Tucker Carlson, Colonel Douglas Macgregor, The Ukraine War

[EconGuy]

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

on September 21st 2023 American commentator and media personality Tucker Carlson interviewed Colonel Douglas
0:06
McGregor a former U.S army officer and Veteran of Operation Desert Storm also known as the first Gulf War this
0:12
interview contained a lot of misinformation and today I'm going to fact check that interview and add context where I can a couple of things
0:18
to start this video is probably going to get shared a lot so allow me to introduce myself my name is Ryan Macbeth
0:24
I served as an anti-armor and heavy weapons Adventure man retiring after 20 years of service and I did a couple of
0:30
combat and non-combat deployments well serving I obtained a bachelor's degree in computer science a master's in
0:36
Engineering Management and an MSC in cyber security in my civilian life I wrote C4 ISR software Solutions
0:42
for ISR means command control Communications computers intelligence surveillance reconnaissance basically I
0:48
find the bad guys and then I hand that information over to my clients who will either continue surveillance or use more
0:54
kinetic means on the subject now I currently do Consulting for velocity a
1:00
private intelligence agency used by government and private companies who want to know who is doing what and why I
1:06
also run a YouTube channel where I do investigative journalism and exposed misinformation to start this is not a reaction video
1:13
where I'll watch the interview and give you a bunch of sarcastic quips I'm going to evaluate Colonel McGregor's
1:18
statements using icd-203 the standard for the intelligence Community if you're watching this video on sub stack and
1:25
you're a free viewer I would really appreciate if you could toss me five bucks also note that all of my
1:30
references are available on sub stack as well if you're watching this on YouTube keep in mind that this is protected by
1:38
Fairview Stockton for commentary criticism news reports and scholarly reports and if you have five bucks head
1:44
over to sub stack and toss them to me it all helps fund this channel to help fight disinformation
1:50
the link to the full Tucker cross interview is in the description below or on the sub stack link page also note
1:56
that Mr Carlson and Colonel McGregor have a First Amendment right to free speech I am in no way advocating to
2:03
platforming them I just want to fact check the interview also note that the truth has a ceiling but the sky is the
2:10
limit for lies one of the disadvantages of telling the truth is that the truth has context and nuance and logic and can
2:18
be grounded in science lives are easier because they're simpler to tell and rely Less on critical thinking skills also
2:25
note that I don't care about politics I'm not a republican I'm not a Democrat I don't care about American Russian or
2:32
Ukrainian politics I'll leave that political stuff to uh Peter Zion he's great at it uh I'm just concerned about
2:39
the Tactical and Technical elements of this specific interview so let's get started pretty much everything that NBC
2:47
News the New York Times have told you about the war in Ukraine is a Lie the Russian army is incompetent they claim
2:54
Ukraine is a democracy Vladimir Putin is Hitler and he's trying to take over the world thankfully the ukrainians are
3:01
winning this runs from 0 to 17 seconds at the start of the video and it's the first logical fallacy proposed by Tucker
3:07
Carlson this is called the straw man fallacy which involves misrepresenting an opponent's argument in a weaker or
3:13
distorted form to make it easier to attack or refute I have yet to see anyone in the mainstream media say the
3:19
Ukraine is winning I've been following this war since the beginning and I've often said that both Russia and Ukraine
3:25
will lose this war the only question is who loses less
3:31
Russia is a pariah among nations Sweden and Finland have decided to join NATO the supremacy of Western weapons has
3:37
been on display for the entire world and more importantly for China to see in
3:43
Ukraine's case they are going to be dealing with demining and rebuilding for years to come nobody wins this war
3:49
everybody loses it's really a contest to see who loses less so Mr Carlson's
3:55
argument is really a brilliant piece of propaganda here because the average Tucker Carlson viewer will never check
4:01
NBC or the New York Times to see if they ever said that Ukraine is winning also
4:06
note that Mr Carlson doesn't provide proof of any of these claims let's move on to 30 seconds in Ukraine is being
4:13
destroyed its population is being slaughtered in lopsided battles with a technologically Superior enemy so this
4:20
is called the false assertion fallacy where someone asserts a statement is true even though it's clearly false
4:25
lacking the evidence to support it if the Russian army were so technologically Superior why have they reached their
4:31
objective Kiev what we're going to see a lot of that in this interview and the interview really hasn't even started yet
4:36
the truth is that the Russian army and the Ukrainian Army are at Rough Tech technological parity although each side
4:44
has their own technological advantages Russia has a significant advantage in long-range cruise missiles and air-to-air missiles they also have a
4:51
slight advantage in electronic warfare Ukraine has a significant advantage in Precision guide Munitions the javelin
4:58
anti-tank missile is a good example this is the missile that saved Keith this is
5:03
a fire and forget missile that guides itself to the Target automatically and Russia has nothing like this and no
5:09
countermeasures for it now Russia has been able to use Jammers to degrade the
5:15
GPS capability of guided weapons like high Mars and jdmer but those weapons also have inertial guidance think of the
5:22
inertial guidance like the accelerometer on your phone so in the end jamming GPS
5:28
degrades the capability but it means instead of hitting a specific window of a building you just hit the building so
5:34
let's skip ahead to 41 seconds as that happens the question will inevitably arise who's going to replace them if the
5:42
ukrainians can't beat Putin who will the answer of course will be us
5:47
American troops will fight the Russian army in Eastern Europe that's most likely again this is the false assertion
5:54
fallacy if the United States were preparing for a war with Russia it would need to start calling up National Guard
5:59
and Reserve troops like right now uh specifically you would need the you need
6:04
heavy armor you need the 28th out of Pennsylvania the 34th out of Minnesota a 36 out of Texas it would take about uh
6:12
three to six months to get them trained up on their equipment and and move it over to Europe you would also need to
6:17
move the first arm and the first Cav out of conus and out of the continental United States and get them over to
6:22
Europe right now uh since none of this is happening you can assume that fighting a major land war in Europe is
6:29
not a concern right now so let's skip to the interview where Colonel McGregor comes in ukrainians now we think had
6:35
lost 400 000 men killed so this is kind of a weird assertion because historically the ratio of dead to.................


