Tension with Russia in Ukraine

[Obamot]

Same with that great democrat Bashar-Al Assad
(But so far better 'choice' than Daesh or HTS)
Received 'simply' by Putin

https://rumble.com/v2dli1e-bulletin-n12 ... 2022..html

[Ahmed]

Since you are talking about democracy, you write:

Oh no, but I'm stupid, it's Russia that isn't a "democracy"...

Beautiful syllogism: European democracy is not perfect, therefore Russia is not an autocracy...
You still haven't explained why there would be no reason to doubt the lack of ulterior motives and cynicism on the part of someone who managed to rise to the pinnacle of power by phasing out all those who stood in his way: isn't that a bit biased like "nanalyse"?
As for Daesh, it is the magnificent pretext (Cf. Ukronazis), but it did not stop there and in the process it helped to put down the rebellion of the Syrian people: between dictators, it is necessary to know how to show mutual aid and then it's exercise to then consider more "personal" things...

[Obamot]

I said no amalgam.

[Ahmed]

"I said", no dictatorship!

[Obamot]

Ooooh my Diiiiiiiieeeeuuu! Congratulations !!!
How are you going to fire Biden, Macron, Von Der Leyen and Zelensky now?

And we did not see you such eagerness for Poroshenko and the kyiv regime in 2014

Thanks for correcting!

[Christophe]

Macron is on fire...

[Woof woof]

How are you going to fire Biden, Macron, Von Der Leyen and Zelensky now?

And we did not see you such eagerness for Poroshenko and the kyiv regime in 2014

Thanks for correcting!

This is where the phrase "THIS IS DEFINITELY AN ALTRUISTIC WILL FOR MUTUAL HELP WHICH IS MANIFEST" sounds really false, since before this Russia Ukraine war, on European soil, there was only the "classic" march of the world, that is to say no armed conflict on European soil = physical peace.
Do you remember ???? 70 years of peace, what you have known all your life?

The conflict which concerns us is of magnitude and what is more, with more or less latent blackmail on the part of the aggressor thug.
There wouldn't be the 6000 warheads in Russia, Putin would have been screwed a long time ago for such embitterments and besides, he probably wouldn't have invaded Ukraine, he would have continued his harassment in the Donbass as since 2014, a conflict of which he is already the duplicitous instigator.

I'm making an effort but I don't really see the ALTRUISTIC WILL FOR MUTUAL HELP of someone who puts on the same level a war with real dead in it and the usual politico-economic quibbles of the world?

We can see either a dose of inconsistency (which is excusable, nobody is perfect),
either sneering duplicity, that is to say a sly and malicious intention very badly concealed, resembling to be mistaken a pure product of Russian propaganda. that is to say the exact opposite of the claimed MUTUAL ALTRUIST.
When we are not permeable to Russian propaganda, we know that they are lying, they know that we know that they are lying but they continue to lie. It's their rules of the game.

Obviously if we swallow this raw propaganda, there is no possible exchange with licensed liars or with the naive people who believe them and consequently defend these liars.
Although I loathe the duplicitous behavior of classic party politics, it's still acceptable in the face of mass murder, commonly referred to as war.

Obamot help! Thank you for helping me to see where your ALTRUISTIC WILL FOR MUTUAL HELP lies, it would really help me to take you seriously.

[Remundo]

because you are among the serious people, you, the Russian prosecutor in the service of the Amerlopes?

By the way,

no armed conflict on European soil = physical peace.
Do you remember ???? 70 years of peace,

I point out to you that there was a war in Serbia/Kosovo in the 1990s, with NATO bombing.

[Ahmed]

Obamot, without going into the details of irrelevant quibbles, two examples of "narrative" shocked me and would suffice on their own to take away all seriousness from the opinions you support.
The first is the affirmation that the Ukrainians would have been very inspired to allow themselves to be invaded very gently, for humanitarian reasons: to avoid unnecessary deaths and suffering on both sides; thus, by a casuistry that deceives no one, you reverse the responsibilities...
The second is this testimony from an American official (but not speaking as such) who condemns NATO's “provocations”: it's quiet cherry picking; fetch the inverse equivalent desire in Russia...
That you profess these kinds of beliefs all along forum, it's your strictest right (and a non-negligible occupation!), it's no longer so when you tell me to renounce what you judge to be amalgams and which are not, just to elude remarks that get in the way of your partisan "narrative".

[Woof woof]

because you are among the serious people, you, the Russian prosecutor in the service of the Amerlopes?

By the way,

no armed conflict on European soil = physical peace.
Do you remember ???? 70 years of peace,

I point out to you that there was a war in Serbia/Kosovo in the 1990s, with NATO bombing.

The first argument seems natural here, already less effective in court or at the police station.
The fault of one does not excuse has never mitigated or excused the fault of another.
Only the simplistic scum have this type of reasoning, hoping that justice will get caught up in it. No one is fooled.
Can we consider 2 culprits and not, either one or the other?
One of the culprits, Russia has committed a murder, can we judge this crime, without taking care of the USA which is only scheming in Europe?


The second argument, I was not preparing for it but I wondered when it was going to come.
So it is now.
Short version, the idea was to end conflicts, not to start a war in order to get your hands on resources.
See Juvin media / information-censorship-media-debate-or-the-truth-t11129-980.html # p527422