Tucker Carlson, Colonel Douglas Macgregor, The Ukraine War

[Tomef]

I agree with you however I don't know that it is practical to cover the range of topics on one thread. Carlson made broad sweeping statements with one liners regarding Ukraines democracy, Putin's so called plans to take over the world, who is winning the war, a lot to cover.

That’s why starting at the beginning and working through it bit by bit is essential. The problems start when people just swallow this kind of thing whole. If you know the person bringing you a message is a habitual liar, it gives you a different perspective on the message.

There’s an element of both chicken and egg to it though. For Carlson’s basic, and fundamentally dishonest, notions about the world to have some resonance with someone, that person must already be attuned to dishonest and simplistic thinking. Those are culturally embedded issues, I would think, something in the fabric of that person’s social environment.

 

[lukethethird]

That’s why starting at the beginning and working through it bit by bit is essential. The problems start when people just swallow this kind of thing whole. If you know the person bringing you a message is a habitual liar, it gives you a different perspective on the message.

There’s an element of both chicken and egg to it though. For Carlson’s basic, and fundamentally dishonest, notions about the world to have some resonance with someone, that person must already be attuned to dishonest and simplistic thinking. Those are culturally embedded issues, I would think, something in the fabric of that person’s social environment.

Yes, and a lot of that becomes apparent when discussing these topics on this thread with each other. People set in their ways.
In the video posted just a few posts back, the host deals with Carlson in a short and concise manner by addressing his broad statements as logical fallacies. I should have thought of doing that myself but there it is.

 

[Sargonski]

I believe that Subduction Zone may have been referring to this post by EconGuy to the cOLTER OP video:

Tucker Carlson, Colonel Douglas Macgregor, The Ukraine War

How does that change the principle of the matter? Also, you failed to answer my question about Alaska. And speaking of failing to answer questions, there where three question in that post you replied to and you answered ZERO!

www.religiousforums.com

Here is the Youtube video that EconGuy posted. It lasts about 30 minutes.

Spoilsport

Excellent Lads ... Part 3 completed ... now for Parts 1 and 2 por favor.

1) What is the falsehood that is being claimed in the OP video and
2) What is the rough timestamp where Dougs errant claim is refuted

Come now Lads .. let us not engage in the wild goose chase fallacy .. "The answer is over there somewhere and I havn't told you what you are searching for"

We will call 1 and 2 the dumb and dumber test .. as without at least one of the two would be moronic to go these silly hunts that clowns will sometimes propose.

 

[Sargonski]

That’s why starting at the beginning and working through it bit by bit is essential. The problems start when people just swallow this kind of thing whole. If you know the person bringing you a message is a habitual liar, it gives you a different perspective on the message.

There’s an element of both chicken and egg to it though. For Carlson’s basic, and fundamentally dishonest, notions about the world to have some resonance with someone, that person must already be attuned to dishonest and simplistic thinking.

OMG... this is an amazing example of projection friend .. Priceless does not do it justice.

OK .. so you start out with the fallacy that the messenger should give you a different perspective on the message. It shouldn't ... but you believe this false nonsense and so your perspective on the message changes .. Just like you say. " to have some resonance with someone, that person must already be attuned to dishonest and simplistic thinking.

This is quite on the mark ... which is quite intuitive and shows active brain matter .. something that has been thought about .. reason and rational thought have been employed ... critical analysis to some degree

So Kudo's for all that .. but - how much more irrational is your inability to understand it false nonsense to think that the messenger falsifies the message .. in any way shape or form.

You have been inndated with this and other fallacy .. and as such ... have discounted the other side of the story before it gets read .. self induced partisan blindness .. on the basis of being already attuned to dishonist and simplistic thinking .. Nail on the head friend .. just unfortunate, albeit priceless at the same time, the the head is your own ?

 

[anna.]

I didn't search all 14 pages of this thread to see if someone had posted the video I'm about to post. But Ryan McBeth is qualified to opine on the Colonels comments and I think he's spot on 100%.

I posted it in post #126 but I'm happy to see it posted again.

 

[Sargonski]

Yup. Liberals doing it may get too zealous with outright censorship, but Conservatives doing it are efforts to erase people, shove them back into closets, and entirely rewriting history to say evil (slavery, racism, bigotry) is good.

What a wild pile of fallacious bile. Evils from the past by others don't justify Blue Evils in the present Brother Shade ?! nor do dirty deeds of Red against the people justify dirty deeds of Blue against the good citizens.

