| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
OohAah... 
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3514
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 10:04am |
 eireland wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
eireland wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
The alternative was a puppet state like Belarus. Either way a pretty sh*tty outcome for Ukraine. |
Why is Belarus a puppet state for Russia whereas even the likes of us not a puppet state for the US? |
If we decide to go a direction the US doesn't like worst case scenario economic sanctions which anyone is entitled to do. We're not going to have a 3 day US military intervention of Dublin although we'd gladly give them south Dublin anyway. |
 south dublin
tbf here, my question is too broad and vague
|
 |
eireland
Ray Houghton
Joined: 12 Feb 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 4406
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 10:09am |
Mush Cassidys Donkey wrote:
well done again on not answering OohAah's question |
I answered the follow up question. 2 steps ahead of you here mush head.
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10732
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 10:17am |
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism.
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3514
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 10:34am |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism. |
Sorry if Im sounding a bit slow this morning. But what do you mean buffer for neutrality?
I would expect people who are correct to have a consistency in their thinking of matters. So We are again in a case where you do dont believe their narrative on this and I tend to as it makes logical sense.
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10732
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 10:50am |
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism. |
Sorry if Im sounding a bit slow this morning. But what do you mean buffer for neutrality?
I would expect people who are correct to have a consistency in their thinking of matters. So We are again in a case where you do dont believe their narrative on this and I tend to as it makes logical sense. |
Ukraine isn’t the only county that borders Russia. Why attack it?
That’s called ideology. Consistency can be a product of many things, but in the political realm it tends to be fringe ideology.
|
|
eireland
Ray Houghton
Joined: 12 Feb 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 4406
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 10:53am |
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1770741977572601909?t=ttnbrtfz_vAtmRtq-4CFtA&s=19
"BREAKING:
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announces the creation of 2 new ground armies, with 16 new brigades & 14 new divisions
As @noclador points out, that’s more than the combined armies of 🇩🇪🇬🇧🇫🇷🇵🇱🇪🇸🇳🇱🇸🇪
Post-election mobilization is coming".
@Het They attacked Ukraine because it's not yet in NATO. Kazakhstan was a harder sell as was conquering the rest of Georgia. Belarus already a puppet state in the true-ist form. Note not like how Ireland is a puppet state of the US 😂 MOLDOVA had Ukraine in the way but I guess it was next.
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3514
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 10:56am |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism. |
Sorry if Im sounding a bit slow this morning. But what do you mean buffer for neutrality?
I would expect people who are correct to have a consistency in their thinking of matters. So We are again in a case where you do dont believe their narrative on this and I tend to as it makes logical sense. |
Ukraine isn’t the only county that borders Russia. Why attack it?
That’s called ideology. Consistency can be a product of many things, but in the political realm it tends to be fringe ideology. |
Tends or can be but not necessarily. again We are into believing one or the other. Including our own formed opinion
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3514
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 10:58am |
eireland wrote:
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1770741977572601909?t=ttnbrtfz_vAtmRtq-4CFtA&s=19
"BREAKING:
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announces the creation of 2 new ground armies, with 16 new brigades & 14 new divisions
As @noclador points out, that’s more than the combined armies of 🇩🇪🇬🇧🇫🇷🇵🇱🇪🇸🇳🇱🇸🇪
Post-election mobilization is coming".
@Het They attacked Ukraine because it's not yet in NATO. Kazakhstan was a harder sell as was conquering the rest of Georgia. Belarus already a puppet state in the true-ist form. Note not like how Ireland is a puppet state of the US 😂 MOLDOVA had Ukraine in the way but I guess it was next. |
Can you define what you mean by puppet state?
|
|
Badgersboys9
Ray Houghton
Joined: 12 Oct 2019
Status: Offline
Points: 3528
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 11:02am |
|
Give him a chance ffs, he's still searching Twitter for "puppet state".
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10732
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 11:03am |
eireland wrote:
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1770741977572601909?t=ttnbrtfz_vAtmRtq-4CFtA&s=19
"BREAKING:
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announces the creation of 2 new ground armies, with 16 new brigades & 14 new divisions
As @noclador points out, that’s more than the combined armies of 🇩🇪🇬🇧🇫🇷🇵🇱🇪🇸🇳🇱🇸🇪
Post-election mobilization is coming".
@Het They attacked Ukraine because it's not yet in NATO. Kazakhstan was a harder sell as was conquering the rest of Georgia. Belarus already a puppet state in the true-ist form. Note not like how Ireland is a puppet state of the US 😂 MOLDOVA had Ukraine in the way but I guess it was next. |
Russia have had their claws in Moldova for ages. What has now happened was any Ukrainian drift towards NATO and other international bodies had been expedited by Russian aggression. Perhaps that was their goal in order to escalate?
|
|
Mush Cassidys Donkey
Kevin Kilbane
Joined: 16 Feb 2024
Status: Offline
Points: 415
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 11:05am |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism. |
Sorry if Im sounding a bit slow this morning. But what do you mean buffer for neutrality?
