[Continuation] The Russian Invasion of Ukraine (3)

[erlando]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Orban won the election in Hungary with 53% of the vote. Nearest opposition party was 35%

He says "We never had so many opponents, Brussels bureaucrats, the international mainstream media, and the Ukrainian president."

We can see where he thinks his bread is buttered.

Hungary has no place in neither NATO nor the EU. This clearly demonstrates it. They can **** right off.

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by erlando

Hungary has no place in neither NATO nor the EU. This clearly demonstrates it. They can **** right off.

He wants the benefit of the single market and NATO safety blanket and nothing else.

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by erlando

It's no secret. I'm located in Denmark.

Then, this means that your Internet Service Provider (ISP) in Denmark hasn't banned access to RT.com (Russia Today), in spite of the European decision.

Actually, I did some testing with my VPN, and it seems that the Russia Today website remains accessible for most of Europe (even in Ukraine, it can be read). It has, however, be banned by my own ISP.

Quote:

After the EU ban, black screen for the Russian channel RT France
After the European decision to ban the broadcasting of media controlled by Russia, the 175 employees of RT France find themselves unemployed.

(https://www.lesechos.fr/tech-medias/...vision-1390805, article in French)

The danger of such bans should be obvious: they are likely to be followed by tit-for-tat bans in Russia, the Russians then only have "official" information available, and, as a result, you end up with 81% of the Russian public supporting the war:

Quote:

Eighty-one percent said they supported the war, describing the need to protect Russian speakers as its primary justification.

(https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/01/w...t-ukraine.html)

This is also the problem with the various economic sanctions: they risk alienating the Russian public, in addition to the serious consequences for the citizens of the West themselves.

[llwyd]

A flashmob yesterday in Western Finland: https://areena.yle.fi/1-62149031

[Arcade22]

Originally Posted by Michel H

The danger of such bans should be obvious: they are likely to be followed by tit-for-tat bans in Russia, the Russians then only have "official" information available, and, as a result, you end up with 81% of the Russian public supporting the war:

Could you believe it that those making up that 80% are broadly the same people who would hardly ever, if indeed never, consider reading any western news even before this war?

[Arcade22]

Quote:

While Russian troops have battered Ukraine, officials in China have been meeting behind closed doors to study a Communist Party-produced documentary that extols President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia as a hero.

The humiliating collapse of the Soviet Union, the video says, was the result of efforts by the United States to destroy its legitimacy. With swelling music and sunny scenes of present-day Moscow, the documentary praises Mr. Putin for restoring Stalin’s standing as a great wartime leader and for renewing patriotic pride in Russia’s past.

To the world, China casts itself as a principled onlooker of the war in Ukraine, not picking sides, simply seeking peace. At home, though, the Chinese Communist Party is pushing a campaign that paints Russia as a long-suffering victim rather than an aggressor and defends China’s strong ties with Moscow as vital.

Chinese universities have organized classes to give students a “correct understanding” of the war, often highlighting Russia’s grievances with the West. Party newspapers have run series of commentaries blaming the United States for the conflict.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/04/w...a-ukraine.html

Reality check: China is a country where the de-facto state endorsed ideology broadly shares the same narrative as the one in Russia, centered around historical grievances and national imperialist rebirth under a great leader.

It goes something like this: China is a country that has been victimized and humiliated by the evil west for centuries and only now under the unquestionable rule of Xi Jinping and Communist party can China take its "rightful place" as the greatest power of the world, all under heaven.

China may have been alarmed at Putin's actions and the fact that he almost certainly did not warn them beforehand, but anyone thinking that they are ideologically hostile to his brand of Russian imperialism are mistaken.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Arcade22

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/04/w...a-ukraine.html

Reality check: China is a country where the de-facto state endorsed ideology broadly shares the same narrative as the one in Russia, centered around historical grievances and national imperialist rebirth under a great leader.

It goes something like this: China is a country that has been victimized and humiliated by the evil west for centuries and only now under the unquestionable rule of Xi Jinping and Communist party can China take its "rightful place" as the greatest power of the world, all under heaven.

China may have been alarmed at Putin's actions and the fact that he almost certainly did not warn them beforehand, but anyone thinking that they are ideologically hostile to his brand of Russian imperialism are mistaken.

