "non-ethnic" Russian regions, poor leadership/low morale etc. So why not let people read it for themseleves and come to those conclusions themselves? I don't agree with censorship, but it's not hard to imagine why private platforms would refuse to host russian propaganda it's just bad business. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Search engines, etc. Why would any broadcaster that is required by law to be impartial allow lies to be broadcast.? You don’t have to try too hard to find out what is being broadcast in Russia and indeed Putin’s own speech just a few days ago was covered extensively - across all types of media. Gist of the Russian position… We did not invade Ukraine, we were attacked. We are defending ourselves against the West. The Special Military Operation is going to plan. Anyone who disagrees with those lines and says it in public faces arrest" I was referring to online access, which has been blocked in this part of the world by government | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On Russian media it's a bunch of trife that's owned by the government. Do you really except any kind of unbiased opinion from them? They even own companies that operate outside of Russia that try to covertly push Russian propaganda. The most insightful thin you can listen to in terms of "Russisan media" is the intercepted phone phone calls, it'll give you a lot of insight into the duality of opinions of the war, how patriotic Russians have been lied to, how their soldiers are being treated poorly lack of equipment, false contracts, many of them being poor and mass drafted from the "non-ethnic" Russian regions, poor leadership/low morale etc. So why not let people read it for themseleves and come to those conclusions themselves? I don't agree with censorship, but it's not hard to imagine why private platforms would refuse to host russian propaganda it's just bad business. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Search engines, etc. Why would any broadcaster that is required by law to be impartial allow lies to be broadcast.? You don’t have to try too hard to find out what is being broadcast in Russia and indeed Putin’s own speech just a few days ago was covered extensively - across all types of media. Gist of the Russian position… We did not invade Ukraine, we were attacked. We are defending ourselves against the West. The Special Military Operation is going to plan. Anyone who disagrees with those lines and says it in public faces arrest I was referring to online access, which has been blocked in this part of the world by government " Surely if you want a balanced view on what is happening then instead of wanting access to Russian media (which will only provide an extreme pro-Russian position) you need to use the power of the internet to see news sources from other parts of the World (ie not just “the west”). They aren’t blocked! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On Russian media it's a bunch of trife that's owned by the government. Do you really except any kind of unbiased opinion from them? They even own companies that operate outside of Russia that try to covertly push Russian propaganda. The most insightful thin you can listen to in terms of "Russisan media" is the intercepted phone phone calls, it'll give you a lot of insight into the duality of opinions of the war, how patriotic Russians have been lied to, how their soldiers are being treated poorly lack of equipment, false contracts, many of them being poor and mass drafted from the "non-ethnic" Russian regions, poor leadership/low morale etc. So why not let people read it for themseleves and come to those conclusions themselves? I don't agree with censorship, but it's not hard to imagine why private platforms would refuse to host russian propaganda it's just bad business. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Search engines, etc. Why would any broadcaster that is required by law to be impartial allow lies to be broadcast.? You don’t have to try too hard to find out what is being broadcast in Russia and indeed Putin’s own speech just a few days ago was covered extensively - across all types of media. Gist of the Russian position… We did not invade Ukraine, we were attacked. We are defending ourselves against the West. The Special Military Operation is going to plan. Anyone who disagrees with those lines and says it in public faces arrest I was referring to online access, which has been blocked in this part of the world by government Surely if you want a balanced view on what is happening then instead of wanting access to Russian media (which will only provide an extreme pro-Russian position) you need to use the power of the internet to see news sources from other parts of the World (ie not just “the west”). They aren’t blocked!" I have. But i would also like russian sources as well, and make my own mind up on whether i think its all as biased as what everyone tells me it is or not | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