Oops, dammit, you said no would write out a transcipt...Your right, it's really better to just watch.....lol

Ok, dad joke I guess. It's late and I have covid and I'm ready to get out of the house.

 

[Tomef]

on September 21st 2023 American commentator and media personality Tucker Carlson interviewed Colonel Douglas
0:06
McGregor a former U.S army officer and Veteran of Operation Desert Storm also known as the first Gulf War this
0:12
interview contained a lot of misinformation and today I'm going to fact check that interview and add context where I can a couple of things
0:18
to start this video is probably going to get shared a lot so allow me to introduce myself my name is Ryan Macbeth
0:24
I served as an anti-armor and heavy weapons Adventure man retiring after 20 years of service and I did a couple of
0:30
combat and non-combat deployments well serving I obtained a bachelor's degree in computer science a master's in
0:36
Engineering Management and an MSC in cyber security in my civilian life I wrote C4 ISR software Solutions
0:42
for ISR means command control Communications computers intelligence surveillance reconnaissance basically I
0:48
find the bad guys and then I hand that information over to my clients who will either continue surveillance or use more
0:54
kinetic means on the subject now I currently do Consulting for velocity a
1:00
private intelligence agency used by government and private companies who want to know who is doing what and why I
1:06
also run a YouTube channel where I do investigative journalism and exposed misinformation to start this is not a reaction video
1:13
where I'll watch the interview and give you a bunch of sarcastic quips I'm going to evaluate Colonel McGregor's
1:18
statements using icd-203 the standard for the intelligence Community if you're watching this video on sub stack and
1:25
you're a free viewer I would really appreciate if you could toss me five bucks also note that all of my
1:30
references are available on sub stack as well if you're watching this on YouTube keep in mind that this is protected by
1:38
Fairview Stockton for commentary criticism news reports and scholarly reports and if you have five bucks head
1:44
over to sub stack and toss them to me it all helps fund this channel to help fight disinformation
1:50
the link to the full Tucker cross interview is in the description below or on the sub stack link page also note
1:56
that Mr Carlson and Colonel McGregor have a First Amendment right to free speech I am in no way advocating to
2:03
platforming them I just want to fact check the interview also note that the truth has a ceiling but the sky is the
2:10
limit for lies one of the disadvantages of telling the truth is that the truth has context and nuance and logic and can
2:18
be grounded in science lives are easier because they're simpler to tell and rely Less on critical thinking skills also
2:25
note that I don't care about politics I'm not a republican I'm not a Democrat I don't care about American Russian or
2:32
Ukrainian politics I'll leave that political stuff to uh Peter Zion he's great at it uh I'm just concerned about
2:39
the Tactical and Technical elements of this specific interview so let's get started pretty much everything that NBC
2:47
News the New York Times have told you about the war in Ukraine is a Lie the Russian army is incompetent they claim
2:54
Ukraine is a democracy Vladimir Putin is Hitler and he's trying to take over the world thankfully the ukrainians are
3:01
winning this runs from 0 to 17 seconds at the start of the video and it's the first logical fallacy proposed by Tucker
3:07
Carlson this is called the straw man fallacy which involves misrepresenting an opponent's argument in a weaker or
3:13
distorted form to make it easier to attack or refute I have yet to see anyone in the mainstream media say the
