(05-07-2025, 09:28 AM)TokenLiberal Wrote: Do you? My bad, then. What point of yours is a dive into the "might makes right" hypothetical furthering?


Well, I'm asking about what's in your mind. We humans tend to develop our own version of morality, our own opinions on what's right and wrong. Exploring our differences there is the purpose of the thread. We can sit here and explore hypothetical after hypothetical, but I'd rather discuss our actual opinions. Do you understand where I'm coming from there?

I think you are looking for an answer that fits your notion of right and wrong and are unwilling to entertain any other possibilities. We can sit here and explore hypothetical after hypothetical and I may up to around page eight, if I were a troll.

(05-07-2025, 09:36 AM)Michigan Swampbuck Wrote: I think you are looking for an answer that fits your notion of right and wrong and are unwilling to entertain any other possibilities.

Why do you think so? I've explicitly stated multiple times that I want people to answer the question based on their own sense of what's right and wrong.

(05-07-2025, 09:31 AM)TokenLiberal Wrote: So you are taking the Russian state at their word.

Within reason. I am well aware that the Russian government presents a monolithic presence to the world. In a way, I think their solidarity in decision-making is far more practical than the playground mess we see in "democracies". Look at the way the American congress attacks others in very dirty ways. Australia is all about mud slinging. Almost never is the opposition right in anything in Australian politics. The more I see of the Russian way, where everyone seems to work towards solving problems, the more I see what lacks in my own country's government.

Quote:Obviously you're going to think they're in the right, then. I understand.

My, my, how dismissive of you . . .

Quote:The next question, which I hope you're willing to answer, is: Why do you trust Russian state media more than Western media? I assume you know there is no freedom of the press in Russia.

No freedom in Australia either. Not in important things, anyway. The press here likes to seem impartial, but really there are things that are brought up to distract the public to keep them arguing with each other rather than the powers that be.

As for media, well I trust both equally when it comes to some things. I see no reason to disbelieve Russian reporting and more importantly can you show me in the Western newspapers where they reported on the referendums? They don't even mention them. Might that be because it shows Russia in a favourable light, which starts to destroy their owners' narratives?

More importantly, if you have ever watched Sergey Lavrov or Vladimir Putin give interviews or speak on important matters, you may get a feel for the nature of the man. Lavrov as foriegn minister speaks in English, so it is easier than when a translator is used. Those two men know their business and have integrity. It is plain to see.

From Wikipedia:

Quote:Sergey Lavrov - Russian diplomat who has served as Minister of Foreign Affairs since 2004. He is the longest-serving Russian foreign minister since Andrei Gromyko during the Soviet Union. Lavrov was born in Moscow and graduated from the Moscow State Institute of International Relations in 1972.

Also from Wikipedia:

Quote:Russian politician and former intelligence officer who has served as President of Russia since 2012, having previously served from 2000 to 2008. Putin also served as Prime Minister of Russia from 1999 to 2000 and again from 2008 to 2012. He is the longest-serving Russian president since the independence of Russia from the Soviet Union.

These guys know their business, and no wonder Trump and Whitcoff seem to be scared of facing the Russian negotiators.

Now what has America, Europe and Australia have? The answer is short term politicians who have to think about their own re-election. Look at what the woke politics did to America. The Secretary of the Navy was a man in a dress pretending to be a woman. No wonder trump sacked them all from the military the first chance he got. How embarrassing . . .

Can we see a difference?

Quote:So Putin is protecting the Ukrainian people by invading their country and killing a hundred thousand of them. What is he protecting them from? NATO?

We really like to twist people's words, don't we . . .

Russia is probably protecting itself from NATO, but not just that. The British have long coveted Crimea, So did the French, and the Germans. Turks too if I remember correctly. They all got their arses kicked by the Russians. Feel free to correct me.

Now it seems that Germany, France and Britain are hiding behind EU and NATO skirts to achieve possession of Crimea. Look at the line-up here:

Ex Blackrock employee Frederick Merz and gynaecologist Ursula Von Der Leyen are champing at the bit to get everyone else fighting Russia, along with trampoline girl Burbock. Oh and the blond girl from a Baltic state somewhere (I think). She is just as bloodthirsty as the others: Kaja Kallas is her name. Frenchman Micron (did I misspell that?) and Cyrus Starmer from the UK . . . I could go on.

Quote:What is he protecting them from? NATO?

- You might be right there, TL . . . yes indeed.

-------

I'm sorry everyone, I just can't resist. Here is a pic of the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas in her native habitat. She is from Estonia (I had to look that up). Isn't she adorable?

   

This is the mudpit : )

I know enough from how you respond here TL, I feel no need to engage. I see your posts responding to others, and it has the gears rotating at any rate, even if the tires are spinning and tossing up mud.

I will comment here and there, mostly cheering on the others. However, I'm just practicing my keyboarding skills at this point. Having a conversation with myself is actually gratifying, and I find me to be a great listener.

(05-07-2025, 11:15 AM)NobodySpecial268 Wrote: Within reason. I am well aware that the Russian government presents a monolithic presence to the world. In a way, I think their solidarity in decision-making is far more practical than the playground mess we see in  "democracies". Look at the way the American congress attacks others in very dirty ways.  Australia is all about mud slinging. Almost never is the opposition right in anything in Australian politics. The more I see of the Russian way, where everyone seems to work towards solving problems, the more I see what lacks in my own country's government.