I would expect people who are correct to have a consistency in their thinking of matters. So We are again in a case where you do dont believe their narrative on this and I tend to as it makes logical sense. |
Ukraine isn’t the only county that borders Russia. Why attack it?
That’s called ideology. Consistency can be a product of many things, but in the political realm it tends to be fringe ideology. |
You’ve been told why multiples times on this thread. You are incapable to see past your nose and read facts given to you by others instead of the rhetoric feed to you.
You're demeaner and dismissal towards Chomsky and Sachs is a true reflection of the little blue nose gobsh*te that you are.
Edited by Mush Cassidys Donkey - 21 Mar 2024 at 11:06am
|
|
Mush Cassidys Donkey
Kevin Kilbane
Joined: 16 Feb 2024
Status: Offline
Points: 415
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 11:05am |
Badgersboys9 wrote:
Give him a chance ffs, he's still searching Twitter for "puppet state". |
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10732
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 11:08am |
Mush Cassidys Donkey wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism. |
Sorry if Im sounding a bit slow this morning. But what do you mean buffer for neutrality?
I would expect people who are correct to have a consistency in their thinking of matters. So We are again in a case where you do dont believe their narrative on this and I tend to as it makes logical sense. |
Ukraine isn’t the only county that borders Russia. Why attack it?
That’s called ideology. Consistency can be a product of many things, but in the political realm it tends to be fringe ideology. |
You’ve been told why multiples times on this thread. You are incapable to see past your nose and read facts given to you by others instead of the rhetoric feed to you.
You're demeaner and dismissal towards Chomsky and Sachs is a true reflection of the little blue nose gobsh*te that you are.
|
Nonsense. I profoundly disagree with Chomsky and Sachs on the issues, and their position on the subject has been predictable thanks to their ideology. The ‘anti-war’ left have let themselves down on this one.
Edited by Het-field - 21 Mar 2024 at 11:09am
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3514
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 11:25am |
Het-field wrote:
Mush Cassidys Donkey wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism. |
Sorry if Im sounding a bit slow this morning. But what do you mean buffer for neutrality?
I would expect people who are correct to have a consistency in their thinking of matters. So We are again in a case where you do dont believe their narrative on this and I tend to as it makes logical sense. |
Ukraine isn’t the only county that borders Russia. Why attack it?
That’s called ideology. Consistency can be a product of many things, but in the political realm it tends to be fringe ideology. |
You’ve been told why multiples times on this thread. You are incapable to see past your nose and read facts given to you by others instead of the rhetoric feed to you.
You're demeaner and dismissal towards Chomsky and Sachs is a true reflection of the little blue nose gobsh*te that you are.
|
Nonsense. I profoundly disagree with Chomsky and Sachs on the issues, and their position on the subject has been predictable thanks to their ideology. The ‘anti-war’ left have let themselves down on this one.
|
Lads Ill agree with Jeffrey Sachs here, and say saying negative personal things will be no help in looking for a solution or understanding. As He said JFK didnt do it with Kruscech(spelling check needed) but Biden is happy to do it with Putin
People are entitled to argue whatever way they want, there is no policing of the use of language. We can deduce for ourselves whether a point has been agreed without having to explicitly saying it.
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10732
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 11:29am |
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Mush Cassidys Donkey wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism. |
Sorry if Im sounding a bit slow this morning. But what do you mean buffer for neutrality?
I would expect people who are correct to have a consistency in their thinking of matters. So We are again in a case where you do dont believe their narrative on this and I tend to as it makes logical sense. |
Ukraine isn’t the only county that borders Russia. Why attack it?
That’s called ideology. Consistency can be a product of many things, but in the political realm it tends to be fringe ideology. |
You’ve been told why multiples times on this thread. You are incapable to see past your nose and read facts given to you by others instead of the rhetoric feed to you.
You're demeaner and dismissal towards Chomsky and Sachs is a true reflection of the little blue nose gobsh*te that you are.
|
Nonsense. I profoundly disagree with Chomsky and Sachs on the issues, and their position on the subject has been predictable thanks to their ideology. The ‘anti-war’ left have let themselves down on this one.
|
Lads Ill agree with Jeffrey Sachs here, and say saying negative personal things will be no help in looking for a solution or understanding. As He said JFK didnt do it with Kruscech(spelling check needed) but Biden is happy to do it with Putin
People are entitled to argue whatever way they want, there is no policing of the use of language. We can deduce for ourselves whether a point has been agreed without having to explicitly saying it. |
My point on the anti-war left movement is not personal. It’s a commentary on the movement. They seem to lose the plot when regimes they are sympathetic to are under scrutiny.
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3514
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Mar 2024 at 11:37am |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Mush Cassidys Donkey wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism. |
Sorry if Im sounding a bit slow this morning. But what do you mean buffer for neutrality?
I would expect people who are correct to have a consistency in their thinking of matters. So We are again in a case where you do dont believe their narrative on this and I tend to as it makes logical sense. |
Ukraine isn’t the only county that borders Russia. Why attack it?
That’s called ideology. Consistency can be a product of many things, but in the political realm it tends to be fringe ideology. |
You’ve been told why multiples times on this thread. You are incapable to see past your nose and read facts given to you by others instead of the rhetoric feed to you.
