Tucker Carlson, Colonel Douglas Macgregor, The Ukraine War

[ImmortalFlame]

Nato is nothing but a self fulfilling prophecy, a war treaty looking for a war, and now they got one, but you don't get that.

How many wars has NATO started?

 

[lukethethird]

I have said it repeatedly. You have called the invasion a "border dispute". You have attempted to excuse the invasion as a consequence of a "US backed coup" that was actually a popular protest within Ukraine that resulted in new, democratically elected leader. You have claimed that Ukraine has been killing Russian-speaking people in the Donbas, and when pressed for evidence of this you claimed they were responsible for 14,000 deaths, which I later learned was the total number of deaths - on both sides - of the war in the Donbas that was initiated by Russian separatists (and also just so happens to have been virtually identical to a dishonest claim made by Putin to excuse his invasion). You are desperate to shift the cause of the invasion, and it's moral weight, onto the USA or NATO (usually after you fail to put it onto Ukraine). You place blame ANYWHERE but at Russia, and only offer vague platitudes about Putin being bad while doing ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING YOU CAN to remove any moral accountability or responsibility for the invasion (when you're willing to call it that) from him.


You don't care about Ukrainians, otherwise you would respect their decision to defend their home and fight off an invading force, rather than calling it a "border dispute" and constantly having to LIE about Ukraine's history.

Ukraine has the right to self defense. The USA, their military ally, has the right (and, I would argue, the moral necessity) to provide them with the means to defend themselves. Putin has the right to negotiate, but isn't willing to cease his invasion without concessions in the form of territory.

An anti-imperialist would support a powerful nation aiding a weaker nation to protect their borders from an actual invasion. That is the bare minimum principle required of being anti-imperialist. You have to REJECT IMPERIALISM and support any acts - diplomatic, hegemonic or otherwise - that curtail actual imperialism.

You wouldn't be downplaying it. You wouldn't be excusing it. You wouldn't engage in lies and repeat the ACTUAL ARGUMENTS OF AUTHORITARIAN IMPERIALISTS to support the disarming of a nation that is defending itself AGAINST imperialism

Those are things an imperialist does.

You have done them.

Hence, you're an imperialist.

The US backed coup was in 2014, that was then, this is now. I mentioned that to demonstrate the sort of democracy we are supposedly supporting. Again I don't make excuses for Putin, unfortunately neither Russia nor USA recognize international criminal courts. Everyone knows the biggest imperialists are USA and its western lackys, and the US is known worldwide for invading countries that can't defend themselves, Afghanistan, Iraq, Grenada. In this case the people of Ukraine are fighting the US's proxy war against Russia, it is Ukraines blood that is being shed, do you ever think about that? Like Lindsey Graham said to the Ukraines in that video a few posts back, "your fight is our fight" yeah, easy for him to say.

 

[lukethethird]

How many wars has NATO started?

List of NATO bombings - Wikipedia

Linked so you can read about them, they read like infomercials for Nato and its capabilities but that's wiki.

 

[Stevicus]

Exactly.
I am trying to figure out how much money the US spent on useless wars and never received anything in return.

Last time America got anything in return for any war we've fought in was in 1898. This chart shows how much has been spent on defense since that time:

 

[Subduction Zone]

I suppose putting Russian missiles in Cuba or Mexico would not be a threat?

Go back and reread my post. For you to answer in this manner tells me that you either did not read it or did not understand it. What part confused you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

List of NATO bombings - Wikipedia

Linked so you can read about them, they read like infomercials for Nato and its capabilities but that's wiki.

Wow! More signs of an inability to understand even the simplest of posts. Your source did not help you.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The US backed coup was in 2014,

I've already exposed this as a lie. There was no "US backed coup". There was a mass protest and the president fled to Russia, then the individual next in line to the position of president assumed the role for an interim (as per the usual constitutional process) and then an election was held.

There. Was. No. Coup.

that was then, this is now. I mentioned that to demonstrate the sort of democracy we are supposedly supporting.

