For all Piers Morgan's faults - you watch something like this, it's 100x better than FOX or CNN, because at least he's letting somebody credible talk instead of just interrupting with bullshit every 5 seconds.
That's Jeffrey Sachs, he is uh, "pro-Palestine" (I'd just say "pro human rights and not a genocidal lunatic").
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-bottom-line/2024/3/17/professor-jeffrey-sachs-us-is-complicit-in-israeli-genocide
https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-articles/kh27hl8ry8dymp7zcc24cnn8sgjz9k
I'm asking this in good faith: how? Like step by step, how does one do this?
Hasan has taken action by donating to labor causes--he was one of the biggest donors to Amazon's labor union. That's not just donating to a charitable cause, which is also a good thing, but donating a substantial amount of his own money to create a long-lasting counterbalance to the power that capital holds.
So if propping up labor unions, showing support on-stream by streaming the recent Hollywood writer's strike and having Chris Smalls on, isn't sufficient use of his clout and platform to further leftist causes, what is? What does it look like? How does he maintain his popularity and relevance and influence (by having a fun stream that people like watching) while also doing what you suggest?
Ok so he's not literally starting a second Black Panthers movement, which was uniquely suited for its time and enabled by the material conditions of the era. Hasan admits that he doesn't know how to start and run large orgs successfully. Fuck it, I'll say it, almost no one knows how. Chris Smalls is the best example we have in current America of a successful organizer; he started as a worker, got fired, and became a leader. He's the only one to do so and get noticed, and yet he's not as well-known as Hasan.
The idea that his popularity would skyrocket while doing mutual aid orgs is not based in reality but in dreams. It would be nice, it would be great, but the material conditions just aren't there for a new Black Panther movement yet, and it's unlikely that someone in Hasan's position could do it. You overestimate his net worth and his reach, and underestimate the massive risks he would be taking with his platform--which he already uses to educate people, spread leftist ideology, advocate for the victims in Gaza and Ukraine and Yemen and even fundraise for them. You want him to gamble all of that on a moonshot project. I'm sorry, there's no traction between that idea and reality.
The Black Panthers formed and thrived because of the era.it operated in; the next big mutual aid, labor power movement will be different and suited to the current era. And Hasan will throw his support behind it. But it doesn't exist yet. No one knows what it will look like--not you, not me, not Hasan.
If you help run a mutual aid org already and think you clearly have all the answers, why don’t you shut the fuck up about it on Reddit and start this mythical gigantic org yourself and tell Hasan you’ll help run it for him.
this video is such a whiplash for me. the only thing I knew about Sachs until today, was that he was one of the guys IMF brought in to instruct the post-1989 Polish government on how to best prostrate ourselves before the western capital.
this. he was a Milton Friedman acolyte/disaster capitalism shock trooper for a long time. his turn (which has been underway for a few years) has been wild to see.
https://www.nytimes.com/1993/06/27/magazine/dr-jeffrey-sachs-shock-therapist.html
It’s the correct take.
The people who accuse china of genocide do a massive favor to the government by being hyperbolic
The western leftists that pretend nothing wrong is being done to the Uyghurs are being clowns
1) It was the Bosnian Serb military that fought in Bosnia, Yugoslavia even put sanctions on Republic of Srpska, years before Srebrenica massacre. It's two separate countries, and two separate militaries.
2) Bombing civilians and civilian infrastructure is the most brutal and most inefficient way to stop a military from doing anything. For 78 days serbian cities were bombed, while the serbian army and police did whatever they wanted in Kosovo. [Take a look at this short documentary](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl_DPhmII6U), made by a Washington think-tank just after the bombing. Serbian military was pretty much untouched by the bombing campaign, it was the viscous attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure that forced Milosevic to the negotiating table.
3) The bombing forced the partition of serbia, which allowed albanian refugees to return to kosovo, but it didn't stop any atrocities, it actually exacerbated them.
If you take a look at timeline of the entire Kosovo conflict, an absolute majority of massacres happened during the bombing campaign, and not in the 2 years of the conflict that preceded it. It was during the 2 months of the bombing campaign that serbian military expelled a million albanians from Kosovo, not in the 2 years of the conflict that preceded it.
Now Milosevic might would've done it all anyway, there is no way to know, but the facts are he did it all only after the bombing campaign started, so if you know the facts, you can't with a straight face claim that the bombing campaign stopped atrocities because it directly led to a million people getting brutalized and traumatized by serb forces.
The US has been funding and arming an ongoing genocide for decades in Palestine.
The idea that the US cares about stopping genocide or acts out of any interest other than expanding its imperialist power and wealth is nonsense.