The last paragraph


It is reported that just before the invasion, there was a cyberattack on Ukrainian defence servers originating in China.

[erlando]

Originally Posted by Michel H

Then, this means that your Internet Service Provider (ISP) in Denmark hasn't banned access to RT.com (Russia Today), in spite of the European decision.

No. It simply means that the website rt dot com is not banned in the EU as explained to you a multitude of times. It is only the broadcasting - here being very narrowly defined as a "linear audiovisual media service" by the Audio-Visual Media Services Directive Article 1 1.e. - of RT content that is banned.

Here is an in-depth analysis. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-eus-b...t-and-sputnik/

Why your ISP apparently has blocked rt dot com must be a question for your ISP. They are not required to.

ETA: Here is the relevant decision by the EC (highlighting mine):

Quote:

1. It shall be prohibited for operators to broadcast, or to enable, facilitate or otherwise contribute to broadcast, any content by the legal persons, entities or bodies listed in Annex IX, including through transmission or distribution by any means such as cable, satellite, IP-TV, internet service providers, internet video-sharing platforms or applications, whether new or pre-installed.

2. Any broadcasting licence or authorisation, transmission and distribution arrangement with the legal persons, entities or bodies listed in Annex IX shall be suspended.’;

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-cont...22%3A065%3ATOC

[erlando]

Double - meant to edit

[David RP]

"What Russia should do with Ukraine"

This published by RIA Novosti makes for some chilling reading.

It talks of de-Ukrainization, murders and mass repressions. It effectively says that the genocide of Ukrainians (that is currently being carried out by the russian troops in Ukraine) must be completed.

https://cryptodrftng.substack.com/p/...ld-do-with?s=r

[Meridian]

www.rt.com does seem to be blocked by Telekom (large German ISP) for example. Not that I wanted to access it anyway!

[Manger Douse]

Nm

[Arcade22]

Originally Posted by David RP

"What Russia should do with Ukraine"

This published by RIA Novosti makes for some chilling reading.

It talks of de-Ukrainization, murders and mass repressions. It effectively says that the genocide of Ukrainians (that is currently being carried out by the russian troops in Ukraine) must be completed.

https://cryptodrftng.substack.com/p/...ld-do-with?s=r

As I have repeatedly stated: since the Russian's never really make any serious effort in distinguishing the supposed "neo-Nazis" they are fighting from any other Ukrainian (this is because the "neo-Nazis" they speak of do not exist), it's pretty much inevitable for them to end up treating anyone and potentially everyone as a "neo-Nazi". Dehumanization is complete.

They already often call all Ukrainian soldiers "neo-Nazis", or some other synonym. After that anyone who resists or simply protests Russian soldiers are "neo-Nazis". Russian military column gets ambushed in a town? It must be a "neo-Nazi" nest so the people there can be killed as revenge, because the "neo-Nazis" are all scum that should be killed anyway.

Of course the Russians recognize the cruel cynical irony of the fact that their way of dehumanizing people is very much the same as the Nazis themselves did in order to justify their brutal murderous policies. They just don't care, or even find it amusing.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Meridian

www.rt.com does seem to be blocked by Telekom (large German ISP) for example. Not that I wanted to access it anyway!

Blocked here, too.

[SteveAitch]

Originally Posted by Meridian

www.rt.com does seem to be blocked by Telekom (large German ISP) for example. Not that I wanted to access it anyway!

Seems to be still available in the UK too - I use BT internet.

[crescent]

Regarding Bucha -

Edited by xjx388:

<SNIP> Edited for Rule 0

there were numerous statements from the Mayor of Bucha and others regarding the killing of civilians in Bucha before it was liberated. No video until enough mines were cleared to allow some passage of along a few roads.

Edited by xjx388:

<SNIP> Edited for Rule 11

There's no excuse for supporting the slaughter of non-combatants.