You lied.

Again I don't make excuses for Putin,

Yes you do. You keep suggesting he was "provoked" and calling his invasion a "border dispute" and repeating his lies about "14,000 Russian-speaking Ukrainians being killed".

unfortunately neither Russia nor USA recognize international criminal courts.

We're talking about Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Stay on topic.

Everyone knows the biggest imperialists are USA and its western lackys, and the US is known worldwide for invading countries that can't defend themselves, Afghanistan, Iraq, Grenada. In this case the people of Ukraine are fighting the US's proxy war against Russia, it is Ukraines blood that is being shed, do you ever think about that? Like Lindsey Graham said to the Ukraines in that video a few posts back, "your fight is our fight" yeah, easy for him to say.

The rest of this nonsense is just more propaganda, repeating the same debunked lies that have been addressed, and adds nothing.

You are an imperialist. You don't care about Ukraine. If you did, you would be condemning Russia for invading them, not the USA for aiding them. Stop pretending you care when you'd rather run defense for the totalitarian war criminal invading them than admit that maybe, just maybe, the USA might actually be on the right side for once.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

List of NATO bombings - Wikipedia

Linked so you can read about them, they read like infomercials for Nato and its capabilities but that's wiki.

I'll ask again:

How many wars has NATO started?

 

[lukethethird]

I'll ask again:

How many wars has NATO started?

I've already exposed this as a lie. There was no "US backed coup". There was a mass protest and the president fled to Russia, then the individual next in line to the position of president assumed the role for an interim (as per the usual constitutional process) and then an election was held.

There. Was. No. Coup.


You lied.


Yes you do. You keep suggesting he was "provoked" and calling his invasion a "border dispute" and repeating his lies about "14,000 Russian-speaking Ukrainians being killed".


We're talking about Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Stay on topic.


The rest of this nonsense is just more propaganda that says nothing.

You are an imperialist.

I think Putin is a tyrant, a terrorist, and should stand before a criminal court, the sooner the better, and I also think you are full of BS. I don't think you care that Ukrainians are dying, I just think you have never seen a war you didn't like, just like any other neocon that just wants to see Russia weakened at the expense of the Ukrainian people. Armchair chickenhawk warriors, gottaluv'm.

 

[lukethethird]

Wow! More signs of an inability to understand even the simplest of posts. Your source did not help you.

I linked to the wars that Nato was involved in, as for who started them, well it's the victors that write the histories. Provocations appear to be a rather touchy subject for posters here.

BTW, I think it ironic to call NATO a “defensive alliance”.

 

[Sargonski]

You can easily verify whether Carlson’s description of media coverage is accurate or not by simply reading the media coverage. You can find out yourself in half an hour’s reading that his representation of media coverage of the war is completely false. As it’s hard to believe he isn’t actually aware of that, I mean I assume he actually reads some of the stuff he comments on, unless he really does have zero integrity, then he is of course lying. I’ve been following reporting on the war since it began and the reporting on it is nothing like Carlson’s notions about it.

You can also quite easily find all the information you need into ongoing abuses, on both sides but predominantly from the Russia side. This information and the thorough, ongoing investigations are publicly available.

You don’t know what is true because you don’t bother to look into it, or because you lack the ability to think critically, I don’t know. I’ve seen so many of these idiotic posts it’s hard to understand what motivates them. One common theme however is that the posters, like you, haven’t actually read the information they dismiss out of hand on the word of an inveterate liar like Carlson. Frankly, it’s astonishing. What prevents you, for example, from actually reading the media reports to verify whether or not Carlson’s representation of that reporting is accurate? I read the NYT, the Economist, The Spectator, the Times, The NY-er and others of the often disparaged (by ignorant morons who never even read the things they dismiss) MSM, and everything and more in this dumb vid is covered - NATO expansion, corruption in Ukraine, the massive casualties on both sides. None of this is news, people have been reporting on it and opining on it for the last 2 years.