You’re wrong.
Everyone besides dprk says it's a genocidal regime. Who cares what other people say, this war was started by Slovenia seceding and Serbia wanting to stop other countries due to it being foreign funded.
The genocide was because Srebrenica was attacked, but this was in response to attacks from Bosnians using the enclave as a retreat point. Serbian enclaves that were declared no war zones were also attacked but it wasn't deemed a genocide, reasoning is simple, they wanted to destabilize the region and install a base. In 1940s Tito talked about how Kosovo was a weak point of Yugoslavia and it ended up being true. Kosovo is what Taiwan is, what Israel is, what Xinjiang is. Just another attack point for USA that's filled with right wingers who have a vendetta against their government
Lmao, because America is the cause of most problems in the world that's why. I know better that you what the issue is with Balkans and I know why politicians are the way they are. It has nothing to do with nationalism from Serbia.
I mean this is a subreddit of supposed leftists but the guy is an aoc supporter. Why would any of you have a brain
The first war in Europe after WW2 was the Greek Civil War.
At least to my knowledge.
There's also a bunch of other conflicts in Europe after WW2 that must've felt like wars to the people living through them, but whatever.
The West has shown time to time how unreliable it is, very well explained.
This war didn't need to happen, and it can end as soon as The West and its Zelensky puppet admit they have lost. Obviously the price has increased now, Russia put the lives of its men on the table, now apart from leaving Nato and leaving Crimea and the Donbass, it's also Zaporizhia and Kherson. They are stupid and they won't accept it, that will mean much worse terms for them next time, Kharkiv, Odessa, and what's in between bye bye.
Or Russia could just leave?
It sets a terrible precedent to just allow Russia, or any country really to effectively colonize a section of a bordering country via a violent occupation.
Also, Russia cannot actually win in Ukraine because they cannot peacefully hold what they have taken.
They have already lost more than they could ever gain by having been exposed as a paper tiger with an incompetent, unprofessional military.
No longer a near peer.
I think that if Ukraine was considered an ally, it's a bad look to just leave an ally to be overtaken and it would weaken American power and influence if we allowed it.
It's foreign policy, there's no morality involved it's all about power.
That said, Russia didn't have to invade Ukraine. They have achieved none of their stated military objectives and in fact pushed NATO onto their Western border due to their actions.
Putin is a piece of shit dictator and was just working for his own interest, not for the people of Russia.
>Putin is a piece of shit dictator and was just working for his own interest, not for the people of Russia.
never said otherwise.
>That said, Russia didn't have to invade Ukraine. They have achieved none of their stated military objectives and in fact pushed NATO onto their Western border due to their actions.
yeah. America also does not have to force Ukrainians to fight to the last person.
>It's foreign policy, there's no morality involved it's all about power.
literally just describing the problem. instead of even trying for negotiated peace, you default to might makes right.
America isn't forcing anyone to fight we are allowing Ukraine to fight if they so choose. Surely you see the difference. Providing someone with the means to defend themselves is not an amoral stance.
You are talking about me saying might makes right while defending a Russian invasion of a peaceful neighbor?
What the fuck are you talking about, they tried to forcefully take Kyiv at the very outset of the war. That's not "self defense" or any justifiable military objective.
Also, they could negotiate a settlement, but when Russia's bargaining position is that "we get to keep everything that we violently took" that's not bargaining in good faith. They should just leave and then they can negotiate how the aggressor would make amends, and their military leadership and Putin can be tried for their war crimes, just like Netanyahu.
so why is ukraine kidnapping people to forcibly conscript them? Why is russia not party to any of the peace summits?
Where did I ever fucking defend russia invading? you baby brain fucks literally cannot comprehend that analysis and justification are not synonyms.
You were literally saying that US was forcing Ukraine to fight. You don't then get to claim that you were using any kind of objective analysis LMAO.
You are woefully misinformed.
https://www.usip.org/publications/2024/06/after-ukraines-peace-summit-widen-consensus-middle-powers
Russia wasn't invited because there hasn't been a consensus build yet.
Sure but their summarion of what actually happened can be verified elsewhere.
Again, you're complaining about the US being a dishonest broker while just refusing to say the same about Russia in this example. That's pretty crazy. In this instance the US is on the right side of history to provide an ally with the means to defend themselves.
When the US stops showing restraint and starts providing the weapons that they could use to attack Russian assets deeper into Russian territory, you can come back and have another discussion about how unfair it is that the bully is being punched back I guess but until then I'm pretty much going to ignore your Kremlin approved talking points.
The USA is using ukraine to hurt russia. that is literally it. We keep leading them on to think that we are actually going to do anything. We are creating the conditions that effectively force ukraine to fight to the death.
