put:fu:in Fuck Russians! - Page 4

On March 08 2022 09:26 Liquid`Drone wrote: went up 10% at what point? Because I've also seen that his support has increased because of the Ukraine situation - but that was only before the actual invasion of the whole country (which seems to have come as a surprise to most russians) and also before the sanctions were put in place. I'm not saying that this conflict and the response to it is gonna spell doom for Putin's domestic support, but I'd like to see your source and what the date of said source is. My impression (which I also have no source for, basically just sharing sentiments from a handful of russians that I've come across) is that Russians were overall rather supportive of taking Crimea, that they were probably also supportive of the recognition of Luhansk and Donetsk, but that a full blown invasion of Ukraine has significantly less popular support. Of course, it's hard to tell to what degree russians get any real information on what is happening - younger russians who speak English and use the internet seem very negative, but russians who get their information from state owned and controlled russian media will have a very different understanding.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...st-Putin-SURGED-invasion-Ukraine.html


Only 4% of Russians believe the war is their fault. (probably unreliable poll results though)

Sanctions hurt russian people far more than they hurt putin. If history is a guide, it will just cause a pointless amount of suffering and most likely have little effect on putin. I have no idea what Putins plan is, but there's no way he can occupy ukraine and expect to be half as popular as he is now in the long run.

On March 11 2022 06:44 Baalim wrote: Only 4% of Russians believe the war is their fault. (probably unreliable poll results though)

Brainwashed people

On March 11 2022 17:29 Stroggoz wrote: Sanctions hurt russian people far more than they hurt putin. If history is a guide, it will just cause a pointless amount of suffering and most likely have little effect on putin. I have no idea what Putins plan is, but there's no way he can occupy ukraine and expect to be half as popular as he is now in the long run.

he clearly didn't plan that much resistance from Ukraine, perhaps he thinks that he can bombard Ukraine into oblivion and get part of what he wants in negotiations, and he might.

Piece is the way

Im not followin dis w4r in detail

but its ni c e that i can come 2 dis forum and learn everythin by doin the opposit of what liquiddr9ne and stroggi says

On March 11 2022 18:44 VanDerMeyde wrote: Show nested quote + On March 11 2022 06:44 Baalim wrote: Only 4% of Russians believe the war is their fault. (probably unreliable poll results though) Brainwashed people

A big % of every country is brainwashed with some nationalistic pathos, the US is the modern historical enemy of Rusia, they've had real NATO concerns in their borders, there are some big nazis groups in Ukraine and some regions wanting to break out from Ukraine, it isn't hard to spin that off into support of these people specially with the totalitarian control of the press.

Its been said many times but the US operates in a similar fashion, the only difference is that their main targets are shitty chaotic countries with dictatorships so the liberator propaganda is easier to justify than in Ukraine.

Pretty interesting serious of articles by Chomsky recently. https://truthout.org/articles/chomsky...nowhere-if-us-keeps-refusing-to-join/

The key part of sanctions and arming Ukraine:

"Perhaps it is based on hope for regime change. If so, it is both criminal and foolish. Criminal because it perpetuates the vicious war and cuts off hope for ending the horrors, foolish because it is quite likely that if Putin is overthrown someone even worse will take over."

Really understates the insanity of how pointless sanctions are from the west (or rather the US). Not only this, but the US has ignored Zelensky's call for neutrality, and he did not want to join NATO. Sanctions have dramatically lowered the chance of any kind of ceasefire. I can't really expect NATO to offer a deal with Putin that isn't humiliating to him, given their history of total irrationality.

Also really comical, the amount of moralizing going on. Like, for instance, facebook has now allowed hatespeech so long as it's against Putin.

chomsky say stroggoz do

Why are Chomsky's tankie opinions relevant?

On March 15 2022 20:14 Stroggoz wrote: Sanctions have dramatically lowered the chance of any kind of ceasefire

I"m not in favor of most of the sanctions, but I don't know why you say they diminish the odds of a ceasefire?