I don't know Tuckers thoughts on the war .. not sure what his narrative is. You seem to really dislike the fellow .. and have heaped all kinds of abuse on him .. but didn't manage to state what it is that he has misrepresented . .. you accuse the guy of a a completely false coverage of the war .. but don't give one example of a falsehood .. he is a liar .. but do not tell us a lie. so a bunch of playground advective.

None of which matters however as is completely unrelated to MacGreggors narrative on the war his credibility and so forth ... which is the topic and subject of interest .. not your silly Ad Hom Fallacy

"You don’t know what is true because you don’t bother to look into it, or because you lack the ability to think critically, I don’t know. I’ve seen so many of these idiotic posts it’s hard to understand what motivates them. One common theme however is that the posters, like you, haven’t actually read the information they dismiss out of hand on the word of an inveterate liar like Carlson.

Then you go right off the turnip truck .. from attacking Tucker to attacking me .. some how linking me to Tucker .. is some massive Strawman fallacy .. who is not part of the conversation that you are responding to.

This is Whack a doodle friend .. clearly you are upset .. have a case of hurtebutt over something I said .. but you clearly got something confused in the mix .. as my commentary on the war has nothing to do with Tucker .. and your commentary has nothing to do with nothing except make calling .. and demonizing poor Tuck .. but he is not part of the Narrative under examination friend .. Now get up off the floor and tell us what has you sore.. something I said obviously .. spit it out now .. don't be shy ... your in the Adult Room .. we can take it

 

[Sargonski]

I just think it's odd that you'd post a statistic like that (even putting it in bold, so obviously you must have thought it was pretty significant) but have no idea if it's true or not.

Of course I had an idea of whether or not it was True .. and I Gave you the Source .. told you the that the actual number given was 90 .. and I quited 80% .. but you have absolutely no idew whether it is true or not .. nor why you care so much .. and thats kind of Odd.. given it was a minor part of the commentary on Russia's overall economic wellbeing .. the war objectives factoring into that future well being.

and what is super odd .. and frankly idiotic .. is obsessing over whether the number is 80% .. or 75% ... clearly the region is economically very propserous .. that the word on the street from Doug .. and by my estimation that is going to be generally true .. Economic Win for Russia .. be it 75 or 85% of GNP.. says Twiddly Dumb and Twiddly dee ..

Now this economic prosperity number seems exceedingly important to you .. been harping on it now for a number of posts .. the word "incessant" comes to mind and hopefully I spelled it right .. in case there are any spelling Nazi's around.

So what is the point you would like to make .. relating to Russia doing well by its land grab .. which you mistakenly thought was just the Donbass. That beachfront property along the Black Sea must have some value aye mate ? Worth more say .. than some field outside of Kiev. Did you not see the Gas map ? that was part of the convo .. the immortal Flame from flaring gas .. how could you miss that ?

Something of value to contribute .. to the convo you jumped into .. then deflected down a fallacious rabbit hole .. surely you must have had something of value you wanted to say

 

[Subduction Zone]

I linked to the wars that Nato was involved in, as for who started them, well it's the victors that write the histories. Provocations appear to be a rather touchy subject for posters here.

BTW, I think it ironic to call NATO a “defensive alliance”.

That was not the question that you were asked. NATO did not start the wars that they were involved in. You may not understand this but they were first asked for help by an arm of the UN. This may help you:

Bosnian War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I don't know if you have answered this yet: What wars had NATO started?

 

[Estro Felino]

You have no idea of the recent history of events. Zelensky beat Poroshenko in a runoff election in 2019. The Maidan revolution took place in 2014. Putin invaded in February and March, 2014, in response to the overthrow of Yanukovych. Neither Poroshenko nor Zelensky were in power when Russia invaded. There was a power vacuum in Ukraine at the time, and Putin was taking advantage of it.