3:19
Ukraine is winning I've been following this war since the beginning and I've often said that both Russia and Ukraine
3:25
will lose this war the only question is who loses less
3:31
Russia is a pariah among nations Sweden and Finland have decided to join NATO the supremacy of Western weapons has
3:37
been on display for the entire world and more importantly for China to see in
3:43
Ukraine's case they are going to be dealing with demining and rebuilding for years to come nobody wins this war
3:49
everybody loses it's really a contest to see who loses less so Mr Carlson's
3:55
argument is really a brilliant piece of propaganda here because the average Tucker Carlson viewer will never check
4:01
NBC or the New York Times to see if they ever said that Ukraine is winning also
4:06
note that Mr Carlson doesn't provide proof of any of these claims let's move on to 30 seconds in Ukraine is being
4:13
destroyed its population is being slaughtered in lopsided battles with a technologically Superior enemy so this
4:20
is called the false assertion fallacy where someone asserts a statement is true even though it's clearly false
4:25
lacking the evidence to support it if the Russian army were so technologically Superior why have they reached their
4:31
objective Kiev what we're going to see a lot of that in this interview and the interview really hasn't even started yet
4:36
the truth is that the Russian army and the Ukrainian Army are at Rough Tech technological parity although each side
4:44
has their own technological advantages Russia has a significant advantage in long-range cruise missiles and air-to-air missiles they also have a
4:51
slight advantage in electronic warfare Ukraine has a significant advantage in Precision guide Munitions the javelin
4:58
anti-tank missile is a good example this is the missile that saved Keith this is
5:03
a fire and forget missile that guides itself to the Target automatically and Russia has nothing like this and no
5:09
countermeasures for it now Russia has been able to use Jammers to degrade the
5:15
GPS capability of guided weapons like high Mars and jdmer but those weapons also have inertial guidance think of the
5:22
inertial guidance like the accelerometer on your phone so in the end jamming GPS
5:28
degrades the capability but it means instead of hitting a specific window of a building you just hit the building so
5:34
let's skip ahead to 41 seconds as that happens the question will inevitably arise who's going to replace them if the
5:42
ukrainians can't beat Putin who will the answer of course will be us
5:47
American troops will fight the Russian army in Eastern Europe that's most likely again this is the false assertion
5:54
fallacy if the United States were preparing for a war with Russia it would need to start calling up National Guard
5:59
and Reserve troops like right now uh specifically you would need the you need
6:04
heavy armor you need the 28th out of Pennsylvania the 34th out of Minnesota a 36 out of Texas it would take about uh
6:12
three to six months to get them trained up on their equipment and and move it over to Europe you would also need to
6:17
move the first arm and the first Cav out of conus and out of the continental United States and get them over to
6:22
Europe right now uh since none of this is happening you can assume that fighting a major land war in Europe is
6:29
not a concern right now so let's skip to the interview where Colonel McGregor comes in ukrainians now we think had
6:35
lost 400 000 men killed so this is kind of a weird assertion because historically the ratio of dead to.................


Oops, dammit, you said no would write out a transcipt...Your right, it's really better to just watch.....lol

Ok, dad joke I guess. It's late and I have covid and I'm ready to get out of the house.

