View Poll Results: Is Investigative Reporter Parry's narrative accurate?

Voters
281. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES!

    93 33.10%
  • NO!

    95 33.81%
  • OTHER, please explain.

    93 33.10%
Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 98

Thread: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

  1. #41
    Invictus


    Rogue Valley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,107

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Yes vauge. Ukraine has context. If you want to ask a specific question about Ukraine, I can answer it.
    So can I. I've lived in both mainland Ukraine and Crimea.


    Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet. -- Marine Corps General James 'Chaos' Mattis

  2. #42
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:55 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,292

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Yes vauge. Ukraine has context. If you want to ask a specific question about Ukraine, I can answer it.
    What do you think the precedence of allowing Russia to grab Crimea, the coastal resources and Eastern Ukraine directly following and as a consequence of the EU forcing through a Trade Treaty with Ukraine?

  3. #43
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,292

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    Yep. Some actually believe that theory of the all powerful monster and its vast conspiracy.
    Personally I see humans. And they cannot swing that type of thing.
    CORPORATIONS are not human, but Citizen United gives them more power than you.
    Clean your goggles so you can see past the humans to the CORPORATIONS that are
    running and ruining our World.

  4. #44
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:55 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,292

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    CORPORATIONS are not human, but Citizen United gives them more power than you.
    Clean your goggles so you can see past the humans to the CORPORATIONS that are
    running and ruining our World.
    You are right. Corporations are not people. They are people organized.

  5. #45
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,292

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    This post makes me laugh for so many reasons. But I think it is most summed up in the very first post, when instead of exploring the differences between the two points of view, you immediately go to point the finger at the US. I suppose it's also the US that's responsible for all those Russian planes flying so close to so many sovereign air spaces huh?

    But you know what? How about I offer a compromise? Russia can keep the predominantly Russian half of Ukraine for a mutually acceptable compensation, and Western Ukraine gets to join NATO. That sound fair? Russia gets to *cough* protect native speaking Russians, and Kiev gets the backing of the west. Then in a few years when Russia is again a failed state and can't support Eastern Ukraine, they can rejoin the West just like Germany did.
    The Eastern Russians wanted to be annexed by Russia and Russia refused. Ukraine attacked Eastern Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine did not attack Ukraine. The Kiev coup, now in power with a vote of approval by 18% of eligible voters was not acceptable to Eastern Ukraine. Kiev attacked and is likely to get its' ass kicked instead of making serious efforts to negotiate a settlement. Brennan (US CIA) showed up in Kiev to reinforce the work done by CIA lackeys in installing the 18% gov't, and about 300 mercs' showed up to help out and Ukraine attacked its' own people. It only attacked the Russian speaking section where they tried to make the Russian language illegal. In Kiev, these Eastern Ukrainians are referred to as "colorados" (beetles) and a term similar to calling black people niggers. Just take a good look at the people in charge in Kiev to measure the quality of the gov't. A bunch of CIA assets and agents to administer the theft of the patrimony of the Ukrainian people. Pretty simple. You cant't for one moment believe there is any movement of liberty, freedom, justice or democracy unless one is common sense challenged. When the USA helps, we helps, don't ya' know, like Vietnam, Honduras, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Nicaragua, Egypt, Cuba, etc. Hot dam, mon, I sees the light and hope it's not a nuclear flash.

  6. #46
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,292

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    You are right. Corporations are not people. They are people organized.
    CORPORATIONS are a "fictitious entity" by legal definition. They are formed to insulate from
    legal liability the humans behind them, but they are always a fictitious entity. The said
    CORPORATIONS do not breathe nor suffer from old age, but have continuity beyond human
    lifespans. CORPORATIONS don't have any problems with chemical, biological or nuclear
    contamination because they are a fictitious and need only concern themselves with the
    bottom line/profit. It is legal for CORPORATIONS to own all the politicians it can afford and
    they can afford most of them. No Greens or Barney Franks, it would seem. I acknowledge that
    there is a human component behind CORPORATIONS, but the human component dies and the
    CORPORATION continues doing whatever it started doing, good or evil. I will add that there is
    not much profit in good, don't ya' know?
    A short homily to give meaning to Corporate. You own a Nuke plant near its' end of useful life.
    Now this plant and all its' radioactive waste will become a financial liability soon. No problem,
    CORPORATE will accept a rubber check to sell the plant to my goombah Justin O. Peewillie. Now
    Justin can't afford a roll of toilet paper, but no problem because the sale is done and he has title to
    the plant and all its' waste. CORPORATE never cashes the check because it might bounce, ergo,
    don't aggravate the chance to bail out on waste liability. Justin promptly files bankruptcy through
    his Justin O. Peewillie Corporation. Now the Fed or State must pay Justin to keep the waste from
    migrating into now green pastures under bankruptcy protection. Somebody gonna sue somebody
    for sure, but it's all CORPORATE so there really aren't any warm bodies to get a hand on except
    Justin who still has to get paid to manage the cleanup or no cleanup as the case may be. The best
    part is that the original CORPORATE profiteers are positioned legally blameless and besides they
    are a fictitious entity and who you gonna sue? Now that's what CORPORATE is all about.
    Last edited by DaveFagan; 02-10-15 at 12:29 PM.

