Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)SN
Posts
1
Comments
1,459
Joined
9 mo. ago

  • Which is it? Should the Minsk agreements have been followed or not? Because every action you’re describing by the west is a violation of the agreements. Zelenskyy ran on neutrality, and respecting agreements made with Russia, then reversed course once elected, and now refuses to hold elections and risk the people electing a real neutral candidate.

    You have a complete misunderstanding of the basic facts in this conflict: https://savageminds.substack.com/p/save-ukraine-from-american-meddling

  • LoL. I remember.

    And the people who fall for it will pretend they knew it was an illegitimate war all along, when the media narrative finally changes. And they won’t learn anything from this, and they’ll go along with the US narrative again next time.

  • Yeah, that’s what I said. Y’all apply it to everybody who opposes escalation with nuclear superpowers, or supporting US proxy wars.

    If you support those, then you’re not anti-war.

  • Not at all. I’ve linked the same cables to you before, and you dismiss them. Once I get to a stopping point at work, I’ll come back with the links and previous comments. Or they can look them up on Wikileaks themselves.

    I would love for people to look up what Jeffrey Sachs has to say on Ukraine. The guy has been on the ground investigating, and directly involved in negotiations. He is absolutely an authority on the subject.

  • Jeffrey Sachs isn’t ‘just some rando blogger.’ And the State Dept and CIA have openly admitted they don’t have the evidence to back the claims you’re making (maybe you should join and share your info with them), and US documents & cables have been leaked backing China’s version of events you still deny.

    But you believe MSNBC’s version more than firsthand accounts and leaked US cables.

    Thank you for portraying the behavior I’ve accused you of directly in this thread. That’ll save people reading from having to go through your profile to see the madness.

  • That’s not true. You’ve openly admitted you only accept corporate or western government sources. The same ones pushing the propaganda you like.

    And if it’s an outlet that challenges your narrative, you say it’s not a legitimate source. So it’s this endless feedback loop of trying to prove CIA narratives with you pointing to either the government story, or the news laundering it, with this self-reinforcing nonsense.

    No amount of linking to accounts from journalists on the ground or involved in negotiations, or CIA documents revealing hoaxes, has ever budged you an inch or convinced you to question your worldview. Evidence doesn’t work on astroturfers.

  • The problem is that y’all believe, that acknowledging many of the claims about those countries to be CIA hoaxes, is also somehow a declaration of approval of those countries policies.

    You may not like those countries, but you’re taking that to mean you have to personally adopt the position of defending the bullshit lies you’ve been told about them.