Like, for instance, facebook has now allowed hatespeech so long as it's against Putin.

If only somebody had warned us that "hate speech" will be used to control narratives and silent political dissidents... -_-

On March 17 2022 10:52 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On March 15 2022 20:14 Stroggoz wrote: Sanctions have dramatically lowered the chance of any kind of ceasefire I"m not in favor of most of the sanctions, but I don't know why you say they diminish the odds of a ceasefire?   Like, for instance, facebook has now allowed hatespeech so long as it's against Putin. If only somebody had warned us that "hate speech" will be used to control narratives and silent political dissidents... -_-

The speech control is pretty inconsequential compared to the overall control over information that silicon valley has, it's another grain of sand on top of the mountain. I just find it amusing. I think the algorithm that suppresses various news sites that they don't like has a far bigger, though more subtle effect. You can basically cripple any independent media economically with it. It's predictable that everyone in power is trying to exploit this situation I guess.

I think I overstated the sanctions part. But if you read the article, the general strategy of the US has been to refuse any attempt at diplomacy, even though Zelenskky wants it, and I'm guessing most people in ukraine would, also he was also against Ukraine joining Nato before the invasion. This is all for reminiscent of Russia's invasion of Afghanistan, which was one that we know the US wanted to happen, even more so than Russia-for which it was a complete disaster.

On March 18 2022 13:11 Stroggoz wrote: The speech control is pretty inconsequential compared to the overall control over information that silicon valley has, it's another grain of sand on top of the mountain. I just find it amusing. I think the algorithm that suppresses various news sites that they don't like has a far bigger, though more subtle effect. You can basically cripple any independent media economically with it. It's predictable that everyone in power is trying to exploit this situation I guess. I think I overstated the sanctions part. But if you read the article, the general strategy of the US has been to refuse any attempt at diplomacy, even though Zelenskky wants it, and I'm guessing most people in ukraine would, also he was also against Ukraine joining Nato before the invasion. This is all for reminiscent of Russia's invasion of Afghanistan, which was one that we know the US wanted to happen, even more so than Russia-for which it was a complete disaster.

information control breeds from the same ground as "hate speech" regulations, they claim they are fakenews and ban them, for example the NYT now confirmed the Biden's son crack story is real while it was supressed in social media in election time, as long as information is controlled it will be used by cinics for nefarious purposes, thats what I've seen saying for fucking years and its quite simple, but morons like Loco don't seem to realize the censorship won't always be in favor of their ideas.

I dont think Ukraine joining Nato would have been a good idea, it escalates the possibility of WW3, but flirting with the idea of joining was the worst possible thing to do, Ukraine should have taken an absolutely neutral stance, switzerland like so that it isn't an ideological nor strategial threat to Russia, that was the safest bet to avoid invasion.

On March 18 2022 23:25 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On March 18 2022 13:11 Stroggoz wrote: The speech control is pretty inconsequential compared to the overall control over information that silicon valley has, it's another grain of sand on top of the mountain. I just find it amusing. I think the algorithm that suppresses various news sites that they don't like has a far bigger, though more subtle effect. You can basically cripple any independent media economically with it. It's predictable that everyone in power is trying to exploit this situation I guess. I think I overstated the sanctions part. But if you read the article, the general strategy of the US has been to refuse any attempt at diplomacy, even though Zelenskky wants it, and I'm guessing most people in ukraine would, also he was also against Ukraine joining Nato before the invasion. This is all for reminiscent of Russia's invasion of Afghanistan, which was one that we know the US wanted to happen, even more so than Russia-for which it was a complete disaster. information control breeds from the same ground as "hate speech" regulations, they claim they are fakenews and ban them, for example the NYT now confirmed the Biden's son crack story is real while it was supressed in social media in election time, as long as information is controlled it will be used by cinics for nefarious purposes, thats what I've seen saying for fucking years and its quite simple, but morons like Loco don't seem to realize the censorship won't always be in favor of their ideas. I dont think Ukraine joining Nato would have been a good idea, it escalates the possibility of WW3, but flirting with the idea of joining was the worst possible thing to do, Ukraine should have taken an absolutely neutral stance, switzerland like so that it isn't an ideological nor strategial threat to Russia, that was the safest bet to avoid invasion.