  7. #47
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:55 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,292

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    CORPORATIONS are a "fictitious entity" by legal definition. They are formed to insulate from
    legal liability the humans behind them, but they are always a fictitious entity. The said
    CORPORATIONS do not breathe nor suffer from old age, but have continuity beyond human
    lifespans. CORPORATIONS don't have any problems with chemical, biological or nuclear
    contamination because they are a fictitious and need only concern themselves with the
    bottom line/profit. It is legal for CORPORATIONS to own all the politicians it can afford and
    they can afford most of them. No Greens or Barney Franks, it would seem. I acknowledge that
    there is a human component behind CORPORATIONS, but the human component dies and the
    CORPORATION continues doing whatever it started doing, good or evil. I will add that there is
    not much profit in good, don't ya' know?
    A short homily to give meaning to Corporate. You own a Nuke plant near its' end of useful life.
    Now this plant and all its' radioactive waste will become a financial liability soon. No problem,
    CORPORATE will accept a rubber check to sell the plant to my goombah Justin O. Peewillie. Now
    Justin can't afford a roll of toilet paper, but no problem because the sale is done and he has title to
    the plant and all its' waste. CORPORATE never cashes the check because it might bounce, ergo,
    don't aggravate the chance to bail out on waste liability. Justin promptly files bankruptcy through
    his Justin O. Peewillie Corporation. Now the Fed or State must pay Justin to keep the waste from
    migrating into now green pastures under bankruptcy protection. Somebody gonna sue somebody
    for sure, but it's all CORPORATE so there really aren't any warm bodies to get a hand on except
    Justin who still has to get paid to manage the cleanup or no cleanup as the case may be. The best
    part is that the original CORPORATE profiteers are positioned legally blameless and besides they
    are a fictitious entity and who you gonna sue? Now that's what CORPORATE is all about.
    I was interested in what they are socio-economically. The legal only defines the framework within which the rules of interaction within and towards the outside of the group are cast.

  8. #48
    Left the building
    Fearandloathing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada Dual citizen
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,404

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by SBu View Post
    I would say the writer's assessment is fairly accurate in its indictment of media generally and US media specifically (other than the hearsay he suggests), but then again, what else is new?


    Because media is too easily distracted by other flashy stories like fergusan* and the grammys and don't find themselves obliged to inform a generally disinterested public until a serious crisis develops.


    Are there Neo Nazis in the Kiev camp? Yes. Are there despotic communists in the Rebel/Russian camp? Yes. Are they all crooks? Yes. I think we are supporting Ukraine because of what it could be, not what it is, and in response to an aggressive Russia. Apart from hyperbole, I don't think the Ukrainian leaders are Nazis, but it does seem Putin is inclined to hyperbole because he actually believes it to one extent or another.


    No. But what do you do when that trading partner begins to forcefully take over your country's territory? The fact is that Russia reacted militarily way too early to even give dialogue and diplomacy a chance to accomplish it's objectives and alleviate its concerns. This is what ultimately led everyone into this situation. There is no reason to believe that the Ukrainian coup in and of itself couldn't have been diplomatically maneuvered by Moscow to achieve similar objectives without becoming an outcast and drawing the west into conflict.

    According to recent reports, Merkle and Hollande are extremely pessimistic about peace and are alluding to an inevitable escalation in hostilities that could quite possibly turn into all out war instead of relatively static conflict. What is going on right now and in the coming weeks is very important, and should be given the media coverage it deserves. To say that nuclear war or an incursion into NATO states is imminent or even more likely than not is a bit reckless. However, a total dismissal of the possibilities over time is equally reckless. At the moment we are a bit closer to midnight and serious confrontation, but we must not forget that the hands on the clock are adjustable.