Something similar may be happening in Kherson as well.
Nathan Ruser on Twitter

Quote:

April 2nd satellite imagery of Kherson shows that the graves I've mentioned before (https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/1498683814134136849) are still being dug. Since the beginning of this invasion, ~824 grave plots have been dug in Kherson Cemetery.
Given what we know about Bucha this is very concerning

[crescent]

The Russian State media is now calling for the "liquidation" of all Ukrainian government officials and the total elimination of the Ukrainian nation - including the use of the name.

Francis Scarr on Twitter

Quote:

An op-ed for state news agency RIA Novosti titled "What Russia should do with Ukraine" by pundit Timofei Sergeitsev has created quite a stir today

The rhetoric is truly horrific, even by the standards of what I'm used to seeing from pro-Kremlin media

Below are a few quotes:

Quote:

"Denazification is a set of measures aimed at the nazified mass of the population, which technically cannot be subjected to direct punishment as war criminals

Quote:

"However, besides the elite, a significant part of the masses of the people, who are passive nazis, are accomplices to Nazism. They have supported the Nazi authorities and indulged them..."

Quote:

"...The just punishment for this part of the population is possible only as the bearing of the inevitable hardships of a just war against the Nazi system"

The actual (translated) text of that:
Day 40. What russia should do with Ukraine.
A guest post from russian state media.
Some gems from the derangement:

Quote:

The further denazification of this mass of the population consists in re-education, which is achieved by ideological repression

Quote:

The time frame for denazification can in no way be less than one generation, which has to be born, grow and mature under the conditions of denazification.

Quote:

denazification cannot be carried out in a compromise, based on a formula such as "NATO - no, EU - yes". The collective West itself is the designer, source and sponsor of Ukrainian Nazism,

Quote:

The name "Ukraine" apparently cannot be retained as the title of any fully denazified state entity on territory freed from the Nazi regime.

Quote:

The Banderovite top brass must be liquidated; its re-education is impossible.

That's just skimming from the first half. This is from Russian state media. They're really doubling down - and this article will only further unify and motivate Ukrainian resistance to the invasion. Such has been the state of Russian groupthink over the past decade, that all attempts to push against the Ukrainian westward tilt backfire due to the obvious and overwhelming Russian hubris on the issue. Once again Russia publishes a manifesto that creates ever greater resistance to Russian domination of Ukraine. Vladimir Putin has been and continues to be the greatest cheerleader ever for the Ukrainian efforts to ally with Europe - nobody but nobody has worked harder to unify Ukrainian resistance to Russia than Vladimir Putin has.

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Originally Posted by Arcade22

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/04/w...a-ukraine.html

Reality check: China is a country where the de-facto state endorsed ideology broadly shares the same narrative as the one in Russia, centered around historical grievances and national imperialist rebirth under a great leader.

It goes something like this: China is a country that has been victimized and humiliated by the evil west for centuries and only now under the unquestionable rule of Xi Jinping and Communist party can China take its "rightful place" as the greatest power of the world, all under heaven.

China may have been alarmed at Putin's actions and the fact that he almost certainly did not warn them beforehand, but anyone thinking that they are ideologically hostile to his brand of Russian imperialism are mistaken.

About the highlighted, they may not be ideologically opposed, but they are opposed in imperialism. Mongolia and their shared border are not to China's liking. Both are seeking influence in Africa and Russia is supporting India, which is China's local rival.

China needs to do nothing to win from this. Which is exactly what they are doing.

[Jimbo07]

Quote:

denazification cannot be carried out in a compromise, based on a formula such as "NATO - no, EU - yes". The collective West itself is the designer, source and sponsor of Ukrainian Nazism,

Nazi - n. Any person not a Russian

apparently

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

He wants the benefit of the single market and NATO safety blanket and nothing else.

Both of these are things worth wanting. Having them should incur no obligation to want or seek anything else. NATO is not an ideological organization. It's a pragmatic organization. Same with the single market of the EU. I guess the panjandrums of the EU would very much like to make it an ideological organization, but they probably shouldn't.

And of course it would be a mistake to make NATO an ideological organization, for any ideology other than "we're not going to expand our borders, and we're going to defend each other against the expansionistic 400-lb bear in our back yard."

