RussiaGate

[rousseau]

I am not equivocating anything. But you are promoting this idea that if some country is less "good" than another then this another can use any means possible to bring the first one to the standards. Why not fucking nuke Russia? after all, they are worse than US?
Fact is, US has done much worse meddling in Russia and around than Russia (allegedly) did this time. And your "but we are good guys" simply are not working. You are losing any good will you ever had among russians. It's just stupid and short-sighted.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, you can ask Obama, he seemed under impression that Putin did in fact have support.

Well, we have to thank US for that. Putin does seem a bit paranoid about that. But in his defense, he saw what happens when US decides to do revolt. Now it is assumed any opposition is paid by State Department, and it's often true.

So that naturally leads me to the question of: if the Russian people so overwhelmingly support Putin, why is his government so dead-set on squashing dissent?

Because people have memory. They remember when they had president whom US liked and how it was back then. There was plenty of dissenting left and right, not much eating.

Which president are you referring to?

Eltsin.

Here's a genuine curiosity for you:

Do you think Russia would be better off if it was democratic? Or do you feel Putin's government is your only option? And if so, why?

 

[barbos]

I am not equivocating anything. But you are promoting this idea that if some country is less "good" than another then this another can use any means possible to bring the first one to the standards. Why not fucking nuke Russia? after all, they are worse than US?
Fact is, US has done much worse meddling in Russia and around than Russia (allegedly) did this time. And your "but we are good guys" simply are not working. You are losing any good will you ever had among russians. It's just stupid and short-sighted.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, you can ask Obama, he seemed under impression that Putin did in fact have support.

Well, we have to thank US for that. Putin does seem a bit paranoid about that. But in his defense, he saw what happens when US decides to do revolt. Now it is assumed any opposition is paid by State Department, and it's often true.

Because people have memory. They remember when they had president whom US liked and how it was back then. There was plenty of dissenting left and right, not much eating.

Which president are you referring to?

Eltsin.

Here's a genuine curiosity for you:

Do you think Russia would be better off if it was democratic? Or do you feel Putin's government is your only option? And if so, why?

That's a loaded question. It assumes that Russia is absolutely not democratic and US is absolutely democratic.

Not many people in Russia really doubt that democracy in theory is better system. But I think this democracy talk is a pretext for something else.
I have stated my theory many times. I think US sees Russia as a threat which needs to be eliminated. and democracy is a merely tool for that, not a goal.

 

[rousseau]

I am not equivocating anything. But you are promoting this idea that if some country is less "good" than another then this another can use any means possible to bring the first one to the standards. Why not fucking nuke Russia? after all, they are worse than US?
Fact is, US has done much worse meddling in Russia and around than Russia (allegedly) did this time. And your "but we are good guys" simply are not working. You are losing any good will you ever had among russians. It's just stupid and short-sighted.

- - - Updated - - -

Which president are you referring to?

Eltsin.

Here's a genuine curiosity for you:

Do you think Russia would be better off if it was democratic? Or do you feel Putin's government is your only option? And if so, why?

That's a loaded question. It assumes that Russia is absolutely not democratic and US is absolutely democratic.

Not many people in Russia really doubt that democracy in theory is better system. But I think this democracy talk is a pretext for something else.
I have stated my theory many times. I think US sees Russia as a threat which needs to be eliminated. and democracy is a merely tool for that, not a goal.

I'm not interested in the U.S.'s role in your country, just your view on the Russian government. What I'm picking up is that you don't like the U.S., but would also agree that things could be better domestically.

 

[barbos]

I am not equivocating anything. But you are promoting this idea that if some country is less "good" than another then this another can use any means possible to bring the first one to the standards. Why not fucking nuke Russia? after all, they are worse than US?
Fact is, US has done much worse meddling in Russia and around than Russia (allegedly) did this time. And your "but we are good guys" simply are not working. You are losing any good will you ever had among russians. It's just stupid and short-sighted.

- - - Updated - - -



Eltsin.

Here's a genuine curiosity for you:

Do you think Russia would be better off if it was democratic? Or do you feel Putin's government is your only option? And if so, why?

That's a loaded question. It assumes that Russia is absolutely not democratic and US is absolutely democratic.

Not many people in Russia really doubt that democracy in theory is better system. But I think this democracy talk is a pretext for something else.
I have stated my theory many times. I think US sees Russia as a threat which needs to be eliminated. and democracy is a merely tool for that, not a goal.

I'm not interested in the U.S.'s role in your country,

You can't separate it.

just your view on the Russian government. What I'm picking up is that you don't like the U.S., but would also agree that things could be better domestically.

This is stupid, I love US, it's just US foreign policy could be better. I mean overall US is the best country (domestically) Does not mean there are no objectionable BS in US.
As for russian government, fairly corrupt, incompetent (sometimes laughably stupid) and hopeless which moves in generally wrong direction, but I can see they are trying, they are truly trying. It's just environment is such that domestic issues became smaller compared to foreign crap. This US elections meddling if there was one was a mistake. But It's understandable mistake, US neocons has put everything on the policy of Russia harassment. And I even understand that too. It's pretty damn convenient and profitable to have evil Russia back. I have little doubt that when some american general talks trash about Russia he is really thinking about his retirement on LM board of directors or at least on some lecture tour.

