So let's be right.....your rebuttal to 'Russian misinformation', is to link to the Ukrainian security services....the very people who put the guy in prison.....as evidence of the truth.

Are you for real mate? Please tell me how that is an independent viewpoint?

I'll wait.

So again, let's get this right. Ukraine....a country that is presented as a democracy (which suspends elections) and as a country to stand behind morally is a country that arrests and throws people in prison for spreading 'wrong opinions'.

I didn't agree with some of what Lira said and agreed with other opinions. Regardless, I probably don't agree with you on much but that doesn't mean I'd arrest you.

Lira did not broadcast in Ukrainian, he spoke in English and it can't be claimed that his opposition to the Ukrainian regime was even intended for a Ukrainian audience.

You state he is a criminal yet the only thing that has been proven is that he gives the 'wrong opinions' for the Ukrainian government.

Ukraine have the right to arrest him....I'll agree to that, however according to Lira he has been stolen from and was beaten up. Until he escaped he wasn't given a voice and now they won't allow access. The right thing for Ukraine to have done would have been to deport him. Now plenty of people fear for this guy's life or that he's going to be maimed in there....All while you think everything is nice and proper.

Tucker has every right to raise the case of Lira, not only due to the free speech aspect in a country that is taking treasure from the US taxpayer but for the sheer double standards on display here.

The Biden administration moved heaven and earth to release an American basketball player yet when it comes to Lira they do their best to avoid any publicity.

Again, all based on his 'opinions'.

I watched plenty of Lira videos when he was putting them out. I bet you didn't. You're the kind of guy who seems to take what the SBU says as gospel......Even though they have been shown lying on numerous occasions during this war.

Edited by Stirlingsays (13 Dec 2023 6.14pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

On this question of 'international laws' (something that even itself is a disputed term).

You seem to be under the belief that Ukrainian laws aren't negotiable, when they regularly pass laws subject to pressure (only the other week on corruption after pressure from US/EU) or that they are reasonable in a situation where Ukraine is being presented as a democracy and as worthy of financial and moral support for its war aims.

Need I remind you that, back in the real world, the Americans have just put Zelensky under significant pressure to have elections this coming year and it was only the other week that he dismissed this pressure and refused elections.....different camps are already lined up in Ukraine against Zelensky.

Let me remind you...or tell you because you probably didn't know that South Vietnam had elections during the Vietnam war.....Both Afghanistan and Iraq had elections during its war with the Taliban and ISIS respectively....A war that Afghanistan eventually lost as we know.

So this 'martial law' is an excuse for essentially allowing the government to do whatever it wants......Hamas used it to suspend elections after 2004. So excuse me if I don't accept the point.

So if I don't answer every single point you make in long posts I avoiding in some way? Paranoid much? Dude, I'm not a professional activist paid to answer every single point someone makes. Rest assured I'm not avoiding a point. If you want a specific point answered just make it clear without it being buried within many more points.

To answer your blitz point, sure someone has the right to argue against a government during war....As I stated, countries have held elections during war times....Something you seem to have not known.

If disagreement is allowed at the highest levels of government how democratic is it to ban it lower down. As stated Lira was not broadcasting in Ukrainian or indeed Russian. I remember my Grandfather who fought in WW2 and certainly had many criticisms as I'm sure many did.

Unlike WW2 the Ukraine war emerged out of a civil war where a significant body of Ukraine's east and south wanted to secede and were prepared to fight their own government to do it. So this idea that Lira wasn't representing a significant body of opinion even in the country itself doesn't hold water.

However, I agree that Ukraine had the right to deport a fifth columnist.

Ukraine have the right to deport Lira....something I would suggest would have been far more sensible but whatever. However, they didn't decide on that and as I have said, there are significant concerns for his safety and treatment since the Ukraine have not been allowing access.

I've answered the point on elections in countries during wars....you didn't seem to know.

However, I certainly agree that Ukraine is a flawed democracy and in fact is one of the most corrupt countries in the world. One that before this war was subject to many articles criticising it.

A law that basically gives the Ukraine the right to do just about anything it wants....yeah ok, but please don't talk to me about democracy in Ukraine....Anyone can actually use the word 'democracy', but the proof is in the eating.

Again, Lira was representing a body of opinion that a significant number of Ukrainians also think....The whole reason the war exists in fact is down to the fact the country is divided. Lira's chose to stay in 'democratic Ukraine' and now suffering his decision to do that.