Hungary may be wrong for siding with Russia in this (and I think they are wrong). But they're not wrong for only being interested in the actual stated benefit of NATO, and not any of the other cultural values and ideals of some of the other members. Hungary could be a fascist dictatorship; as long as it upholds its NATO obligations, that's all I ask of it as a NATO member.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Both of these are things worth wanting. Having them should incur no obligation to want or seek anything else. NATO is not an ideological organization. It's a pragmatic organization. Same with the single market of the EU. I guess the panjandrums of the EU would very much like to make it an ideological organization, but they probably shouldn't.

And of course it would be a mistake to make NATO an ideological organization, for any ideology other than "we're not going to expand our borders, and we're going to defend each other against the expansionistic 400-lb bear in our back yard."

Hungary may be wrong for siding with Russia in this (and I think they are wrong). But they're not wrong for only being interested in the actual stated benefit of NATO, and not any of the other cultural values and ideals of some of the other members. Hungary could be a fascist dictatorship; as long as it upholds its NATO obligations, that's all I ask of it as a NATO member.

NATO is an ideological organization and being a tolerant democracy is in fact a requirement.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Jimbo07

Nazi - n. Any person not a Russian

apparently

Isn't it funny how the people the right wing accuse of 'calling everyone a Nazi' are not the people ideologically aligned with the people justifying murdering people by just calling them Nazis? It's almost like that isn't how the mainstream left works but is how the mainstream right does.

It's the same dynamic as the right wing now calling people 'groomers' for opposing legislation that gives people a legal excuse to just sue non-straight teachers. They think that the people who actually have been opposing authoritarian ideologies use the terms the same way they would; a simple dehumanizing excuse for violence. Calling someone a 'racist' or 'nazi' or 'commie' isn't a finding based on their actions needing addressing, but just a threat.

[crescent]

A quote from from Feb. 27:

Quote:

A Ukrainian friend living in Kyiv has just messaged me via Instagram to tell me that Russian soldiers in Bucha on the outskirts of the city are now entering civilian homes and shooting anyone they find inside. Thousands of innocent people are trapped in the city with no way out.

This was known and documented before the town was liberated.

March 5:

Quote:

Reports coming in of Kadyrovites going door to door in Hostomel and Bucha and executing civilians. Desperate messages of people stranded there on Ukrainian social media. Needs verification

and this:

Quote:

Some conspiracy theorists insinuate/claim that the Ukrainians killed collaborators in Bucha (all the dead bodies) because there is a time difference between the withdrawal of the Russians and the discovery of the corpses.

Is not true.

Quote:

On 01 April 17h31, the mayor of Bucha distributes a video announcing that Bucha has been liberated.

Other reports indicate that the Russians had left Bucha on MAR 31, which does NOT mean that the Ukrainian army entered Bucha immediately.

Quote:

Presumably the mayor simply expressed himself incorrectly here: all reports indicate that the Russians were withdrawing faster than the Ukrainian army could catch up. There were also booby traps that forced the Ukrainian army to progress more slowly...

Quote:

On April 1, at 10 pm, the first video of citizens entering Bucha and discovering the corpses is released.
The video was in daylight, so it had to be filmed in the afternoon at the latest.

(and not only on April 2/3 as they claim)

Quote:

On April 2, you will see the first video of the Ukrainian army entering Bucha.
Nowhere in that video do you see any other people walking around. Which is perfectly normal: there was the danger of booby traps.

Quote:

If a (violent) army leaves, the civilians will not immediately come out.
And the terrain must indeed be "reclaimed" by the own army.
It's not that people just take Russia at their word...
So this is why it took some time.

Quote:

This explains the difference between the announcement of the Russians and the actual detection of the crimes (less than 24 hours later) and the arrival of the Ukrainian army (less than 48 hours later).

(Based on what is currently available of information/images)

Quote:

Several corpses were in such a state of decomposition that they may have been there for a week or more. Which makes them difficult to move and they must have been murdered during Russian presence.

Too bad we have to spend time on such debunks...

Quite a few links in the twitter thread that support each claim


The execution of the people whose corpses were found by some pallets at an industrial area - that was filmed on March 25 (the execution itself, not the discovery of the corpses). Video didn't get out earlier presumably because it was filmed by a resident who had no way to get the video out.