 

[barbos]

Watch just the end of it if you can't stomach too much FoxNews.

 

[Patooka]

I agree with the sentiment i'm assuming you're implying. America had an election that was tampered with by a third party? Yeah, Nicaragua, Iran, Greece, Panama and a whole bunch of other countries sympathize. The sentiment that you are missing is that for the first time, a country has had its democratic process hijacked, and the head of state of that country doesn't give a fuck. Also, I don't think anyone is giving the US a pass on their history (with the exception of FNC of course); the contention is that it is not as pertinent as to what is happening right now.

 

[barbos]

I agree with the sentiment i'm assuming you're implying. America had an election that was tampered with by a third party? Yeah, Nicaragua, Iran, Greece, Panama and a whole bunch of other countries sympathize. The sentiment that you are missing is that for the first time, a country has had its democratic process hijacked, and the head of state of that country doesn't give a fuck. Also, I don't think anyone is giving the US a pass on their history (with the exception of FNC of course); the contention is that it is not as pertinent as to what is happening right now.

What do you mean for the first time? I understand election process is pretty high-jacked on it's own, by NRA, banksters and other interests group.

 

[Copernicus]

It is a straw man to claim that Russiagate depends on a pretense that the US government has never meddled in, or tried to overthrow, democratically elected governments in other countries. History is full of examples where it has done just that in more blatant ways than this latest meddling by Putin's intelligence services. It is also irrelevant that Russia invaded its neighbor, and that barbos appears to think this was somehow mitigated or justified by US support of anti-Yanukovych forces.

What is relevant to this thread is whether Russia did, in fact, directly interfere in the US election campaign in violation of US laws. If so, then Mueller's indictment of those Russians is important whether or not they are ever brought to justice. It should be part of the official record that they are charged for crimes they committed. Moreover, it is a crucial piece of the investigation into whether or not American citizens, particularly members of the Trump campaign, conspired to abet such criminal activity.

The fact that the CIA overthrew legitimate governments from Iran to Chile hisorically is deplorable, but it has no bearing on Russiagate. To argue it is relevant is to perpetrate a classic tu quoque fallacy.

 

[Opoponax]

It is a straw man to claim that Russiagate depends on a pretense that the US government has never meddled in, or tried to overthrow, democratically elected governments in other countries. History is full of examples where it has done just that in more blatant ways than this latest meddling by Putin's intelligence services. It is also irrelevant that Russia invaded its neighbor, and that barbos appears to think this was somehow mitigated or justified by US support of anti-Yanukovych forces.

What is relevant to this thread is whether Russia did, in fact, directly interfere in the US election campaign in violation of US laws. If so, then Mueller's indictment of those Russians is important whether or not they are ever brought to justice. It should be part of the official record that they are charged for crimes they committed. Moreover, it is a crucial piece of the investigation into whether or not American citizens, particularly members of the Trump campaign, conspired to abet such criminal activity.

The fact that the CIA overthrew legitimate governments from Iran to Chile hisorically is deplorable, but it has no bearing on Russiagate. To argue it is relevant is to perpetrate a classic tu quoque fallacy.

Exactly. Or to put in more plain terms, it's another form of Whataboutism. As if a nation, because it's done wrong things, has no right to defend itself when attacked. If one is so concerned about America's past wrongs, then they should start their own thread about it.

 

[barbos]

It is a straw man to claim that Russiagate depends on a pretense that the US government has never meddled in, or tried to overthrow, democratically elected governments in other countries. History is full of examples where it has done just that in more blatant ways than this latest meddling by Putin's intelligence services. It is also irrelevant that Russia invaded its neighbor, and that barbos appears to think this was somehow mitigated or justified by US support of anti-Yanukovych forces.

What is relevant to this thread is whether Russia did, in fact, directly interfere in the US election campaign in violation of US laws. If so, then Mueller's indictment of those Russians is important whether or not they are ever brought to justice. It should be part of the official record that they are charged for crimes they committed. Moreover, it is a crucial piece of the investigation into whether or not American citizens, particularly members of the Trump campaign, conspired to abet such criminal activity.

The fact that the CIA overthrew legitimate governments from Iran to Chile hisorically is deplorable, but it has no bearing on Russiagate. To argue it is relevant is to perpetrate a classic tu quoque fallacy.

tu quoque fallacy is abused too often, we need to make a fallacy about that.

I don't know what specific laws Russia had regarding foreign meddling in russian elections. But you do realize that assuming they were similar to ones in US Russia would have to arrest Bill Clinton and throw him in prison? not to mention bunch of ordinary americans.

In any case, I am not concerned with legal aspects of that. My concerns are about politics and US are losing politically when they try to act as if rules do not apply to them because they are good guys, this approach will always fail.

 

[barbos]

Exactly. Or to put in more plain terms, it's another form of Whataboutism.