My, my, how dismissive of you . . .


No freedom in Australia either. Not in important things, anyway. The press here likes to seem impartial, but really there are things that are brought up to distract the public to keep them arguing with each other rather than the powers that be.

As for media, well I trust both equally when it comes to some things. I see no reason to disbelieve Russian reporting  and more importantly can you show me in the Western newspapers where they reported on the referendums? They don't even mention them. Might that be because it shows Russia in a favourable light, which starts to destroy their owners' narratives?

More importantly, if you have ever watched Sergey Lavrov or Vladimir Putin give interviews or speak on important matters, you may get a feel for the nature of the man. Lavrov as foriegn minister speaks in English, so it is easier than when a translator is used.  Those two men know their business and have integrity. It is plain to see.

From Wikipedia:


Also from Wikipedia:


These guys know their business, and no wonder Trump and Whitcoff seem to be scared of facing the Russian negotiators.

Now what has America, Europe and Australia have?  The answer is short term politicians who have to think about their own re-election. Look at what the woke politics did to America. The Secretary of the Navy was a man in a dress pretending to be a woman. No wonder trump sacked them all from the military the first chance he got. How embarrassing . . .

Can we see a difference?


We really like to twist people's words, don't we . . .

Russia is probably protecting itself from NATO, but not just that. The British have long coveted Crimea, So did the French, and the Germans. Turks too if I remember correctly. They all got their arses kicked by the Russians. Feel free to correct me.

Now it seems that Germany, France and Britain are hiding behind EU and NATO skirts to achieve possession of Crimea.  Look at the line-up here:

Ex Blackrock employee Frederick Merz and gynaecologist Ursula Von Der Leyen are champing at the bit to get everyone else fighting Russia, along with trampoline girl Burbock. Oh and the blond girl from a Baltic state somewhere (I think). She is just as bloodthirsty as the others:  Kaja Kallas is her name. Frenchman Micron (did I misspell that?) and Cyrus Starmer from the UK . . . I could go on.

- You might be right there, TL . . . yes indeed.

-------

I'm sorry everyone, I just can't resist. Here is a pic of the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas in her native habitat. She is from Estonia (I had to look that up).  Isn't she adorable?



This is the mudpit : )

You are so deep into the Russian propaganda, you will never accept any reality other than the one presented by them. Our differences are clear, I don't think there's any point in talking past each other about what the facts actually are.

Enjoying your Western freedoms and wealth, you shit on the institutions that gave them to you and suck the dick of a Russian autocrat who murders his political opposition, throws people in jail when they criticize him in public, and sends millions to die in war to satisfy his imperial ambitions. It's despicable, frankly. You're an example of Putin's resounding success in turning the West against itself. Maybe you should move to Russia. I'm sure Putin would love to have you, he can always use more cannon fodder.

@MichiganSwampbuck

When we discussed who benefits from our division, did I mention the Russians? If I didn't, that was an oversight..

(Yesterday, 04:37 AM)TokenLiberal Wrote: You are so deep into the Russian propaganda, you will never accept any reality other than the one presented by them. Our differences are clear, I don't think there's any point in talking past each other about what the facts actually are.

No hard feelings on my side TL, this is the Mudpit after all.

(smile) Some soothing music with song is perhaps appropriate here.

I imagine that there is no single source that will fill the bill of unbiased and factual reporting. Without concrete, verifiable facts, I'd say this thread isn't going anywhere too soon.

How about Al Jazeera? or Channel News Asia? or Mexico News Daily? or the ever-popular Jerusalem Post?

I have a feeling that we will only be using those sources recommended by the original poster of this thread. And it may be more selective than that if the content doesn't fit well.

I'm not doing any research that will simply be rejected down the line, I say that is on the shoulders of the person who began all this.

(Yesterday, 10:01 AM)Michigan Swampbuck Wrote: I imagine that there is no single source that will fill the bill of unbiased and factual reporting.

... especially if it's the Russian state.

Quote:I have a feeling that we will only be using those sources recommended by the original poster of this thread. And it may be more selective than that if the content doesn't fit well.

I'm not doing any research that will simply be rejected down the line, I say that is on the shoulders of the person who began all this.

If you only use highly biased sources during your "research", yeah, I will point that out, because it's unlikely to get you any closer to the truth and it will probably be the reason we disagree. But you're not doing any research regardless, let's face it.

(Yesterday, 10:15 AM)TokenLiberal Wrote: ... especially if it's the Russian state.


If you only use highly biased sources during your "research", yeah, I will point that out, because it's unlikely to get you any closer to the truth and it will probably be the reason we disagree. But you're not doing any research regardless, let's face it.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean I'm going away too soon either. So I guess you need to provide sources with a low political bias that will get us closer to your truth. That may get my attention, so I'll stay tuned.

I personally won't believe the following sources, Reuters, NPR, AP, Aljazzera and Fox News (most of the time). My list is much larger, but this is off the top of my head and directly related to the conflict in Ukraine.

Maybe this will help . . .
Media Bias Fact Check