You're demeaner and dismissal towards Chomsky and Sachs is a true reflection of the little blue nose gobsh*te that you are.
|
Nonsense. I profoundly disagree with Chomsky and Sachs on the issues, and their position on the subject has been predictable thanks to their ideology. The ‘anti-war’ left have let themselves down on this one.
|
Lads Ill agree with Jeffrey Sachs here, and say saying negative personal things will be no help in looking for a solution or understanding. As He said JFK didnt do it with Kruscech(spelling check needed) but Biden is happy to do it with Putin
People are entitled to argue whatever way they want, there is no policing of the use of language. We can deduce for ourselves whether a point has been agreed without having to explicitly saying it. |
My point on the anti-war left movement is not personal. It’s a commentary on the movement. They seem to lose the plot when regimes they are sympathetic to are under scrutiny. |
So your saying NC and JS are part of the ant-war left? Which to me is an umbrella term which sounds orgainised in some form and I dont think will stand up to scrutiny. It ignores logical debate on subjects and ignores independant informed opinion. We get it here the whole time on various issues, far right, looney left and its as if there some sort of belief system which will think a certain way regardless of the topic. And I dont think its the reality and certianly doesnt nothing to understand any sunject
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10732
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 22 Mar 2024 at 8:58am |
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Mush Cassidys Donkey wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Goes over old ground but He's always worth a listen to
|
It’s the same tired old claptrap that deliberately links everything back to the USA, and ignoring simply facts about Russian expansionism that started in 1992 the agency of the Ukrainian people and the Euromaidan, or the sovereignty of a state to expand in the way it chooses. The only way somebody like Sachs can reach the conclusion he does is by cherry picking facts that suit the narrative that this was stoked by the US. It’s rather bog standard theory being spouted by somebody with big credentials. It’s from the Chomsky school of foreign affairs which in spite of all the acolytes he has, is bog standard and predictable. It was worth a listen simply to realise there is nothing original about JS’ position, or compelling. |
Russian Expanionism started in 1992?
They may be cherry picked facts but they remain facts.
It still goes back to what I was saying that the US was acting the maggott over there, so We will never know if the invasion wouldve happened in the absence of it.
Anyway We are still left ot believe in one school of thought or the other and the truth may be somewhere between the two. It can be hard with overseas ventures and interference to link them to see an outcome. Perhaps the likes of JS/chomsky see them correctly or perhaps they join dots incorrectly. |
Sachs and Chomsky are like stopped clocks. This is not one of the occasions where they are correct. Their narrative is predictable based on their previous narratives. It leaves no room for key facts, Ukrainian agency, or the fact that there exists other buffers for neutrality, which are slowing being eroded due to Russian imperialism. |
Sorry if Im sounding a bit slow this morning. But what do you mean buffer for neutrality?
I would expect people who are correct to have a consistency in their thinking of matters. So We are again in a case where you do dont believe their narrative on this and I tend to as it makes logical sense. |
Ukraine isn’t the only county that borders Russia. Why attack it?
That’s called ideology. Consistency can be a product of many things, but in the political realm it tends to be fringe ideology. |
You’ve been told why multiples times on this thread. You are incapable to see past your nose and read facts given to you by others instead of the rhetoric feed to you.
You're demeaner and dismissal towards Chomsky and Sachs is a true reflection of the little blue nose gobsh*te that you are.
|
Nonsense. I profoundly disagree with Chomsky and Sachs on the issues, and their position on the subject has been predictable thanks to their ideology. The ‘anti-war’ left have let themselves down on this one.
|
Lads Ill agree with Jeffrey Sachs here, and say saying negative personal things will be no help in looking for a solution or understanding. As He said JFK didnt do it with Kruscech(spelling check needed) but Biden is happy to do it with Putin
People are entitled to argue whatever way they want, there is no policing of the use of language. We can deduce for ourselves whether a point has been agreed without having to explicitly saying it. |
My point on the anti-war left movement is not personal. It’s a commentary on the movement. They seem to lose the plot when regimes they are sympathetic to are under scrutiny. |
So your saying NC and JS are part of the ant-war left? Which to me is an umbrella term which sounds orgainised in some form and I dont think will stand up to scrutiny. It ignores logical debate on subjects and ignores independant informed opinion. We get it here the whole time on various issues, far right, looney left and its as if there some sort of belief system which will think a certain way regardless of the topic. And I dont think its the reality and certianly doesnt nothing to understand any sunject |
Chomsky definitely. Sachs is more of a geo-political commentator who take the America-centrism line.
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3514
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 22 Mar 2024 at 11:55am |
Sorry to harp on here. You explained away " The ‘anti-war’ left have let themselves down on this one"
I dont agree with these umbrella terms but youve now clarified chomsky is one of these but JS is more of a centrist.
" Nonsense. I profoundly disagree with Chomsky and Sachs on the issues, and their position on the subject has been predictable thanks to their ideology. " The ‘anti-war’ left have let themselves down on this one"
So by this statement it would appear the left and centrist views are the same. How do you square this?
|
|
Tweet