Quote:

Blurry af due to distance, but this video purportedly from March 25 matches up with the location of several of the corpses (pallets in front of a construction site) and may depict their execution by soldiers wearing white arm bands.

A person could go on and on with this. The events at Bucha were witnessed and documented at it happened, reported as it happened although the reporting was somewhat incomplete due to press lack of access to the area. Further documentation occurred as the press and Ukrainian officials gained access. Disgusting pro-Russian schills and conspiracy theorists who claim otherwise are full of **** and are generally amoral and repugnant.

[llwyd]

I guess this hasn't been posted here - sounds very realistic, the grim reality of war: https://youtu.be/9IDFSKYH2Fk

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Isn't it funny how the people the right wing accuse of 'calling everyone a Nazi' are not the people ideologically aligned with the people justifying murdering people by just calling them Nazis? It's almost like that isn't how the mainstream left works but is how the mainstream right does.

It's the same dynamic as the right wing now calling people 'groomers' for opposing legislation that gives people a legal excuse to just sue non-straight teachers. They think that the people who actually have been opposing authoritarian ideologies use the terms the same way they would; a simple dehumanizing excuse for violence. Calling someone a 'racist' or 'nazi' or 'commie' isn't a finding based on their actions needing addressing, but just a threat.

Because everything the Right is afraid of is a confession.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

NATO is an ideological organization and being a tolerant democracy is in fact a requirement.

Thank you for the correction. I guess that Hungary needs to be a democracy as part of its NATO obligations then. But that still doesn't obligate its citizens to democratically vote for French ideals rather than Hungarian ideals. Nor should it. I still don't think "Hungary is only interested in NATO as a security blanket" is a valid criticism.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

NATO is an ideological organization and being a tolerant democracy is in fact a requirement.

Is it? Turkey, Portugal, and Greece, all joined when they were dictatorships.

It is a requirement for membership of the EU, though

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Is it? Turkey, Portugal, and Greece, all joined when they were dictatorships.

It is a requirement for membership of the EU, though

Yes. (and https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/faq.htm )

Quote:

While there is no membership checklist for interested nations, NATO has made clear that candidates for membership must meet the following criteria. Interested nations must:

Uphold democracy, including tolerance for diversity;
Be progressing toward a market economy;
Have their military forces under firm civilian control;
Be good neighbors and respect the sovereignty of other nations; and
Work toward interoperability with NATO forces.

Again, while these criteria are essential, they do not constitute a checklist leading automatically to NATO membership.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Yes. (and https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/faq.htm )

Gah. I hate this kind of "no citation citation".

"While there is no membership checklist for interested nations, NATO has made clear that candidates for membership must meet the following criteria. Interested nations must:"

So there isn't a checklist. But there is a checklist. But the checklist itself isn't cited. Just a platitude about "NATO has made clear". Where? Where has NATO made it clear? If it's not a checklist, how clear is it, exactly? Are these guidelines? Can exceptions be made? Is it aspirational? Is it simply the current mood of the current membership, creating a de facto checklist? Does it actually matter?

[erlando]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Both of these are things worth wanting. Having them should incur no obligation to want or seek anything else. NATO is not an ideological organization. It's a pragmatic organization. Same with the single market of the EU. I guess the panjandrums of the EU would very much like to make it an ideological organization, but they probably shouldn't.

And of course it would be a mistake to make NATO an ideological organization, for any ideology other than "we're not going to expand our borders, and we're going to defend each other against the expansionistic 400-lb bear in our back yard."

Hungary may be wrong for siding with Russia in this (and I think they are wrong). But they're not wrong for only being interested in the actual stated benefit of NATO, and not any of the other cultural values and ideals of some of the other members. Hungary could be a fascist dictatorship; as long as it upholds its NATO obligations, that's all I ask of it as a NATO member.

NATO absolutely is an ideological organization. A fascist dictatorship is contrary to those ideals.

Quote:

To join the Alliance, nations are expected to respect the values of the North Atlantic Treaty, and to meet certain political, economic and military criteria, set out in the Alliance’s 1995 Study on Enlargement. These criteria
include a functioning democratic political system based on a market economy; fair treatment of minority populations; a commitment to resolve conflicts peacefully; an ability and willingness to make a military contribution to NATO operations; and a commitment to democratic civil-military relations and institutions.

https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2...gement-eng.pdf

[erlando]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Is it? Turkey, Portugal, and Greece, all joined when they were dictatorships.