It’ll be interesting to see if you can break the three monkey problem. Fox/TC fans have a thinking problem that isn’t resolved through better information. It seems to have deeper roots than that.

 

[EconGuy]

It’ll be interesting to see if you can break the three monkey problem. Fox/TC fans have a thinking problem that isn’t resolved through better information. It seems to have deeper roots than that.

I didn't always belive as I do now. It was reading through the arguments of others that I came to believe as I do today. Everything I write it to help people who don't know, but want to learn, or those like me, who thought they did know, but still cared about the truth, which eventually pursued me. I know there are some beyond my grasp, but what they need to find thr truth isn't my speciality.

 

[Sargonski]

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

Nobody asked for a transcript .. but youtube provides should you ever want .. for every video.

You were asked to state what you are claiming is false .. do you not understand the question ? ... and further .. do you not understand why it is moronic idiocy to run around crying out "Doug is lying a number of times in the first few minutes" but not state what our Colonel Dout is lying about so that one has something to respond to .. or knows what to look for should they wish to view the video and confirm your claim.

How would one know what lie you are talking about is... if you don't state what the lie you are talking about is ?

 

[EconGuy]

It is at that moment when you understand your not making arguments and presenting evidence to support a position, rather it becomes evident that the argument is the position.

Or, don't feed the trolls. Yeah, that works. Gotta work on brevity.

 

[Tomef]

It is at that moment when you understand your not making arguments and presenting evidence to support a position, rather it becomes evident that the argument is the position.

Or, don't feed the trolls. Yeah, that works. Gotta work on brevity.

I think you’re right there, you’re thinking big picture, the only way to really understand this kind of thing. The ‘fake media’ brigade though are baffled by big picture stuff, they tend to cling to whatever one detail they think they can be sure of for dear life and to evade any attempts to illuminate the picture a bit. A bit like trying to persuade a drowning man to let go of the tiny bit of wood keeping him afloat and climb into the boat.

 

[Sargonski]

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.

Who are the FSB ? and why would they want to arrest me .. and what matters where I live ?

"Not my business to pick out critical comments for you" No one said it was your business and I certainly didn't ask. .. Why are you making up fake conversations in your head friend and attributing them to me ?

Not my business to find support for your made up nonsense claim of falsehood and since you won't state what the falsehood we are supposed to be looking for is .. there is no point in looking for something .. when you have absolutely no idea what it is you are looking for. You have some kind of fallacious circular marathon going on inside that noggin Friend .. but I can't help you if you won't tell us what is troubling you..

"It wont damage your brain" ... Not too sure about that Brother Coper .. the sad commentary on human intellect is troubling .. don't see how such could help one's brain .. not sure about the effect of pondering irrational nonsense either .. do you really think it would help ?

 

[Sargonski]

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

K.. appreciate the semblence of coherent thought .. but knowing someone's state of mind is not required to point out falsehoods. One poster claimed there were numerous Lies in the first few minutes I asked this one .. and about 3 others who chimed in to state what the falsehood was .. as I am in search of the Truth .. and if there is a lie or falsehood or misrepresention .. I would like to know. but if you don't tell me what the falsehood or lie is .. I can't possibly hope to find it in the video .. and if I were to find a few falsehoods in the video -- how would I know which one the person is referring to... and calling out "All of them" is moronic idiocy .. and why would I waste 30 minutes watching some video .. looking for a falsehood but don't know what the falsehood is..

A well rounded point of view is given in the interview in the OP .. Thanks for posting what you think is another .. somewhere in this thread of 32 pages .. maybe I will search for it one day.. when I am in the mood for a good wild goose chase

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Can you say "confirmation bias?"

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes.Wikipedia

You've said nothing, and provided nothing.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

When the U.S.-U.K. invade a country, they go for the jugular, destroying communications, transportation, energy systems, anything needed to keep the country going. To the surprise of the U.S.-U.K. planners, Putin didn’t do that. The press reports that, “In Kyiv and much of the western part of the country, prewar life has largely returned for civilians. People eat in restaurants, drink in bars, dance and enjoy lazy summer days in parks.”