These efforts to erase people are bad - regardless of side however, the undermining of our democracy via censorship of speech .. far exceed anything happened on Jan 6 .. like comparing a rain drop to a hurricane kind of excess... in terms of hope of success.

"Slavery" -- Historically it was the Blue side that was the worst so "wrong" .. and humorously dumb as slavery in history has zero to do with today's Evil Blue Empire .. taking us down the dark path of an Orwellian totalitrian collectivist fantasy. .. with all the hallmarks of Nazi tactics .. aka .. totalitarian tactics in general" .. just these one's real similar to some of Adolfs gems.. especially on the propaganda front.... What happened to "My body My Choice" ? how about we just erase/cancel that right .. "For the good of the Collective" .. let us create a new directive .. do an end run around the safeguards the founders put in place to protect that right .. because we have the might .. and might is right .. Do as we say .. not as we do .. and what is right for me .. is right for you cause we all the same in the Hive.

Oh .. but you better vote Blue because some Conservatives had slaves way back in history -- there is a sensible rational for who to vote for in Woke-Land.

 

[EconGuy]

I posted it in post #126 but I'm happy to see it posted again.

I'm glad I'm not the only one paying attention!

 

[Tomef]

Priceless does not do it justice.

I’m so glad you like it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What a wild pile of fallacious bile. Evils from the past by others don't justify Blue Evils in the present Brother Shade ?! nor do dirty deeds of Red against the people justify dirty deeds of Blue against the good citizens.

These efforts to erase people are bad - regardless of side however, the undermining of our democracy via censorship of speech .. far exceed anything happened on Jan 6 .. like comparing a rain drop to a hurricane kind of excess... in terms of hope of success.

"Slavery" -- Historically it was the Blue side that was the worst so "wrong" .. and humorously dumb as slavery in history has zero to do with today's Evil Blue Empire .. taking us down the dark path of an Orwellian totalitrian collectivist fantasy. .. with all the hallmarks of Nazi tactics .. aka .. totalitarian tactics in general" .. just these one's real similar to some of Adolfs gems.. especially on the propaganda front.... What happened to "My body My Choice" ? how about we just erase/cancel that right .. "For the good of the Collective" .. let us create a new directive .. do an end run around the safeguards the founders put in place to protect that right .. because we have the might .. and might is right .. Do as we say .. not as we do .. and what is right for me .. is right for you cause we all the same in the Hive.

Oh .. but you better vote Blue because some Conservatives had slaves way back in history -- there is a sensible rational for who to vote for in Woke-Land.

Lots of words but no substance. You're new so I'll let you know, don't make assumptions about me and if I didn't say it do not claim I did. Like your "better vote blue." You are off to a crap start.
And obviously you don't know Reps and Dems switched. Oh well. That doesn't have any bearing today because today it is Republicans saying garbage such as slavery trading black people coping skills.

 

[Copernicus]

Excellent Lads ... Part 3 completed ... now for Parts 1 and 2 por favor.

1) What is the falsehood that is being claimed in the OP video and
2) What is the rough timestamp where Dougs errant claim is refuted

Come now Lads .. let us not engage in the wild goose chase fallacy .. "The answer is over there somewhere and I havn't told you what you are searching for"

We will call 1 and 2 the dumb and dumber test .. as without at least one of the two would be moronic to go these silly hunts that clowns will sometimes propose.

Congratulations! You passed the test for the dumbest reply. Nobody is going to top that. Do your own homework and watch the video, but, before you do, bear in mind that Colonel MacGregor is mainly criticized for being wrong, not necessarily telling falsehoods. For example, much of the criticism was in his use of clear fallacies to support his points. A fallacy is not a false claim, but an invalid argument to support a claim. As for the timestamp, you can discover that on your own. If you had time to watch the original video, you have time to watch a 30 minute rebuttal, even if you are going to reject everything in it out of hand before you even see it. You just might learn some new things about the war. I certainly did.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Excellent Lads ... Part 3 completed ... now for Parts 1 and 2 por favor.

1) What is the falsehood that is being claimed in the OP video and
2) What is the rough timestamp where Dougs errant claim is refuted

Come now Lads .. let us not engage in the wild goose chase fallacy .. "The answer is over there somewhere and I havn't told you what you are searching for"

We will call 1 and 2 the dumb and dumber test .. as without at least one of the two would be moronic to go these silly hunts that clowns will sometimes propose.