I don't know how true or not that is but I'm not here claiming that Lira is some stand up guy. As I previously said I disagreed with him on things he said about this war and also with many other things he's said and done....That's not my point.

You have an issue with the word 'escape'? I think I've answered this point on what Ukraine have a right to do....Yes, they have that right. What I'm concerned about is what happens after that....and we differ on what you seem to think of as serious crimes. But deportation was certainly appropriate.....However, Lira said he had been stolen from and beaten up and they want to kill him....So I regard concern for him also to be appropriate.

He hasn't lived in Chile nor paid tax there for a long time I think and his family are in America as seen with his father talking to Carlson. However, Chile have enquired about him, according to Lira's own statement when he posted a video on bail....something that no doubt broke one of those laws you defend so much.

I certainly hope you're right about deportation. Personally I think it more like to come about via pressure of bad publicity rather than some fairness which you seem to think exists.

You aren't required to agree with someone's opinions to think they have a right to say them.

Edited by Stirlingsays (14 Dec 2023 9.17am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Excellent posts

Indeed - get ready for a triple down!

Not really no. Your original post is a share of Tucker raising Lira's 'plight'. I have pointed out numerous times there is nothing abnormal about what is happening to him. Your reply has always been to suggest that what Ukraine has done with regards to it's law keeping has always been abnormal and thus seemingly less legitimate.

I've continously pushed back on this and explained why you are incorrect stating that it's not up to foriegn national to judge how legitimate rules are and imply if they should or should not be followed when living in a country which at this time is in very bad way. He violated a very clear law, he is being punished for it. The information shared by Tucker and yourself is just whole sale incorrect as is your defence why actually 'it shouldn't matter'.

To reiterate and to get back on point. Zelensky is the president of Ukraine, he has an obligation to do whatever he can to preserve the soverign integrity of this nation, he the price tag of survival is passing token anti corruption laws, there is no real loser here. Corruption is bad, we can all agree on that. Sniping at Ukraine passing said laws is as opportunistic as it is bizarre given the situation facing his country.

You also dishonestly imply that Ukraine actually has a choice in ending the war. This is what I refer to as the peacenik argument where responsibility for ending the war lies only with Ukraine appeasing a nazi dictatorship (remember when we tried that last time), and not with Russia upholding its international obligations (UN charter in 45, Helsinki Accords 75) and just leaving Ukraine.

Lets assume for a moment that Ukraine did make appeasements, what guarantuee do we have that Russia would uphold the agreement given they have broken x3 agreements on Ukraine already (Budapest, Minsk and Minsk II)?

We did fund the Soviets. They thanked us by claiming they won WW2 single handley. Should we have withheld support then?

[Link]

This is respectfully, changing the argument... something you claim I am doing and you are not?

As stated, currently Lira is in custody awaiting trial for a very clear cut crime. The penalty may well just be deportation hence the lack of public concern from the US and Chile at this stage.

Respectfully, no I am not. I am directly applying your line of 'Ukraine has no legitimacy because these countries did what basically no one else did and have elections during wartime'. you refferred to an election where the incumbant got 100% of the vote and another where the election only actually took place in a minority of the country.

Elections happen when they are constituionally obligated to happen. As Ukraine like many other countries at war is in Martial law, elections don't need to happen and as I posed the question, would not really tick your legitmacy box anyway even if they did.

The only time an election which you would consider to be 'legit' has been held during actual war time has been held would probably be 1944 in the US. Odd how the Japanese American's were not able to vote and that the NSDAP didn't front a candidate no? seems very unfair to me!

To reiterate, banning parties which literally call for the capitulation of your country to this is not a bad thing, it never has been interntionally via convention its only now it suddenly seems to have been because Daddy Putin says so?

[Tweet Link]

Not when they turn their businesses into Russia propaganda outlets as pretend to be experts in their field. Then convince rational people of an irrational view.

It's not really a strawman when your reply to a like for like crime i.e.'denying the blitz and telling the world we deserved it would not have been accepted in a democratic country such as the UK' is to say. 'My grandad criticed the war a lot'. Sure... but its not a like for like. Thats my point.

I'm going to stick my neck out here and call the bluff on this one.

Using the traditional vatnik vocabulary such as 'coup' and 'civil war' when these have long been debunked doesn't bode well for a accurate poll being present anywhere on this thread. No I'm not going through 435 pages, niether would you... IF you want to link me to it, you can, until then. Respectfully I will assume no such evidence exists.