Far from the U.S.-U.K. style of war.

Western military analysts offer reasons why “Putin’s Bombers Could Devastate Ukraine But He’s Holding Back.” Whatever the reasons, the fact remains.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/04/25/russia-weakened-lloyd-austin-ukraine-visit/


This is a perspective that might shed some light on the level of this invasion.

I absolutely love how you post THIS directly after accusing ME of confirmation bias.

You're literally now arguing Putin's invasion "isn't that bad". Are you serious?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yes, it's an invasion. One factual statement does not change or contradict the accuracy of another factual statement.



Both would be accurate. To call it "playing semantics" is itself, playing semantics.



Yes. I haven't disputed that point.



No one is denying or downplaying the act of invasion. I know the history of the region and I know the background of this dispute, and I also know the geopolitical perceptions of NATO and the United States. I have a keen interest and have avidly studied this region and the overall topic of history and geopolitics since the 1970s, so I can assure you I'm not regurgitating propaganda or trying to both-sides the debate. I know what I know.

I don't see that we have any actual disagreement over the facts of the situation at hand. It's only our perceptions of the facts and the intensity of outrage which seems to be at odds. I'm just stating my own honest opinion here, in good faith. I'm not trying to "semantic lawyer" you, whatever that's supposed to mean. We clearly have a difference of opinion here, but I see no reason to make more out of it than that.

Strictly speaking, at least from the standpoint of international law and the West's position on this matter, it is a legal matter. To bring up legalities and "lawyering" is, in my opinion, fair comment in a discussion regarding that situation.

A border dispute is a territorial dispute, and like it or not, most wars throughout history have been rooted in territorial disputes, one way or another. Countries want to expand, they want more land, resources, wealth - it's been known to happen. Countries don't go to war for the fun and excitement.

Nationalism is oftentimes used as a tool to rile up the masses and get them geared up and supportive of war. Nationalism is also rooted in history, so it might also include claims of territories which once belonged to their ancestors - and that seems to be a factor in the current war.

That doesn't make it right, but I don't know what else you want me to say. Russia is behaving abominably here, and I've not denied that.

I consider this conflict to be a matter between Ukraine and Russia. I've been to both countries in the past, and I've found them to be good people with a rich culture and fascinating history - albeit riddled with a great deal of tragedy and hardship as well. I'm very troubled by what's happening, and I wish it hadn't happened, but I'm also powerless to do anything about it. It's also quite saddening that Russia has degenerated into a malignant nationalist fascist mobster state, and I hope that someday they can overcome and overthrow that regime. But the reasons why the people support Putin now are multi-faceted.

As for "both sidesing" I don't see it as being quite so simple as that. This is a damnable situation where there are no easy, clear-cut solutions. The "hold at all costs" and "fight to last man" bravado is all very compelling and courageous, but sometimes, circumstances may call for an alternative course of action.

I'm just going to ignore your posts from this point forward. If you can't admit the obvious, I have no reason to read your posts. And if you want to put more effort into this meaningless essay about why it's totally fine to use empty platitudes to downplay an invasion than in actually addressing the real issues, I will not be missing much.

 

[Stevicus]

I'm just going to ignore your posts from this point forward. If you can't admit the obvious, I have no reason to read your posts. And if you want to put more effort into this meaningless essay about why it's totally fine to use empty platitudes to downplay an invasion than in actually addressing the real issues, I will not be missing much.

What you do mean "admit the obvious"? Admit that it's an invasion? I've already admitted that numerous times throughout this thread, so if you're saying I can't admit that, then you're obviously wrong.

Are you capable of a reasonable, rational, unemotional discussion about this issue? If so, then please do so. If not, then perhaps it might be best for you to ignore not just me, but the entire topic.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

What you do mean "admit the obvious"? Admit that it's an invasion?

No. That calling it a "border dispute" is a deliberate attempt to downplay it.

I have been extremely clear. Perhaps you should understand what I'm saying being going off on lengthy diatribes in future.

Are you going to admit the above or not?

 

[Stevicus]

No. That calling it a "border dispute" is a deliberate attempt to downplay it.

What difference does it make? "Deliberate attempt to downplay it" is an emotionally-laden statement which has nothing to do with fact.