It's a requirement since at least 1995:

Quote:

To join the Alliance, nations are expected to respect the values of the North Atlantic Treaty, and to meet certain political, economic and military criteria, set out in the Alliance’s 1995 Study on Enlargement. These criteria
include a functioning democratic political system based on a market economy; fair treatment of minority populations; a commitment to resolve conflicts peacefully; an ability and willingness to make a military contribution to NATO operations; and a commitment to democratic civil-military relations and institutions.

https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2...gement-eng.pdf

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Gah. I hate this kind of "no citation citation".

"While there is no membership checklist for interested nations, NATO has made clear that candidates for membership must meet the following criteria. Interested nations must:"

So there isn't a checklist. But there is a checklist. But the checklist itself isn't cited. Just a platitude about "NATO has made clear". Where? Where has NATO made it clear? If it's not a checklist, how clear is it, exactly? Are these guidelines? Can exceptions be made? Is it aspirational? Is it simply the current mood of the current membership, creating a de facto checklist? Does it actually matter?

In context 'not a checklist' means 'just because you meet the requirements listed here doesn't mean you get in'. These things are the minimum as established in the cited communiqués and the various treaties/agreements (primarily in this case the 1995 Study on Enlargement, which also explains how some countries in the 1950's were able to join without being democracies).

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by erlando

It's a requirement since at least 1995:



https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2...gement-eng.pdf

A requirement, or an expectation? Is there a difference? Are we talking about a rule or a guideline?

[Trebuchet]

Item on the teevee news last night showed Ukranians lined up at the rail station in Warsaw for trains back to Ukraine. Don't know if that's hopeful news or just wishful thinking.

[erlando]

Originally Posted by theprestige

A requirement, or an expectation? Is there a difference? Are we talking about a rule or a guideline?

Why don't you research that to your satisfaction and get back to us?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by erlando

Why don't you research that to your satisfaction and get back to us?

Enh. I'm pretty much over it. While I begrudge Hungary their support for Russia, I don't begrudge their paying mere lip service to NATO's ideals, in exchange for NATO's security blanket.

And regardless of whether NATO is ideological, and to what degree, I still think they probably shouldn't be. But that is entirely beside the point of this thread.

[Captain_Swoop]

How combined Arms is supposed to work


How M1A2 Abrams Tanks are Reinforced in Combat

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[shemp]

Biden says Putin should face war crimes trial for alleged atrocities in Ukraine

Quote:

Washington — President Biden on Monday called for war crimes trial against Russian President Vladimir Putin and said he'd seek more sanctions after reported atrocities in Ukraine.

"You saw what happened in Bucha," Mr. Biden said, adding that Putin "is a war criminal."

Mr. Biden's comments to reporters came after Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited Bucha, one of the towns surrounding Kyiv where Ukrainian officials say the bodies of civilians have been found. On "Face the Nation" Sunday, Zelenskyy called the Russian actions "genocide" and called for the West to apply tougher sanctions against Russia.

The president, however, stopped short of calling the actions genocide.

The bodies of 410 civilians have been removed from Kyiv-area towns that were recently retaken from Russian forces, Ukraine's prosecutor-general, Iryna Venediktova, said. Associated Press journalists saw the bodies of at least 21 people in various spots around Bucha, northwest of the capital.

I agree with him, and anyone who disagrees and spreads propaganda that calls what happened there "fake news" is beneath contempt.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by shemp

Biden says Putin should face war crimes trial for alleged atrocities in Ukraine



I agree with him, and anyone who disagrees and spreads propaganda that calls what happened there "fake news" is beneath contempt.

What's the priority here? Make a show of taking a hard line against Putin? Or doing whatever can be done to rescue Ukraine and Ukrainians? Because as agreeably laudable as I find Biden's sentiment, I don't really see how it's productive to emphasize it now.

[shemp]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Well **** if Biden said that the Right has no choice but to be on Putin's side now.

The U.S. right wing should all go die in a dumpster fire.