[Siderite]

Putin has to be the biggest idiot, even among Trump, Truss and the other dimwits.

He assumed that the Ukrainians would come to his aid, because he genuinely thought that Russian propaganda about the Ukrainian politicals being out of touch with the Ukrainians who are desperate to return to Russia. He thought he would look like the military genius and be a proven threat to the west, which he blames for Russia’s apparent weakness.

Instead the might of Russia has been embarrassed, they failed to make any meaningful ground, lose what they do control and regularly make blunders which make it evident that NATO, and even singular NATO nations, would better them in a war.

Now their propaganda outlets desperately try and make joy out of failing to hold many major cities:

During Russia's New Year special on state TV, they openly addressed the West to say, "Like it or not, Russia is enlarging!" The rest of the clip should give you a general idea as to the mood in the studio. pic.twitter.com/EcBxhEabS0

— Julia Davis (@JuliaDavisNews) January 2, 2023

All the deluded fools who supported and apologised for this, from Galloway to Farage, saying we shouldn’t poke the Russian bear just look like idiots. We apparently poked the Russian bear and it crumbled under the threat of a united smaller nation. Now they’re trying to scramble for some legitimacy while they bomb civilians to oblivion and massacre those on the ground. The propaganda war has truly been lost by the man some tried to make out was some astounding PR genius, adept at social media manipulation.

[Siderite]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64127827

Some context about Santos.

[Siderite]

Oh give over. I may disagree with JI, but this sarcastic sniping at him is tedious. I can find common ground in humanity with those I disagree with. I try to separate the view from the human as much as I can, and in context. I am not finding common ground with Trump’s neo-Nazi buddies like Fuentes.

[Siderite]

Putin and the moronic Republicans who continue to yap about election rigging and demonstrate their opposition to democracy.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66

[Siderite]

Just Iron wrote:

Interesting perspectives. I’m enjoying reading this thread. Alot of sense there NI. Bucks seems to feature quite alot so I would add a further couple of comments. Firstly IA I don’t think he needs medical help. The old ‘keep taking the tablets’ approach can lighten the mood at times but if it becomes a ‘go to’ strategy it contributes to that dynamic which leads to fewer and fewer posters. Secondly, and probably more provocatively, I don’t think that Bucks does get a fair crack of the whip on many occasions. His style isn’t mine by any means. I think it takes a fair amount of goodwill and self discipline to explore a topic with someone who presents as he does, especially if we sit on the other side of the debate. I frequently see an over eagerness to dismiss what Bucks is saying just because it’s him and not on the merits of what he is offering. A bit more reflection on this and the umber of contributors might increase.

I don’t think you can blame people entirely for not going along with Bucks when you acknowledge his debating tactics are easily aggravating. Personally, I have got a bit fed up of being straw manned, especially when he accuses others of treating others badly. I know I have room to improve, but I try and reflect on how I have engaged and improve for next time in any discussion. I think Bucks should pay attention to your comments, but he’d probably see that as a personal attack.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Just Iron

[Siderite]

I don’t think voting Tory is a sufficient reason to call someone evil. Though, of course you should ne able to air your view.

[Siderite]

I think it’s like the twitter pile on effect. Bucks is forthright in his views and many disagree. Those who disagree often signal their disagreement, which makes it look like people ganging up on him. Throw in the odd joke and mixed in comment which goes too far and it does appear like targeting.

It’s a fine line. We all know what people find irritating about him, and I have pointed it out through frustration and trying to make him see how his behaviours appear to others, from my point of view, in a futile attempt to create a reset. I won’t pretend that I haven’t ever overstepped the mark myself when responding. However, I try to be civil, at least before I get fed up of being misrepresented and made to be a stereotype. Also, when I have made small jokes referencing him it’s not really meant maliciously. I hope Bucks can see that, and I am more than happy to laugh at myself, so long as it’s not meant in spite.

I am aware that I am an opinionated bugger and like all opinionated buggers, we need our soapbox kicking from underneath our feet occasionally. :-)

[Siderite]

You did stumble on to non-football, to be fair, so I don’t know why you’d expect footy chat on this. Be warned: we’re all freaks here. :-)

3 users thanked author for this post.