What is certain however is that the regions you claim are vastly pro russian voted overwelmingly for Ukrainian independance in 1991. But I guess this is no longer valid... something something CIA / NATO expansion if we were to read off the same vocab sheet displayed in rebuttle so far.

[Link]

Russia the so called savior of Ukraine has actually consistantly had a higher corruption index since the Putin years. Oddly, Ukrainian corruption has only has only ever been a focus for government action since 2014 while Russia's levels of corruption have just spiralled.

Still... Ukraine bad right?

Good, you must be appalled at what Putin has done to Russia then? Surely its in no fit state to run Ukraine given its now a one party state comparable to North Korea.

No... Russia has destroyed Ukraine through an act of colonial agreesion in violation of its international agreements (see above) and international norms which now dont apply to it because Russia said so.

Lira has told alot of fibs, ever heard of the boy who cried wolf? This is why no one in a position of responsibility will take him seriously given the current level of 'evidence' on display. Still, Tucker is a good guy right? I'm sure he will also happily investigate whether the false flag reasons for Russia to invade Ukraine actually check out... to show he isnt just spreading discord. oh.

No you didn't you essentially said he made a video which resulted in him having his bail recinded. Again not trye. He literally tried to flee the country.

[Link]

That is why he was rearrested... focus this please, on your response.

Again? You are better than this im sure? No of course not. We speak for everyone under the due process of law, which is what he is being held in violation to. What we don't do is take at face value a get a guy who has a previous for just making stuff up (tucker) to just post fake news as to the reasoning of his arrest, then ignore the reply from the Ukrainians, something you keep doing with the 'wrong opinions' line. How many more times must I state the specific violation? its nothing to do with 'wrong opinions' or anything mentioned in your origin post, he has quite literally denied a very serious warcrime and then victim blamed the community. How is this okay when it wouldn't be in any other democratic country as previously pointed out?

Edited by snytaxx (14 Dec 2023 12.18pm)

Edited by snytaxx (14 Dec 2023 12.19pm)

'Not really no'? Really? So in your mind one of the most corrupt countries in the world and one subject to much criticism before this war in the west can't be legitimately criticised for how it handles free speech and how it treats those it detains? Well I disagree....especially when we are being encouraged to view the Ukrainian entity as 'us' against Russia.

As for your contention that someone shouldn't be allowed to speak against a war or a government when at war...Well, pray tell me, how are people meant to form an opposition to what a government is doing if they can't do this.

So does this mean you agree with Russia closing down all opposition or contention against the war as well then? Because I've also criticised that.....but seemingly for you once a government decides to go to war everyone has to shut up and support it.

Would this not be a double standard?

The point I was making here on Ukraine's law making was in response to your suggestion that Ukraine is the sovereign country, your implication being that it's independent. When the reality is that it very much isn't and in fact is now a US client state.

That's the reality.

The corruption in Ukraine is very relevant considering the massive amount of money and weaponry that's been pumped into that country. Both of those decisions can have negative consequences for us.

Hundreds of thousands of people are now in the ground because the opportunity to negotiate in March 21 was rejected. The reasons given are very much what you state here. We disagree on your characterisation but this thread has covered that ground many times. However in terms of what happens going forward I'll say this.

What you need to come to terms with....because you don't seem to have. Is that Ukraine isn't going to win this war. It's not going to get those areas back and will probably lose more the longer the war continues....simply because it doesn't have the population size for an attritional war.

So what you can be certain of is that the war ends in negotiation at some point. The only thing up for discussion is how bad it's going to be for Ukraine.

As for guarantees once a negotiation is reached, I'm genuinely surprised you don't know....Aren't you aware of previous situations like this in Korea for example. You have a demilitarised zone and beyond those areas you build up military.

If Europe was genuinely worried that Russia was going to attack Nato countries then you would have seen defence spending spike to war levels 18 months ago. You need to see beyond the propaganda to observe what countries actually do.

Yes, we did fund the Soviets back in WW2. Out of two genocidal fruitcakes we picked Stalin instead of Hitler and then spent thirty years on the edge of destruction....only to end up back to square one now....but that's for another thread.

Regardless, the Soviets did most of the heavy lifting in WW2, it's not even a question. The Soviets killed four out of every five German military to die.

The British lost half a million in WW2.....everyone of them a hero that deserves the honour we give them every year.

Russia lost way over six million military and around an estimated 20 million civilians.

So while the topic of WW2 isn't really related to this, I'd say the actual history is quite clear on the matter.