No, I am not playing that game. If you want to make claims you need to do so on your own. The video is dead.

Using a source that is of no value is what creationists do. You can look to a source like that for ideas, but you need to confirm them elsewhere if you want to use them in a debate. Right now you are trying to shift the burden of proof and I do not think that anyone that is arguing here will allow you to do that.

 

[Sargonski]

No, I am not playing that game. If you want to make claims you need to do so on your own. The video is dead.

Using a source that is of no value is what creationists do. You can look to a source like that for ideas, but you need to confirm them elsewhere if you want to use them in a debate. Right now you are trying to shift the burden of proof and I do not think that anyone that is arguing here will allow you to do that.

What is this descent into mindless unintelligible gibberish "Im not playing that game - If you want to make claims you need to do so on your own"

I didn't make any claims ? ... It is you and others running around crying out that there are falsehoods by MacGreggor in the interview. I asked you to state what the falsehood was that you were referring to ... and now you are trying to say some burden of proof is on me.

It is your naked unsupported claim and accusation that bears the burden of proof Brother Sub .. You again cry out " A source that is of no value" -- a completely unsupported nonsense claim having no relevance to your previous claim "False False"

You have not even managed to state what the falsehood that has you so worked up is. never mine show that your claim is true .. the full burden of proof .. is all on you to show that your claim is not from La La Fairytale made up land .. but think we already know the answer to that one ... the one playing games .. ring around the rose .. while chanting Blue Woke Prose Har har

 

[Copernicus]

What is this descent into mindless unintelligible gibberish "Im not playing that game - If you want to make claims you need to do so on your own"

I didn't make any claims ? ... It is you and others running around crying out that there are falsehoods by MacGreggor in the interview. I asked you to state what the falsehood was that you were referring to ... and now you are trying to say some burden of proof is on me.

It is your naked unsupported claim and accusation that bears the burden of proof Brother Sub .. You again cry out " A source that is of no value" -- a completely unsupported nonsense claim having no relevance to your previous claim "False False"

You have not even managed to state what the falsehood that has you so worked up is. never mine show that your claim is true .. the full burden of proof .. is all on you to show that your claim is not from La La Fairytale made up land .. but think we already know the answer to that one ... the one playing games .. ring around the rose .. while chanting Blue Woke Prose Har har

The critique of the Carlson-Macgregor video is really good, and it is too bad that you won't even look at it. It is not really an attempt to prove MacGregor wrong as to figure out what he said that could be treated as credible or reliable. The McBeth video actually agrees that MacGregor is correct in some of the things he says, but McBeth himself clearly knows a lot about the subject matter. He isn't the slightest bit partisan or political about it. Besides pointing out fallacies in MacGregor's narrative, he also suggests that MacGregor's knowledge of the weapons being supplied to Ukraine is outdated. MacGregor is a veteran of the Iraq war, so he may simply be out of touch with how some of the old weaponry has been refurbished and updated, not to mention the tactics used by the US in modern warfare and that are part of the training given to Ukrainian troops. McBeth's assessment of the two sides is that they are roughly evenly matched, with each side having advantages and disadvantages. He debunks some Western myths about Russian capabilities.

 

[lukethethird]

Congratulations! You passed the test for the dumbest reply.

No, that distinction goes to Subduction Zone who upon providing a link on this thread to a fact check site that stated my news source had exactly zero false claim checks, and a high credibility rating, and even after knowing this proceeded to claim that, and I quote, "Your source lied.", and "You couldn't support the claims of your bogus source."

 

[Sargonski]

The critique of the Carlson-Macgregor video is really good, and it is too bad that you won't even look at it. It is not really an attempt to prove MacGregor wrong as to figure out what he said that could be treated as credible or reliable. The McBeth video actually agrees that MacGregor is correct in some of the things he says, but McBeth himself clearly knows a lot about the subject matter. He isn't the slightest bit partisan or political about it. Besides pointing out fallacies in MacGregor's narrative, he also suggests that MacGregor's knowledge of the weapons being supplied to Ukraine is outdated. MacGregor is a veteran of the Iraq war, so he may simply be out of touch with how some of the old weaponry has been refurbished and updated, not to mention the tactics used by the US in modern warfare and that are part of the training given to Ukrainian troops. McBeth's assessment of the two sides is that they are roughly evenly matched, with each side having advantages and disadvantages. He debunks some Western myths about Russian capabilities.