TwoWrights, Iron-awe, Just Iron

[Siderite]

He’s a good orator and I am not against his union work.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron

[Siderite]

billpuntonsghost wrote:

NI- when you posted “ isn’t that what your Jesus preached”? ,my reply was spot on.
It was an idiotic reply-even (as you do)declare the Bible is a “ fairy story” ,even an atheist would laugh .

It was obviously a reference to Jesus’s teachings on wealth. Anyway, it’s all superfluous. Your objection to Zelensky on this is nonsense. The Ukrainians will have nothing if they surrender to Russia, as you are so ambivalent about, and your ‘superior’ Christian moral code you tell us atheists is meaningless without God hasn’t exactly led you to what I and many see as a moral position. To be actively ambivalent to mass murder of civilians is ghoulish.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66, Heath, TwoWrights

[Siderite]

64 wrote:

,never said he was Bucks.I’d not insult him in that way. he’s not an extremist which is what that link says to be hard is.

His views on Ukraine and Putin are typical of that of the hard left, as are his views on socialism. He may not be an extremist in the mould of Lenin, but he’s hardly some milquetoast centre-lefty.

[Siderite]

Mick Lynch is hardly a centrist, no matter what you think of him.

[Siderite]

Only a few months ago he was floating the idea of same sex civil partnerships. He will need to be true to his word for respect, but hardly the actions of some villain as portrayed.

When looking for men of the year we won’t find squeaky clean figures. As alluded to, Lynch accused Ukraine of provoking Russia and making Nazi implications, which is Kremlin drivel. It shouldn’t totally detract from his union work, but if we’re criticising Zelensky’s suggestion for his faults, we should with Lynch.

However, I would say Zelensky wins, because being the figure for democracy and and sovereignty against a fascist and murderous invader is something.

[Siderite]

As opposed to yhe saintly Mick Lynch who has apologised for Russia?

I am not interested in such ridiculous statements. Zelensky has stood up bravely for his nation’s sovereignty and democracy. Is he perfect? No, but it deserves recognition for its mean8ng and rightness.

[Siderite]

You do realise most Ukrainians supported him before and even more so after the Russian invasion, so I imagine he acted perfectly in the knowledge they wanted him to act as he did. But, hey, who is Zelensky to say? There’s a guy from the UK who has never met a Ukrainian in his life to speak for their best interests. Which is seemingly to accept being killed by a state murdering them in massacres and mass bombings.

Hilarious how you then claim to be a moral authority and moan about chaos and misery when you are clearly ambivalent to the chaos and misery of Ukrainians and see the person standing up against this as the bad guy.

[Siderite]

Deereyme66 wrote:

‘Ah yes, a joke. Hilarious. Just how crass can you get.’

Satire, and pretty good in the first and later case. IMO.

I hope Bucks doesn’t watch the TV. There are plenty of shows which have poked fun at politicians since time immemorial.

I’d say that poking fun at politicians is something we should be proud of, whether we find the joke on point or funny or not. Rather that than cultures which cannot poke fun at authority and tend to be controlling in nature.

3 users thanked author for this post.

TwoWrights, Heath, Northumbiron

[Siderite]

Aye, being slaughtered by the Russians is a better position.

Have you not considered what the Ukrainians think or do you claim to speak for them?

[Siderite]

Zelensky.

[Siderite]

Bucksiron wrote:

Siderite, I’ve said many times that the Tories are to blame for lots of things and I’ve also accepted that Brexit has caused problems, to you as well as others, so please don’t make claims that are not true.

Well, maybe don’t have a go at other for daring to criticise the Tories then? You became irate at what was a joke, but what you thought of as critique, aimed at the Tories and homelessness. If you’re going to repeatedly get irritated at people for doing such it’s going to leave the impression you don’t like it when people criticise the Tories and it doesn’t suit your narrative.

I am making no statement on who ends up homeless or how easy it is, but he fact is that it was the Tories who brought in no fault evictions, rough sleeping has increased by 169% since 2010 and this is on the Tories’ watch.