You honestly think that if you name a thing then problem will disappear? "Whataboutism" is extremely successful tactics which US have never been able to counteract. This suggests to me that deep down you understand you are wrong. Moreover, US use it too.

As if a nation, because it's done wrong things, has no right to defend itself when attacked. If one is so concerned about America's past wrongs, then they should start their own thread about it.

Yes, Russia has a right to defend themselves. Oh wait, you are good guys, damn!!!

 

[Opoponax]

Exactly. Or to put in more plain terms, it's another form of Whataboutism.

You honestly think that if you name a thing then problem will disappear? "Whataboutism" is extremely successful tactics which US have never been able to counteract. This suggests to me that deep down you understand you are wrong. Moreover, US use it too.

As if a nation, because it's done wrong things, has no right to defend itself when attacked. If one is so concerned about America's past wrongs, then they should start their own thread about it.

Yes, Russia has a right to defend themselves. Oh wait, you are good guys, damn!!!

If one is so concerned about America's past wrongs, then they should start their own thread about it.

 

[Ford]

You honestly think that if you name a thing then problem will disappear? "Whataboutism" is extremely successful tactics which US have never been able to counteract. This suggests to me that deep down you understand you are wrong. Moreover, US use it too.

Yes, Russia has a right to defend themselves. Oh wait, you are good guys, damn!!!

If one is so concerned about America's past wrongs, then they should start their own thread about it.

He's not. He's just following the "Putin's Helpful Hints For Russian Propaganda Playbook." When pressed, turn it around and criticize the US.

 

[Keith&Co.]

You honestly think that if you name a thing then problem will disappear? "Whataboutism" is extremely successful tactics which US have never been able to counteract.

If one is so concerned about America's past wrongs, then they should start their own thread about it.

Naming it is not an attempt to make it 'disappear.' It's just identifying a derail.
And derails only work if the other people allow you to derail. To chase the whatabout down the rabbit hole.

It's quite simple to counteract the tactic, and the 'elsewhere' forum is exactly how it's done.

 

[barbos]

You honestly think that if you name a thing then problem will disappear? "Whataboutism" is extremely successful tactics which US have never been able to counteract. This suggests to me that deep down you understand you are wrong. Moreover, US use it too.

Yes, Russia has a right to defend themselves. Oh wait, you are good guys, damn!!!

If one is so concerned about America's past wrongs, then they should start their own thread about it.

He's not. He's just following the "Putin's Helpful Hints For Russian Propaganda Playbook." When pressed, turn it around and criticize the US.

And what playbook do you use? The one which says "When you lose an argument, turn around and attack the messenger" ?

 

[barbos]

You honestly think that if you name a thing then problem will disappear? "Whataboutism" is extremely successful tactics which US have never been able to counteract.

If one is so concerned about America's past wrongs, then they should start their own thread about it.

Naming it is not an attempt to make it 'disappear.' It's just identifying a derail.
And derails only work if the other people allow you to derail. To chase the whatabout down the rabbit hole.

It's quite simple to counteract the tactic, and the 'elsewhere' forum is exactly how it's done.

Yes, calling it a derail once you lost an argument is another tactic one can employ.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Hi barbos. No, the US shouldnt exert undue influence over other countries. They should not generallu bribe or overthrow democratically elected officials.

Now that your derail is directly addressed, let's keep to the purpose of this thread which is Trump campaign scandal ala Russian contact, influence and/or intentions.

Thank you.

 

[barbos]

Hi barbos. No, the US shouldnt exert undue influence over other countries. They should not generally bribe or overthrow democratically elected officials.

Generally? what do you mean here?

Now that your derail is directly addressed, let's keep to the purpose of this thread which is Trump campaign scandal ala Russian contact, influence and/or intentions.

It's not addressed, not until US admits that and then stops doing that. Also despite loud protests my point was not really "You do it too" My point was "you lie about your reasons for doing it" So you have to admit the actual reason for trying to undermine Russia and then of course stop doing it and actually accept that Russia can have nukes and defense forces in general.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Hi barbos. No, the US shouldnt exert undue influence over other countries. They should not generally bribe or overthrow democratically elected officials.

Generally? what do you mean here?

By "generally" I left open a vague possibility of something else such as a Hitler-like scenario. I now consider the matter closed.

Now that your derail is directly addressed, let's keep to the purpose of this thread which is Trump campaign scandal ala Russian contact, influence and/or intentions.

It's not addressed, not until US admits that and then stops doing that. ...

It's addressed in this thread which isn't even the proper place to do it. Please start your own AmericaGate thread somewhere else.

...Russia can have nukes and defense forces in general.

Great. I don't have a problem with that except to any extent it's an authoritarian state killing people, political opposition, arresting Pussy Riot, gay people, etc. Not the place for this discussion though.

Again, let's keep to the purpose of this thread which is Trump campaign scandal ala Russian contact, influence and/or intentions.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Again, let's keep to the purpose of this thread which is Trump campaign scandal ala Russian contact, influence and/or intentions.

Or, another method to deal with the whataboutism is to put the whatta on ignore...