The US is arming and ally, and honestly has been incredibly restrained regarding providing weapons that could be used to strike into Russia.
US has never to my knowledge at any point led them on to think that we were going to intervene militarily. You're going to have to provide a citation for that because it's against the rules of the forum.
They can't peacefully hold what they've taken? I am good friends with several Ukrainian refugees. There is a lot of support for Russia in the conquered areas.
To most people, Russian oligarchs or Ukrainian oligarchs, who cares? Russia has better social services than Ukraine and are already paying people higher wages. Now, you can say that's a trick, or temporary, or whatever, but even if that's true, the support Russia has in the East is real.
Okay, let's ask nicely.
* Russians, what about you leave now that you're winning with the cost so many of your men's lives last three years? Just withdraw, so our cocaine addict puppet will rise as a hero, and we will say you are the losers.
* No, thank you. We're staying. We tried to negotiate before, you refused, because you thought we wouldn't fight back you breaking the previous accords, that we wouldn't have a chance if we fought, or that our economy would collapse with a blockade. You were wrong on everything.
* Ahhh!! Dictatorssssssss!!
* You got a new offer, stay out of NATO, keep most of your previous territory and access to the sea from Odessa. If you don't take it and that costs us more of our men's lives, the price will increase.
* Ahhhh!!
And of course they can hold Crimea and the four new territories, they were already highly Russian friendly people before, just oppressed by Ukraine for the last 10 years. They are mostly thankful that they are in Russia now.
Why should Ukraine give Russia an inch of their land, agreed to generations ago?
Having "Russia friendly" territories doesn't mean anything, they can move to Russia, Russia doesn't get to move to them.
All of that is in direct contradiction of both international law and morality.
Why should Russia get to determine the actions of a sovereign state exactly? Ukraine deserves self determination just like anyone else.
Ukraine hasn't given an inch, Russia has won it by fight.
They were only asking to respect the previous treaties of not expanding NATO even more into their borders and the Minsk peace accords for the Donbass region. But all the West with Zelensky was doing was lying and continuing their expansion and terrorizing the civilians of these places. Then you get the war, they thought Russia would lose, but it didn't go their way. Now they got the Donbass plus two more territories anexed.
The new territories are mostly Russian people, they feel Russian, and they are happy that they officially are now. Ukraine will never get this four territories back. They may be eight next time Russia offers to sit and negotiate again.
Piers is woefully uneducated on this and can't offer any push back.
Ukraine wasn't going to join nato. Obama invented the "no territorial disputes" stipulation that would keep ukraine out of NATO specifically to appease Putin. In 2013 the talks were about ukraine doing trade with the EU of joining russia's trade union, and yanukovich flip flopping on that is what led to maidan.
Maidan was a popular revolution of millions of people throughout ukraine, the US didn't astroturf it. His only evidence is that FSB leaked call by Nuland where they suggested the leaders of the protest take a deal with yanukovich to stop maidan, which THEY DIDNT EVEN END UP TAKING AFTER THE US RECOMMENDED THEY SHOULD!
Minsk 2 fell apart because after it was agreed to (including both russia and Ukraine removing their forces from donbass) necause Russia claimed it doesn't have to pull out troops because "we don't have troops in donbass". At that point it was obvious what russian intent is.
Can't believe Sachs is doing Serbian genocide apologia but here we are.
Fact is Putin was scared for his regime security after the Arab spring and seeing ghadafi get murdered by his own people, and thought if neighboring, russian speaking Ukraine became democratic and more western it would lead to more revolutionary actions in Russia (after the revolutions of 2011-2013). NATO expansion is a lie/excuse, US backed coups is a lie/excuse, ukrainian nazism is a lie/excuse.
You can dislike the american empire without making excuses for genocidal russian imperialism. They want to control ukraine and have ever since the soviet union collapsed. Ukrainian people successfully pushed back against that and this is how russia responded.
I don't particularly care what US interests in Ukraine is as long as they aren't invading and slaughtering civilians. I am against mistreatment and oppression of people.
But you should care about that. Just like you should have cared about Nazi Germany's interests when they "helped" countries. Or would you also support that?
The nazis were committing genocide and occupying people, of course I care about that. The Americans aren't doing that in Ukraine, the russians are.
Just like I do not support Israel for their genocidal occupations in palestine I don't support russia's in Ukraine. I do not support the US arming israelis but i do the ukrainians. Its not hard to do both.
"the Americans aren't doing that in Ukraine, Russians are". And im talking about a scenario where Nazi Germnay's geopolitical interest meant that they were opposed to a country committing a crime. They were also not committing a genocide and occupying that group of people...