Is it really? Your post contained personal attacks on Lira's character....some of which are valid perhaps and others less so. However, frankly whether you like Lira or not isn't the point.

They certainly had the right to deport a fifth columnist. I fully agree. However, he should not be harmed nor stolen from and I certainly hope you are right that he will be deported but as of yet it's only people like Carlson even raising this.....which you criticise I might add, but I regard as doing god's work.

I've already answered this point so we will have to respectfully disagree. I mean I don't doubt that elections in these countries are suspect. However, dubious going on happen just as much in peace time and in many countries. Were the elections in Afghanistan a problem? I didn't hear these problems when the result was what we wanted.

If you dig enough you will find contentions in every election....Even in the main backer for this war itself the US.

Yep, as I said, Hamas could state the very same thing.

The Americans treatment of Japanese Americans in WW2 has been much criticised.

Banning opposition parties who regard Ukraine's war strategy as the wrong path isn't 'capitulation' if it results in less Ukrainians dead and more land than it ends up with continuing with the war. At some point reality takes over from 'magical thinking'.

Again, you seem to be under the impression that Ukraine continuing in the war is going to result in a better outcome. I suggest that you actually look at what's happening both on the battlefield and in political attitudes towards the war.

I'll also make the same point as before. If you agree that parties in opposition to continuing the war should be banned you also have to agree that Putin is also entitled to do the same thing in Russia.

Otherwise it's a double standard.

For me, I agree with you that fifth columnists, while not harmed, shouldn't be tolerated in countries at war. They should be deported if foreign. However, that is not the same as having a different opinion on what's best for the country in a war. Churchill for example, did not arrest Halifax or ban him from his cabinet for wanting to negotiate with Hitler.

In terms of Lira operating as a fifth columnist in Ukraine I would agree with you. Whether he's a dating coach or we approve of how he legally makes money...it's find to criticise that but it shouldn't influence what happens to him.

Lets be clear, I am calling out the motivation of Tucker on this one. Coupled with lazy journalism and at best and down right lies at worst.

I've explained to you time and time again as to why Lira is in custody but the truth is clear that I feel you dont actually want an answer, or the truth, you just need to get out a 'Ukraine bad' jibe because thats the hill you have chosen to die on. Proof of this? You continously use the loaded term 'regime' in your posts to refer to a government elected through one of the free'est and fairest elections in Ukrainian history (though still far from perfect to be fair hence the flawed democracy category). Only someone with a pro russian motivation would use this term to describe the authorities in a country making tangible attempts to become less corrupt and move to a western social democracy.

There you go again. "Hey everyone let me share this tweet which contains a video blog alledging (without evidence) how i've been mistreated"

(the next sentance)

"if only we had his side of the story"

This is another classic case of accuse, deflect, accuse. At no point are you interested in actually reading about a reasonable explanation about Lira's arrest because its doesn't serve the purpose of your arguement which is 'Ukraine bad'.

You can't have this both ways. Ukraine needs help, when a country or party or any one really needs help, their bargaining power diminishes pick any war where a country has asked for assistance. Has their bargaining power not been diminished? Have they not made concessions to preserve their sovereignty. Ukraine is asking for help, the the Republicans have drunk the Russian Koolaid and start churping out the tradional buzzwords like 'corruption, accountability' not actually caring if they are true or not. Okay how does Zelensky alay these 'concerns' - a bill tightening up the rules to help further reduce corruption. This denies the Russian attack line so it needs to change because remember. 'Ukraine bad'. What else can be used, oh why no "CLIENT STATE! PUPPET GOVERNMENT! WEAK!"

Lets apply the same logic to Ukraine pre 2014, Russia insisted Ukraine not strengthen its ties with the EU back late 2013 as a condition for a better trade deal. Are you saying Ukraine was a Russian puppet prior to 2014? of course not. Like seriously wow!

Am I arguing that Ukraine has no corruption? Of course it does, so does the UK, every country does. But to genuinely suggest that the negative effects of providing Ukraine with arms to defend itself is worse than letting Putin win and the literal genocide that will occur (evidence in previous post) is either incredibly ignorant or outright malign. I would strongly urge a step back approach because i'm certain you are not either of those things.

No they are in the ground because Russia commited an act of colonial agresssion. Stop breezing past this point. Russia invaded a sovereign nation violating its UN charter , Helsinki Accords, Budapest Memorandum, Friendship treaty, Minsk 1 and Minsk 2 obligations. To release Russia of these obligations is just okaying the illegality of this war.