    Should we arm Ukraine directly? No. Should we 'find a way' for 'certain arms and munitions' to get into the hands of the Ukrainians? Yes. Should we bolster Europe's defenses? Yes. Should we station large numbers of troops and equipment in the baltics? No. Close to the baltics? Yes. Should the President publicly brag about how big and bad he is by crushing Russia's economy? No, reckless. Should we continue with sanctions and other regime pressure instruments? Yes.
    I agree to a point, but your assessment of US media is totally wrong. A is usually the case, when the White House shifts its focus to the president's new issue, the MSM follows. While the US media was going ape **** over "income equality" and "higher minimum wage" British, Canadian, German, French and many other media were leading with the "War" in Crimea then Ukraine. At the least G-8 summit Canada's Stephen Harper greeted Putin with "get out of Ukraine" while Obama was waxing poetic about global warming, causing one Canadian columnist to quip "Obama is ensuring Eastern Europe will get a lot hotter"

    Ukraine has been the single largest international news story in this country while America's MSM covers anything but...because Obama is avoiding it like the plague
    ""You know, when we sell to other countries, even if they're allies -- you never know about an ally. An ally can turn."
    Donald Trump, 11/23/17

  9. #49
    Professor
    SBu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Washington State
    Last Seen
    01-18-16 @ 03:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,523

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by Fearandloathing View Post
    I agree to a point, but your assessment of US media is totally wrong. A is usually the case, when the White House shifts its focus to the president's new issue, the MSM follows. While the US media was going ape **** over "income equality" and "higher minimum wage" British, Canadian, German, French and many other media were leading with the "War" in Crimea then Ukraine. At the least G-8 summit Canada's Stephen Harper greeted Putin with "get out of Ukraine" while Obama was waxing poetic about global warming, causing one Canadian columnist to quip "Obama is ensuring Eastern Europe will get a lot hotter"

    Ukraine has been the single largest international news story in this country while America's MSM covers anything but...because Obama is avoiding it like the plague
    It sounds like you're in total agreement with my assessment of the US media then. As I said "fairly accurate in its indictment of ... US media specifically".

    Even while other countries' media has been covering the story more frequently, including the big hitters in US print media, the majority of even those reports etc. focus on the big bad actions of Russia and don't give an equally critical assessment of the actions of other participants and influential powers. Russia of course deserves more than a preponderance of the blame, but our media needs to be equally critical of all actors objectively, investigate the actions and accusations of those actors, etc. In other words, the western media isn't misleading in that it doesn't report the truth with respect to Putin and Russia, but is misleading in what it tends to leave out in an effort to frame the picture, to the under-informed information consumer, in a decidedly pro-western way. The danger being, of course, that our society adopts a distorted view of reality, a reality that is only mostly or partly true, but missing critical pieces of the greater truth.

    For example, I haven't seen much in MSM (including BBC/Sky/etc) about the profile and history of the current leaders of Ukraine (but plenty exists on Putin the adversary), it's difficult to find Lavrov's Munich speech from a couple days ago (mostly BS, but still important for people to see and hear for contextual purposes), I haven't seen much coverage/investigation regarding Ukrainian shells hitting in the middle of rebel held population centers (while plenty of news coverage exists about the Mariupol attack a week or so back. I'm not suggesting these omissions are intentional, but the effect tends to paint a dishonest picture overtime and gradually galvanizes a society's perception of reality. Having said all of that, and in conjunction with my previous statement, it is still quite easy to despise Putin and Russia's actions while at the same time knowing that our partners in Ukraine aren't squeaky clean and innocent, etc.

    We probably don't disagree on much here. I am just long-winded.

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    What do you think the precedence of allowing Russia to grab Crimea, the coastal resources and Eastern Ukraine directly following and as a consequence of the EU forcing through a Trade Treaty with Ukraine?
    I think that you have to consider the context of Crimea in terms of it's history, the ethnicity of it's population, and it's strategic significance to Russia. When seen in that context, your characterization of "grab" is somewhat of a distortion, though not entirely inaccurate. As such, although it is bit of a stretch, it is not entirely inconsistent with the notion of the right of self determination. There is a reason why Russia can be effective in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, and not Western Ukraine. That is simply that they have a significant amount of support from the population. When viewed in that light, the precedence is not entirely out of line with international norms like the right of self determination.

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •