SafeAsMilk wrote:Mike_L wrote:SafeAsMilk wrote:But Russia pushing it's agenda and promoting instability is totally fine by Mike, as he's made clear repeatedly. If the USA does it, he screams bloody murder, but if Russia does it, then it's totally justified. That is, of course, if he can get past his extreme skepticism of anything about what Russia's done and his extreme willingness to accept whenever someone tells him the US has done something bad. He's got an endless list of articles full of breathless editorializing, short on facts and long on telling you what to think, to "support" his claims.
But don't take my word for it, open up any of his links on the last few pages and look at all emotional pandering, note how infrequently any sort of verifiable fact is presented, and note how they pretend to be well-sourced by linking to still more articles full of still more breathless editorializing.
Just don't click on any of the Wikipedia links I included... links to entries that starkly reveal the results of Washington's global meddling and gun barrel diplomacy.
Stick with the likes of CNN and MSNBC... establishment media that slavishly bashes the Trump-shaped piñata while venerating war criminals like John McCain. In short, stick with the 'news' media that's indistinguishable from the shows of John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, etc.
You do know how ridiculous this looks while you regularly slurp up whatever RT, aka Kremlin News Network, throws at you, right? All you can do is "Hurr durr, CNN MSNBC!!" whenever someone points out the hypocrisy of you decrying propaganda while wholesale swallowing it when it suits your preferences, even if they haven't mentioned CNN or MSNBC.
MSNBC (e.g. Rachel Maddow) and CNN are regularly referenced in this thread. They're prime examples of a corporate media that doesn't need to be government-owned, because it's voluntarily between the bedsheets with Washington anyway. It's like MSNBC's Phil Griffin told a demoted Cenk Uygur: "Outsiders are cool, but we’re the establishment".
They'll even rise above their antipathy toward Donald Trump to wax lyrical about the "beauty of our weapons" when he launches them in violation of international law.
Also, It's interesting that you can't tell the difference between being critical of the actions of the US government and slurping Putin's toes, as you do so regularly. I take the sensible position of being able to be critical of both when they do terrible things that hurt people.
Criticism is one thing. But what's wrong with applause? Notwithstanding Putin's "robbing", he has been profoundly good for the Russian people, largely lifting them out of the misery that Washington stooge Boris Yeltsin inflicted on the country.
Putin earns further plaudits for thwarting the USA's regime-change agenda in Syria. As John McCain lamented: the Russians are sticking "their thumb in our eye" by bombing "the people we are supporting and arming and training".
Mike_L wrote:
Russia is obviously far from perfect, but its current president supports a multipolar world order -- as opposed to a unipolar world order with star-spangled boots stomping across the globe.
There's no way you take the absurdly naive position that Putin somehow wouldn't have his own version of star-spangled boots stomping across the globe if given the opportunity. He can't even keep from robbing his own people blind!
So, not content with plain whataboutism, you're now going for hypothetical whataboutism!
But okay...
Yes, you're right! With his nearly 800 Russian military bases in more than 70 territories around the world, Vladimir Putin is poised to take over the world any day now!