I have been extremely clear. Perhaps you should understand what I'm saying being going off on lengthy diatribes in future.

Are you going to admit the above or not?

I don't think you've been all that clear. The only thing that I can deduce from your responses here is that you're clearly upset with me because I don't share the same feelings about this issue as you do. You haven't cited any specific claim of fact which I've made that you take issue with.

 

[lukethethird]

I absolutely love how you post THIS directly after accusing ME of confirmation bias.

You're literally now arguing Putin's invasion "isn't that bad". Are you serious?

That's not me, that's the Washington Post quoting western military analysts.

"Western military analysts offer reasons why “Putin’s Bombers Could Devastate Ukraine But He’s Holding Back.” Whatever the reasons, the fact remains."

The US bombed Baghdad for six weeks, they devastated it. So far Kiev has been spared but that could change should this war escalate.

 

[lukethethird]

No. That calling it a "border dispute" is a deliberate attempt to downplay it.

I have been extremely clear. Perhaps you should understand what I'm saying being going off on lengthy diatribes in future.

Are you going to admit the above or not?

Border disputes can be bloody and tragic, especially this one, however as far as invasions go US military analyst have noted that there has not been an all out destruction campaign that is employed when the US/UK invade. It still could happen. Right now you sound way too emotional, you might want take a break from this discussion.

 

[Sargonski]

I absolutely love how you post THIS directly after accusing ME of confirmation bias.

You're literally now arguing Putin's invasion "isn't that bad". Are you serious?

Border disputes can be bloody and tragic, especially this one, however as far as invasions go US military analyst have noted that there has not been an all out destruction campaign that is employed when the US/UK invade. It still could happen. Right now you sound way too emotional, you might want take a break from this discussion.

Vlad has been a Gentle Giant thus far .. by a host of reasonable metrics. Who is the one who isn't serious .. having seemingly little ability for rational objective assessment of the position on the chessboard.

Enter "Propaganda" .. why is it that some folks are "Aghast" that Russia is not Satan incarnate in every action ? because that is what the raging masses are being told by the State Sponsored Propaganda Machine .. operating on behalf of the interest of the Donor Class . and not our interest a am deeply afraid.

Civilian Death is an often used metric. How about we use that for an objective and quantifiable metric. When you say "isn't that bad" or "Is that Bad" .. Bad compared to what ? and if we go by Dead civilians this war is a cake walk for civilians compared to every war the US has fostered over the last 50 years .. since Rotten Ronnie.

Tell me who is the non serious one in the crowd ? The one crying out "Are you Serious" perhaps ?

 

[Copernicus]

Who are the FSB ? and why would they want to arrest me .. and what matters where I live ?

The Russian FSB is essentially the rebranded Soviet KGB, but I don't think you'd need to worry, even if you did live in Russia. They would tend to go after the ones here trying to talk sense to you.

"Not my business to pick out critical comments for you" No one said it was your business and I certainly didn't ask. .. Why are you making up fake conversations in your head friend and attributing them to me ?

You are the one instructing me to pick out falsehoods in videos. McBeth does a good job of exposing weaknesses in MacGregor's arguments and conclusions, including claims that appear to be false. You asked for the video that had been posted earlier in the thread, and I gave you a link to EconGuy's post. That's it. It seems clear to me that you don't want to watch it, but that's your choice. You can bring a horse to water, but...

Not my business to find support for your made up nonsense claim of falsehood and since you won't state what the falsehood we are supposed to be looking for is .. there is no point in looking for something .. when you have absolutely no idea what it is you are looking for. You have some kind of fallacious circular marathon going on inside that noggin Friend .. but I can't help you if you won't tell us what is troubling you..

Again, most of what McBeth exposes are fallacious arguments made by MacGregor, not proven lies or falsehoods. If you are interested in the thread topic, then you ought to be interested in what McBeth has to say. I have neither the time nor interest in extracting a list of McBeth's criticisms for you. If you simply accept everything MacDonald said in his interview and refuse to watch an excellent critical review of it, that's up to you.

"It wont damage your brain" ... Not too sure about that Brother Coper .. the sad commentary on human intellect is troubling .. don't see how such could help one's brain .. not sure about the effect of pondering irrational nonsense either .. do you really think it would help ?