Does this mean I think Labour are perfect? Of course not. They didn’t exactly get rid of no fault evictions last time. However, Labour’s inadequacies are not an excuse for the Tories’ own inadequacies and worsening of the situation. Changes in the laws on affordable rent, freezing of benefits etc seen under the Tories has led to more and more homeless. It would be foolish to think Labour couldn’t make mistakes or would magically do everything perfectly, but saying they would not do any better gives a crucial detail away. It shows that there is no defence for actual Tory handlings of homelessness if all you have is this. Moreover, it shows that it’s not preposterous to criticise the Tories for this issue.

The constant deflection to Labour may seem like a handy debating tactic, but all it does is show the vacuity of the defence.

[Siderite]

These men prey on the vulnerability some young men face today, saying they can cure it through acting like a domineering and aggressive alpha male who cares for no-one else. It gives some men the impression that they are confident and strong if they act like this, and the promised allure of being attractive to women helps those who see themselves as losers.

This is not a healthy vision, given the negative nature of those with that mindset. It has a horrible viewpoint of women and encourages a lack of empathy. However, I think it has an allure because of its promises to make men feel happy and strong, even if that means being cruel, arrogant and bullying towards others.

[Siderite]

God forbid a PM act as a statesman. Interacting with other nations and trying to forge relations is part of the job.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Heath

[Siderite]

I think he’s saying it’s whataboutery because he thinks you’re using it to deflect from Russian sympathies from other left leaning figures more to your worldview (not saying you are like this here).

Personally, I don’t find this to be damning of Blair. This was 2001 when Putin was more unknown, his problems not yet as evident, so I don’t blame him so much in trying to cause some reconciliation between nations at the time. The issue is among those who have continued to apologise and excuse after Putin’s intransigent hostility became more evident.

I find more to blame in Blair for his palling with corrupt and authoritarian regimes since PM (e.g. Egypt) than this for similar reasons. These countries have exposed their inadequacy now and he has no problem with it.

[Siderite]

I don’t see the whataboutery?

[Siderite]

A lot of people foolishly thought we could deal with Russia on a diplomatic basis back then. It was wrong, but this was before the worst of Putin was known. Some have stalled in treating them as hostile even now.

[Siderite]

Bucksiron wrote:

Of course, when Sir Keir’s PM there won’t be any homeless people.

Just how ridiculous can you get. It’s all so easy for the left. Just blame the Tories for everything. Or just blame Brexit. It’s about the only thing you lot seem capable of doing.

If the left were as good at solving problems as they are at criticising others for them, fine, but they’re not. In fact Labour’s just as useless as the Tories, as I’ve no doubt we’ll be discovering.

Whereas all you sem capable of doing is make out the Tories and Brexit are at fault for nothing when someone else criticises them.

12 years of Tory rule and we are supposed to believe that the Tories have nothing to do with homelessness under their watch. In fact suggesting so is preposterous and blam8ng them for anything.

And, no, I am not saying homelessness would be eradicated under any other party. However, it is demonstrably worse now than under the last Labour government (but I am sure it’s someone else’s fault – it always is). Somehow, despite being just as useless, Labour didn’t seem to cause such a homelessness issue.

Oh, and you missed the point of the OP.

[Siderite]

Deereyme66 wrote:

And now you’re complaining frequently about it causing you problems???

Surely it’s not remiss of someone to realise they were wrong? We should welcome people changing minds rather than stubbornly cling to what is seen as a wrong viewpoint. Otherwise we can’t make the best of whatever situation we face and we’re left with intransigence on important issues.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Iron-awe

[Siderite]

He did do a thread where he said he had some regrets because of how it panned out.

[Siderite]

I see someone else is trying a different kind of fishing.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Iron-awe, TwoWrights, Northumbiron, Deereyme66

[Siderite]

Bucksiron wrote:

“And, no one on here has ever said Labour would never do anything bad. Talk about gaslighting – a perfect example! Is this the dark art of PR at play?”

Indeed, Deerey, nobody on here has EVER said Labour would never do anything bad. You all just keep completely quiet about Labour’s faults.

This is all getting a bit ‘look at yourself in the mirror’. Despite your self-righteousness, you’re no better.

This is why I hate constant dismissals of criticism because ‘the other side does it too’. The truth is that the hypocrisy you point out has been evident with you as well.

[Siderite]

I think it’s obvious what the intention of the question is and it’s you skirting it.

[Author]

Posts