Stop here. Why not? It has taken back half the territory captured by Russian since 2022 (odd you didn't seem to bring that up) What you are confused about is Ukraines potential capability with adequate western support vs your actual motivations. I.e. you don't actually want Ukraine to win, but you cant say this publically thats how we have ended up in this denialist 'it can't win'.

No matter how many Ukrainian victories or Russian setbacks, any detailed explanation of Ukrainian war goals will ever convince you of this because it doesn't fit with the motivation. So I guess I will hold off unless invited to elaborate on this further.

This tallies nicely with my point above. You've bought the line that only Russia can win despite clear evidence to the opposite. The issue is in old reality here, Russian victory actually looks quite unachievable, Putin knows this so the line 'there needs to be an agreement' keeps flying around. What this means as dog whistled by yourself in previous posts is Ukraine needs to appease Russia, Russia needs to make no concesssions so Putin can claim he has won and isnt forced to admit to Russians just how badly he goofed up.

This doesnt give Kyiv any motivation to end the war because any concessions would only be to Russia's advantage and would result in more issues down the line once Putin violates he new treaty like he has done with all the others. Russia can't admit this though so it needs to make out it is the reasonable one hence generic statements such as "Ukraine is not serious" when in reality, anyone who has not drunk the Russian Koolaid is just waiting for Russia to concede something to make ending the war a possibility and for a tangible way to prevent Russia from breaking yet another treaty. which (segway into below)

Isnt this! None of the examples here would work. How do I know this, because none of them involve a UN security council member as a direct belligerant. Lets pretend you get your DMZ. Its even UN enforced - wonderful! Putin being true to form violates another treaty and invades again after rebuilding his forces. Who would enforce return to status quo, oh yeah - the UN! Lets have a quick UN security council vote on that. oh no! Russia veto'd it. Ah well... Perhaps Ukraine should 'get serious' and negiotiate with Russia.

It is pure cloud cuckoo land stuff.

Also, the physcial nature of DMZ is a kind of no mans land that is hard to cross, litered with defences and mines. Kind of like what we have had in the Donbas since 2014. Thank Christ that stopped Russia!

It has

[Link]

Really odd thing to say.

Ooops, we've gone full circle. For those who need context. We started off with the typical 'Ukraine bad line' which is "how can we support a country where an intelligence service suppresses people they dont like? Cut the aid!" to "Actually its okay when Russia does it because they didnt beg for aid" to "Well actually we had to give aid to a really evil regime because of a Nazi dictator threatening Europe so actually its fine to support countries who do this". nuts!

Still, lets use your arguement. Imagine if today we had a Nazi sucessor state on the edge of Europe which used protecting its ethnic people in other countries as an excuse to invade them, while citing the need to eradicate the culture of the local people in said countries as victory condition. Imagine if one country decided to put up a fight and offered to nullify that country as a global threat for ever for just 10% of military spending which we would have spent anyway... Thus solving the need to put your own troops on the ground and incur loses when that nazi state enboldened by its victories and diplomatic indecision thanks to our useful idiots enjoying our democratic freedoms in the west inciting decietful indecision decides to attack a country in a defensive alliance....

To recap the argument for everyone. The original point was 'why dont we investigate what has happened to Lira'.

Firstly, who says the US haven't (privately)?

Secondly my point that what Lira says is likely untrue, if he were in a court of law (which ironically he will be soon) and his defence was 'I can't get a fair trial, why wont you take me seriously'. Would a prosecuting body but be entitled to bring up his 'crying wolf' antics given he is a known liar and the fact that his 'cause' is being propgated by another well know individual with plenty of previous of being selective with the truth.

However in the court of public opinion, me now pointing this out is itself, super unfair and anything Lira says must be taken at face value because... you said so?

Agreed, but we don't have any evidence he has been harmed other than what Lira has said, or not been allowed to say (whichever it is today). We also have no idea if the US and Chilean governments have already enquired as to Mr. Lira's well being but don't want to publicise it. Remember it's your right to receive consular assistance, its not your right to have the government tell everyone about it.

Is it not rather telling that almost every credible journalist has chosen not to touch Mr. Lira's story (as if it almost didn't stand up to basic due dilligence) but Mr. Tucker, the well known bastion of 'doing things by the book' whose motivations are not suspect at all has chosen to speak out about Mr. Lira. Thank god he isnt part of the [insert conspiracy thoery in here] elite. A true asset to the proffession. Maybe next time he and his followers might be open to actually listening to the answer of a question they ask without just saying 'naw not true'. I don't hold my breath on it though.