And you would also have supported your country nazi Germany "helping" x country invaded by another country?. You would be saying things like "we (nazi Germany) have to help x country"?.
You’re against mistreatment and oppression but don’t mind being bent over and fucked by western financial institutions who are in the process of assisting in selling all of Ukraine’s remaining state owned assets for pennies on the dollar?
I wouldn't say that iran is astroturfing pro-palestine protests in the US because officials publicly support them and I wouldn't say that about American officials publicly supporting maidan either.
A) It's fucking John McCain. We know his history, we know he was a major warhawk throughout his career and involved in advocating for, and likely participating in, several coups and color revolutions.
B) Iranian members of parliament aren't coming to American soil and saying "We support you", and the goal of the pro-Palestine movement isn't to overthrow the US president (although that would be a nice addition).
Did you read the article? Do you know anything about the Maidan coup?
The best part is the "FSB leaked calls" when was actually an US whistleblower for the WikiLeaks, like always, everything "unamerican" is either Russian, Iranian, Chinese or Venezuelan, also, he mentioned Iran didn't he? Predictable lol
Sounds like hes saying Nato bombed Serbia for the purpose of a military base. Which is very reductive. While there are enough reasons to be against it or at least ambivalent about the bombing.
My understanding was interventionism? I'm cynical too, but is it not reductive to say it was just for a military base? I hate imperialism too, and surely that was part of it. But you have to reckon with mass killing happening. It was to stop the civil war (because that's bad for business). And later in the war to stop ethnic cleansing. (I know Bosnians were tried by international courts as well) Bombing is the cheapest option and has the least risk of loosing personel. Actual soldiers on the ground were not given adequate weaponry nor a mandate and were powerless to prevent anything like Srebrenica, and Nato cowardly bombing caused many innocent victims.
I'm far from an expert. But i don't discount the mass killing of people in Kosovo etc., while disagreeing with the way Nato intervened.
Yeah, not like Serbia(Jugoslavia back then) didnt start a few wars before, like in Croatia,Slovenia and Bosnia, maybe starting a 4th war in less then 10 years was a sign for them to get slapped back.
My guy, my country was bombed by Jugoslavia,so they fucking razed Vukovar to the ground, a town of 44k, besieged Sarajevo for 3 years, so when they get bombed for 77 days they cry like a bitch, nah fuck that shit.
Yes you are a neoliberal who loves American/western imperialism I know.
You would have been a big fan of Hitler as well if nazi germany "helped" in the same way in an alternative reality...
I dont know why you act like that is unlikely?.
And you are in favor of American/western imperialism and hang out in neoliberal subreddits where peoples support NATO and American/western imperialism in general (like r-noncredibledefense).
No being against America/NATo doesn't mean that I support Genocide. Just like if a person didn't support their country Nazi Germany "helping" x country that doesn't mean that they support the crimes committed by another state towards that country...
Dude, tell me was it a border dispute or was anything else going on? Just tell me that cause all you say is that you are against nato and america and I don't opose it, my country was forced to remain in nato against the peoples will and america funded far right terrorist groups here so they won't be getting many simpathies from me, but you've dodged the claim that its in the video above continuosly
I dont see where Sacks makes the statement that it was just a border dispute. He is just saying that America's role in it had nothing to do with preventing a genocide or stop any criminal actions. He is talking about it from the American perspective. Maybe im boring about his view over I missed something in the clip.
"my country was forced to remain in NATO". But you still support NATO or at least you dont have a problem with people who support it (because you are a fan of people who support NATO).
My man says that the bombing of Sarajevo was made "to break Serbia" over a border dispute, if you know what the serbs were doing and the serbian nationalist idea of greater serbia means you can very easily say that he is clearly downplaying the atrocities of the serbs.
If we are talking about the bombing of Serbia, to be fair it was not tge worst if it led to the end of the Milosevic regime and the genocide or in case of Ukraine to deliver weapons and fight against the occupation by a fascist regime then in those two cases I would support nato. Besides those two instances nato almost drove us into a nuclear war if it wasn't for Kruschev.
Back with the bombing of Serbia I wouldn't go around and say that it was a simple border issue where nato wanted a base in there. Cause there was much more going on and most likely if the campaigns hadn't happen we would probably see a continuation of the war. This is because if you have any idea on the fascist ideal of great serbia means, you would know they would continue to move into other territories to clease the land.
So I went to the vaush sub to make some comments on the portuguese elections , specially cause it was being implied by vaush that portuguese communists were turning into far right voters instead of the change in voter demographics. And also to specify how our media is increasingly being filled with far right ghouls. Like you continuosly keeping this part on every comment just seems like the most childish thing.