Are you on Beano or something ? .. I would love to look at it .. but you can't tell me what the falsehood I am supposed to be looking for is .. and can't seem to figure out why that is necessary for coherent thought to occur.

1) What is the falsehood that MacGreggor stated ? Just one to get us started .. since thus far nothing has been provided.

What is really stupid .. is you crying out "He debunks some Western Myths about Russian Capabilities" --- without stating which myth it was that Douglas was touting that was debunked.


1) What is the falsehood ?

2) What is the falsehood ?

3) What is the falsehood?

Hoping that repetition will elicit a response at some point that isn't the absurly nonsensical crying out falsehood but refusing to state what the falsehood is.

 

[lukethethird]

Are you on Beano or something ? .. I would love to look at it .. but you can't tell me what the falsehood I am supposed to be looking for is .. and can't seem to figure out why that is necessary for coherent thought to occur.

1) What is the falsehood that MacGreggor stated ? Just one to get us started .. since thus far nothing has been provided.

What is really stupid .. is you crying out "He debunks some Western Myths about Russian Capabilities" --- without stating which myth it was that Douglas was touting that was debunked.


1) What is the falsehood ?

2) What is the falsehood ?

3) What is the falsehood?

Hoping that repetition will elicit a response at some point that isn't the absurly nonsensical crying out falsehood but refusing to state what the falsehood is.

For the love of Zeus, the guy is an expert, formally trained and skilled already, he is the most qualified, why do you insist on a second hand review? Just watch it, there is a lot to cover.

 

[Sargonski]

For the love of Zeus, the guy is an expert, formally trained and skilled already, he is the most qualified, why do you insist on a second hand review? Just watch it, there is a lot to cover.

Are you really this stupid or just pretending ? You claim MacGreggor said something false .. .. cite what it is that MacGreggor said was False .. from the Video in the OP ... or ... if this is too much for your to handle .. state that you do not know of any falsehood in the Video .. and retract previous claim -- and state but, you have found some guy .. who has found a falsehood .. and state what that falsehood is. Give the timestamp in your video .. so we can easily find the falsehood for ourselves ?
Do you understand dumbledorf --- "State what the falsehood is" .. it is moronic idiocy to cry out " go look in a video .. there are falsehoods there" .. basically having someone else to the work for you to try to help support your claim.

PS .. there is no falsehood from Doug to be found in your video.

 

[lukethethird]

Are you really this stupid or just pretending ? You claim MacGreggor said something false .. .. cite what it is that MacGreggor said was False .. from the Video in the OP ... or ... if this is too much for your to handle .. state that you do not know of any falsehood in the Video .. and retract previous claim -- and state but, you have found some guy .. who has found a falsehood .. and state what that falsehood is. Give the timestamp in your video .. so we can easily find the falsehood for ourselves ?
Do you understand dumbledorf --- "State what the falsehood is" .. it is moronic idiocy to cry out " go look in a video .. there are falsehoods there" .. basically having someone else to the work for you to try to help support your claim.

PS .. there is no falsehood from Doug to be found in your video.

No one is going to write out a transcript of a video for you.

 

[EconGuy]

I would love to look at it .. but you can't tell me what the falsehood I am supposed to be looking for is

Since I was one of the people that originally linked the video, I'll chime in and just say. Ryan McBeth's video, as Copernicus stated already, doesn't point out any "falsehoods" as that would require knowing someone state of mind, Rather Ryan points out errors that are made.

As far as pointing them out. There are simply too many to list. Ryan's entire 30 minute video is showing what MacGreggor said then fact checking. That said, not everything is done on a true of false basis, rather it's done on a known scale. There are even if few points that are true, but sadly most are false.

I don't generally post video's to refute things (as I prefer to use my own words), but given the excellent work Ryan did in his fact checking and the vid is in response to another vid, it seemed appropriate, I felt that anyone interested in a well rounded point of view would probably have a look.

That said, if you don't want to watch it, don't.

Respectfully,

EG

 

[Copernicus]

Are you on Beano or something ? .. I would love to look at it .. but you can't tell me what the falsehood I am supposed to be looking for is .. and can't seem to figure out why that is necessary for coherent thought to occur.

What is holding you back from looking at McBeth's critique? Are you afraid the FSB will arrest you? You aren't living in Russia, so you can do your own research. It's not my business to pick out critical comments for you. That video does a pretty good job of analyzing the merits of MacGregor's claims. It won't damage your brain to look. Might even help it.