Respectfully, you didn't you back pedalled and here is how.

The accusation went from "its so bad that Ukraine is falsely labelled as a democracy because if they were they would have elections"

to

"plenty of countries have elections in war time, here are two"

to

"okay the examples of countries who actually did do this had problems but all elections have issues".

Firstly This doesn't address a reasonable remedy to your original accusation, it only reinforces the fact that no matter what Ukraine does, no matter how pure its intentions, it will always be 'Ukraine bad - cut off the aid'.

This further exposes it as a fake attack line and one that only benefits the Kremlin by falsely undermining Ukraine.

Secondly its another case of Ukrainian exceptionalism, as in it doesnt matter no other country has managed to ever do what we are asking, they should still do it and aid should be withheld until they do it.

If you look at the election in Afganistan I already pointed out how its no comparible as they are very different wars, but also, the contest only occured in very specific parts of the country making it a poor reflection of democracy.

A better alternative would be to drive the Russian's out. Restore the rule of law and have UN administered elections throughout. Something tells me this will be 'un realistic' which is a code word for 'Russia wont like it'.

I'd just like to clarify that you arent comparing Hamas to the Ukrainian government because... just wow.

Plenty of countries have used Martial law to stiffle democracy, this is wrong, it has always been wrong, it will always be wrong. Martial law should only be used at critical times under a national constitution. A well known / internationally recognised and acceptable use of martial law would be when under immediate attack by a hostile power. Here is where your comparison falls down. Ukraine has been under sustained attached for almost 2 years now, that is when Martial law came into effect, not in the immediate aftermath of Zelensky's victory. Hamas was not under immediate threat in the aftermath of their victory. Infact they actually had mutually agreed treaty inplace protecting them from an Israeli incursion.

[Link]

It's only recently when you know... they went a massarced a bunch of people at a music festival have they actually use the same excuse.

[quote=Stirlingsays;3842132
Banning opposition parties who regard Ukraine's war strategy as the wrong path isn't 'capitulation' if he results in less Ukrainians dead and more land than it ends up with

Again, you seem to be under the impression that Ukraine continuing in the war is going to result in a better outcome. I suggest that you actually look at what's happening both on the battlefield and in political attitudes towards the war.

You didn't watch the video. I dont blame you, its truly awful stuff and the prospect of such as reality being placed on Ukraine is truly dreadful. I would urge you to revisit this because making this statement as it implies that what Russia has install for Ukraine should it achieve it's aims is absolutely dreadful. It is you in the state of deception, not I.

[quote=Stirlingsays;3842132
I'll also make the same point as before. If you agree that parties in opposition to continuing the war should be banned you also have to agree that Putin is also entitled to do the same thing in Russia.

Jesus wept - Russia is the agressor here. It's core territory is not really under threat from Ukraine. Infact more Russians have been killed by friendly fire / infighting that anything Ukraine has done. You also imply that Russia ever had free and fair elections.

These people would have loved to have run agains't Putin i'm sure

[Link]

[Link]

[Link]

The only opposition that has really existed in Russia prior to 2014 are people who argue that Putin needs to be more like Putin.

Everyone else is dead or in prison, they didn't just get banned from running. They got banned from living.

But wait for it. Ukraine bad right?

You love picking great examples. Read what happened to Halifax after Dunkirk. He was sacked as foreign minster and offered deputy pm which is a token post with no power. He refused and was sent to the US as the UK ambassador. This basically exiled him from UK politics and given the magnatude of the situation Britain was in. Churchill just bypassed him and would directly engage with Roosevelt. He never recovered politically after that.

This is yet more dreadful ignorance. I refer you to the above. Russia is now closer to NK in terms of its politics. Ukraine is no where close to being that bad.

I also urge you to refer to what the Kremlin TV are saying they plan to happen to Ukraine after final victory. Its truly horrifying stuff. (link in previous post).

Thats what is literally happening but what Carlson won't admit!

Farage while wrong about NATO can at least admit that what Russia is doing is awful.

[Tweet Link]

Anyway, I think I got all your points. My post will always be here should you wish to revisit these points.

Edited by snytaxx (15 Dec 2023 1.55pm)

Edited by snytaxx (15 Dec 2023 2.04pm)

Edited by snytaxx (15 Dec 2023 2.06pm)