It could help. You have to be able to be able to look at both sides of an argument to be able to think critically. Right now, it appears to me that you aren't willing or able to do that.

 

[Sargonski]

on September 21st 2023 American commentator and media personality Tucker Carlson interviewed Colonel Douglas
0:06
McGregor a former U.S army officer and Veteran of Operation Desert Storm also known as the first Gulf War this
0:12
interview contained a lot of misinformation and today I'm going to fact check that interview and add context where I can a couple of things
0:18
to start this video is probably going to get shared a lot so allow me to introduce myself my name is Ryan Macbeth
0:24
I served as an anti-armor and heavy weapons Adventure man retiring after 20 years of service and I did a couple of
0:30
combat and non-combat deployments well serving I obtained a bachelor's degree in computer science a master's in
0:36
Engineering Management and an MSC in cyber security in my civilian life I wrote C4 ISR software Solutions
0:42
for ISR means command control Communications computers intelligence surveillance reconnaissance basically I
0:48
find the bad guys and then I hand that information over to my clients who will either continue surveillance or use more
0:54
kinetic means on the subject now I currently do Consulting for velocity a
1:00
private intelligence agency used by government and private companies who want to know who is doing what and why I
1:06
also run a YouTube channel where I do investigative journalism and exposed misinformation to start this is not a reaction video
1:13
where I'll watch the interview and give you a bunch of sarcastic quips I'm going to evaluate Colonel McGregor's
1:18
statements using icd-203 the standard for the intelligence Community if you're watching this video on sub stack and
1:25
you're a free viewer I would really appreciate if you could toss me five bucks also note that all of my
1:30
references are available on sub stack as well if you're watching this on YouTube keep in mind that this is protected by
1:38
Fairview Stockton for commentary criticism news reports and scholarly reports and if you have five bucks head
1:44
over to sub stack and toss them to me it all helps fund this channel to help fight disinformation
1:50
the link to the full Tucker cross interview is in the description below or on the sub stack link page also note
1:56
that Mr Carlson and Colonel McGregor have a First Amendment right to free speech I am in no way advocating to
2:03
platforming them I just want to fact check the interview also note that the truth has a ceiling but the sky is the
2:10
limit for lies one of the disadvantages of telling the truth is that the truth has context and nuance and logic and can
2:18
be grounded in science lives are easier because they're simpler to tell and rely Less on critical thinking skills also
2:25
note that I don't care about politics I'm not a republican I'm not a Democrat I don't care about American Russian or
2:32
Ukrainian politics I'll leave that political stuff to uh Peter Zion he's great at it uh I'm just concerned about
2:39
the Tactical and Technical elements of this specific interview so let's get started pretty much everything that NBC
2:47
News the New York Times have told you about the war in Ukraine is a Lie the Russian army is incompetent they claim
2:54
Ukraine is a democracy Vladimir Putin is Hitler and he's trying to take over the world thankfully the ukrainians are
3:01
winning this runs from 0 to 17 seconds at the start of the video and it's the first logical fallacy proposed by Tucker
3:07
Carlson this is called the straw man fallacy which involves misrepresenting an opponent's argument in a weaker or
3:13
distorted form to make it easier to attack or refute I have yet to see anyone in the mainstream media say the
3:19
Ukraine is winning I've been following this war since the beginning and I've often said that both Russia and Ukraine
3:25
will lose this war the only question is who loses less
3:31
Russia is a pariah among nations Sweden and Finland have decided to join NATO the supremacy of Western weapons has
3:37
been on display for the entire world and more importantly for China to see in
3:43
Ukraine's case they are going to be dealing with demining and rebuilding for years to come nobody wins this war
3:49
everybody loses it's really a contest to see who loses less so Mr Carlson's
3:55
argument is really a brilliant piece of propaganda here because the average Tucker Carlson viewer will never check
4:01
NBC or the New York Times to see if they ever said that Ukraine is winning also
4:06
note that Mr Carlson doesn't provide proof of any of these claims let's move on to 30 seconds in Ukraine is being
4:13
destroyed its population is being slaughtered in lopsided battles with a technologically Superior enemy so this
4:20
is called the false assertion fallacy where someone asserts a statement is true even though it's clearly false
4:25
lacking the evidence to support it if the Russian army were so technologically Superior why have they reached their
4:31
objective Kiev what we're going to see a lot of that in this interview and the interview really hasn't even started yet
4:36
the truth is that the Russian army and the Ukrainian Army are at Rough Tech technological parity although each side
4:44
has their own technological advantages Russia has a significant advantage in long-range cruise missiles and air-to-air missiles they also have a
4:51
slight advantage in electronic warfare Ukraine has a significant advantage in Precision guide Munitions the javelin
4:58
anti-tank missile is a good example this is the missile that saved Keith this is
5:03
a fire and forget missile that guides itself to the Target automatically and Russia has nothing like this and no
5:09
countermeasures for it now Russia has been able to use Jammers to degrade the
5:15
GPS capability of guided weapons like high Mars and jdmer but those weapons also have inertial guidance think of the
5:22
inertial guidance like the accelerometer on your phone so in the end jamming GPS
5:28
degrades the capability but it means instead of hitting a specific window of a building you just hit the building so
5:34
let's skip ahead to 41 seconds as that happens the question will inevitably arise who's going to replace them if the
5:42
ukrainians can't beat Putin who will the answer of course will be us
5:47
American troops will fight the Russian army in Eastern Europe that's most likely again this is the false assertion
5:54
fallacy if the United States were preparing for a war with Russia it would need to start calling up National Guard
5:59
and Reserve troops like right now uh specifically you would need the you need
6:04
heavy armor you need the 28th out of Pennsylvania the 34th out of Minnesota a 36 out of Texas it would take about uh
6:12
three to six months to get them trained up on their equipment and and move it over to Europe you would also need to
6:17
move the first arm and the first Cav out of conus and out of the continental United States and get them over to
6:22
Europe right now uh since none of this is happening you can assume that fighting a major land war in Europe is
6:29
not a concern right now so let's skip to the interview where Colonel McGregor comes in ukrainians now we think had
6:35
lost 400 000 men killed so this is kind of a weird assertion because historically the ratio of dead to.................