Nobody has come close to threatening to overthrow Putin except apparently his late henchman, Yevgeny Prigozhin. There is no such objective in the US government, let alone your fictional "deep state". All you are doing here is spouting paranoid fantasies pushed by Russian troll farms.

Why did Putin invade?
Because the Ukrainian government would persecute Russian minorities in the Donbas regions and in Crimea.
So please: let's not turn the perpetrators in the victims. Thank you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why did Putin invade?
Because the Ukrainian government would persecute Russian minorities in the Donbas regions and in Crimea.
So please: let's not turn the perpetrators in the victims. Thank you.

Is there any evidence for this claim?

 

[lukethethird]

Is there any evidence for this claim?

US Victim of Own Propaganda in Ukraine War

 

[Copernicus]

Why did Putin invade?
Because the Ukrainian government would persecute Russian minorities in the Donbas regions and in Crimea.
So please: let's not turn the perpetrators in the victims. Thank you.

Putin began his invasion shortly after Yanukovych was deposed in February of 2014, so it is clear that he had been planning for one as a contingency plan if things went sideways with Yanukovych's attempt to suppress the rebellion. The protest itself was not persecuting Russian minorities, and pretty much everyone involved in it spoke Russian as their dominant language. Kyiv itself is a Russian-speaking city, although Ukrainian is widely spoken in the surrounding countryside. Whatever you consider persecution, it was nothing compared to the inevitable number of deaths and injuries that a war causes, so that was not Putin's concern. The victims here were Ukrainian citizens, because their country was under attack. You have a very weird sense of who was being victimized. Russia itself was not under attack, so it was not a victim. Nor was it any of Russia's business that a popular uprising overturned the government in Kyiv.

We all know why Putin invaded, so let's not turn the real perpetrators into victims.

 

[Copernicus]

Why did Putin invade?
Because the Ukrainian government would persecute Russian minorities in the Donbas regions and in Crimea.
So please: let's not turn the perpetrators in the victims. Thank you.

Is there any evidence for this claim?

US Victim of Own Propaganda in Ukraine War

Luke, this is not evidence that the Ukrainian government was persecuting Russian minorities in the Donbas regions. For one thing, it took place in Odesa, not the Donetsk. Moreover, the clashes were started by anti-Maidan protesters, some of whom were armed and had ties to Russian ultranationalists. Your article by Joe Lauria was published just today (August 31, 2024) by a pro-Putin journalist, but it left out many details from that incident and blamed the fire on pro-Maidan demonstrators. The video "proof" in the link was supposed to show pro-Maidan demonstrators tossing firebombs into the lobby, but it actually showed them being thrown by both sides, and it did not show any being lobbed into the lobby from outside. The local investigation claimed that the people inside had started the fire, possibly by accident.

See the Wikipedia article on the event for more context and a more objective description of what happened:

2014 Odesa clashes​

 

[Estro Felino]

Putin began his invasion shortly after Yanukovych was deposed in February of 2014, so it is clear that he had been planning for one as a contingency plan if things went sideways with Yanukovych's attempt to suppress the rebellion. The protest itself was not persecuting Russian minorities, and pretty much everyone involved in it spoke Russian as their dominant language. Kyiv itself is a Russian-speaking city, although Ukrainian is widely spoken in the surrounding countryside. Whatever you consider persecution, it was nothing compared to the inevitable number of deaths and injuries that a war causes, so that was not Putin's concern. The victims here were Ukrainian citizens, because their country was under attack. You have a very weird sense of who was being victimized. Russia itself was not under attack, so it was not a victim. Nor was it any of Russia's business that a popular uprising overturned the government in Kyiv.

We all know why Putin invaded, so let's not turn the real perpetrators into victims.

I have so many documents proving it.
Imagine if these videos enter an international criminal court.

 

[Subduction Zone]

US Victim of Own Propaganda in Ukraine War

I will take that as a "No" then.

Consortium News - Bias and Credibility

LEFT BIAS These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may

mediabiasfactcheck.com