Heh, no one on this forum takes silicon valley's propaganda machine seriously or even has attempted to understand it. Most information control is suppressed because they just don't like what they say, it doesn't fall under grounds of hate speech. It's the pagerank algorithm, however it works, that is doing a lot more damage. Most of the focus is on the hate speech part though, because that seems to be the big obsession in American culture, even though speech is very free there.

It's perfectly reasonable to not talk about the Biden crack story, because it isn't interesting. Why should anyone care that someone smokes crack and is addicted to it? I do 50mg of ritalin every day. So what? To care about these things and pretend that they are interesting questions and topics is a seriously overlooked, and highly ideological bias that stems from capitalist ownership of the media. The same could be said of Trumps amphitimine use.

On March 19 2022 01:59 Stroggoz wrote: Heh, no one on this forum takes silicon valley's propaganda machine seriously or even has attempted to understand it. Most information control is suppressed because they just don't like what they say, it doesn't fall under grounds of hate speech. It's the pagerank algorithm, however it works, that is doing a lot more damage. Most of the focus is on the hate speech part though, because that seems to be the big obsession in American culture, even though speech is very free there.

It falls under hate speech, or misinformation or whatever excuse, that is the point of the absolutism in freedom of speech, and yes the US one of the best records of free speech in the world, but sadly every day less and it should be protected at all costs.

It's perfectly reasonable to not talk about the Biden crack story, because it isn't interesting. Why should anyone care that someone smokes crack and is addicted to it?

If you believe the story and pics of Hunter Biden's crack addiction in the middle of an election isn't interesting you are either an imbecile or dishonest.


Also it wasn't deemed "interesting" lol, it was said to be fake news and directly supressed by social media, funny that you complain about social media manipulation in the Russian/Ukrain war but in this case, you seem to defend it, are you trying to substitute for Ethienne or is this hypocricy innate to socialists?

In the context of a Trump vs Biden election, Biden's son being kinda fucked up and there being some nepotism involved strikes me as entirely irrelevant and a complete non-issue. The possible story here relates to media bias, but nothing that has been revealed is in any way 'politically significant'.

On March 19 2022 11:41 Liquid`Drone wrote: In the context of a Trump vs Biden election, Biden's son being kinda fucked up and there being some nepotism involved strikes me as entirely irrelevant and a complete non-issue. The possible story here relates to media bias, but nothing that has been revealed is in any way 'politically significant'.

First of all, he didn't say politically relevant he said interesting, and I'm sure that if Ivanka Trump turned out to be a crack whore CNN wouldn't publish her pictures sucking her pimps dick because its not politically relevant lol.


If you are going to claim that Facebook and Twitters active supression (removing posts under "false information" flags), regarding the story was not an attempt to help Biden's chances in the election then congratulations on joining the legion of dishonest leftists.

If that's your attempt at honestly reading or interpreting my post then I guess congratulations on joining the legion of idiot right wingers?

In this context-'interesting' means 'relevant to politics', so I may as well have said that. Election cycles themselves mostly have very little to do with politics, they are largely entertainment shows, and so are not really that interesting either.

As I said, the story here of media bias is pretty clear. Because these issues are obviously not interesting, it shows that the media is biased in reporting on these kinds of things. I'm sure CNN would post that story about Ivanka Trump, a lot. That story is also hardly relevant. If Ivanka sucks dicks, why is that an issue? You realize a lot of people suck dicks right, and it's a normal and healthy thing to do? Perhaps not if it's prostitution. Anyone involved in prostitution should be helped, not publicly humiliated by having pictures shown on CNN.