Oops, dammit, you said no would write out a transcipt...Your right, it's really better to just watch.....lol

Ok, dad joke I guess. It's late and I have covid and I'm ready to get out of the house.

Excellent Work Econoguy Now .. apparently there are a whole bunch of lies and falsehoods .. but unfortunately you have not listed any. I see a 400,000 dead number .. and have heard Doug say that so you don't have to go find him making that claim .. which is what you were supposed to do for full marks but no worries.

400,000 Dead -- this is not a lie nor a falsehood .. as far as we know.. so it turns out that this fellow is the falsehood

 

[Sargonski]

The Russian FSB is essentially the rebranded Soviet KGB, but I don't think you'd need to worry, even if you did live in Russia. They would tend to go after the ones here trying to talk sense to you.



You are the one instructing me to pick out falsehoods in videos. McBeth does a good job of exposing weaknesses in MacGregor's arguments and conclusions, including claims that appear to be false. You asked for the video that had been posted earlier in the thread, and I gave you a link to EconGuy's post. That's it. It seems clear to me that you don't want to watch it, but that's your choice. You can bring a horse to water, but...



Again, most of what McBeth exposes are fallacious arguments made by MacGregor, not proven lies or falsehoods. If you are interested in the thread topic, then you ought to be interested in what McBeth has to say. I have neither the time nor interest in extracting a list of McBeth's criticisms for you. If you simply accept everything MacDonald said in his interview and refuse to watch an excellent critical review of it, that's up to you.



It could help. You have to be able to be able to look at both sides of an argument to be able to think critically. Right now, it appears to me that you aren't willing or able to do that.

I have read McBeth .. and doesn't expose squat .... by your own admission .. "Not proven lies or falsehoods" -- you then claim there are fallacies .. which contradicts your previous claim of no lies or falsehoods as a fallacy must contain such .. a misrepresentation being a false hood.

and quit trying to project your failings on to me... It is you who has proven yourself incapable of critical thought thus far .. seemingly having no understanding of what an argument is .. never mind making one. Step 1 in debate 101 friend Do you know what constitutes a valid argument ?