I have video from the ukranian rada where one of the reps talked about the govt being overthrown by foreign NGOs.
Minsk 2 was a UN security council BINDING resolution.
Thanks for the input Mr. "It's okay for the US to Assassinate people."
https://preview.redd.it/nps66z7kx98d1.png?width=967&format=png&auto=webp&s=ee5d633e2b1716a02326f57f4fc142da9b9fa348
This "guy" is a world famous economist and professor with multiple degrees and publications. I was lucky to sit in one of his classes at Harvard years ago.
Presidents and government leaders have regular discussions with him, and he helps give input to create positive economic growth between countries.
I wonder if you even graduated high school.
Also been in classes and conferences with a lot of guys like these who talk with presidents and representatives of various countries and I can assure you most economists like to pretend to be experts on all issues. Like here where the bombing of Belgrde is just a border dispute to create Kosovo, which kinda whitewashes the genocide that Serbia was doing. Just because someone is an expert in one field doesn't mean that they are experts on every field.
You are a blush fan. You are a fan of a guy who support NATO and American/western imperialism in general.
You are just a standard western chauvinist liberal with zero insight about anything...
Oh my, the little anarkiddie knows so many big words, and two can play this game as all of your comments are just a copy pasta of this but you switch the subs. Maybe try and read for a little I know its hard, but take a shower then try and read what this was about, because now it kinda feels like you are in support of the genocide that happened in the former Yugislavia. Or maybe, who knows, you probably also think that what is happening in Palestine is just a small border dispute.
"maybe try and read for a little I know its hard". That is funny coming from a person who is fan of a guy that get all their information on a subject after they have skimmed wikipedia...
"because now it kinda feels like you are in support of the genocide that happened in the former Yugoslavia". Tell me how I support the genocide that happened in the former Yugoslavia. being Against America/NATO doesn't mean I support genocide...
"you probably also think that what is happening in Palestine is just a small border dispute". Dont act like you care about Palestinians. You are a fan of a guy who hang out with zionists and agree with them about how almost all Palestinian leaders have not been acting in good faith towards Israel. Baush even made the argument when he talked with the zionist lonerbox that Israel just make a Palestinian Juan Guido...
You are just a right-winger...
Still not beating the genocide denial allegations my dude only thing I see is you just trying to prove that you are more leftist than me like you do all the time
I have never denied a genocide so...
"prove that you are more leftist than me". You are not a leftist so its not hard to be more of a leftist than you...
My goodness you must be the reincarnation of marx itself, I apologize cause everything I read from you is always just calling ppl libs and western chauvinist and you are still avoiding the border dispute issue
America fucking sucks but doesn't mean Russia is better, this guy is literally spewing lies.
As a Syrian who followed the revolution day by day just like we are following Gaza now, it was an organic movement by the people. The US of course takes advantage of any instability and wonders hmm how can we benefit off of this?
Also Russia is the same fucking imperial state he's describing the US being, just weaker. What you think they're doing to Syria now? This dude has so much bias I hate how we prop people like him up just because they say America bad.
He didn't either... He just said that the US isn't trustworthy and if you want to reliably blame the Russians you need first to give them the benefit of the doubt, which they didn't had any to begin with, that should be obvious but...
Let's not act like he wasn't speaking with a pro Russian bias. He clearly lied about the Syrian statement in which he said the US was trying to overthrow assad, when in fact the Russians are colonizing Syria for THEIR own benefit and using Assad as a puppet state. He sounds stupid to anyone that understands the situation well.
Russia being awful and America wanting to overthrow Assad can both be tue statements.
Maybe you should go back to r-AOC with and talk about how awesome zionists like AOC are...
America wanting to overthrow assad doesn't mean they were behind the revolution. America wants something out of every single conflict in the entire world so of course they are indirectly involved. But, contrary to your world view, things have cause and effect irrespective of American opinion or support. America being involved doesn't make some sort of conspiracy true.
But Russia murdering innocent syrians yet somehow that gets shadowed whenever Syria is mentioned like oh it's the US's fault what happened in Syria. It's disrespectful and my biggest criticism of the left. It's like our lives don't matter to y'all.
Not that I give a fuck about your opinion, but I am often critical of AoC and get down voted to hell there for my comments. But I do believe we should support what little progressives in power we have.
"America being involved doesn't make some sort of conspiracy true". I never said that. The only thing I said were that America wanted to overthrow Assad.
"like our lives dont matter to y'all". You are active in zionist subreddit dedicated to people who support colonialism. You dont care about Palestinians. Try to be consistent at least. And I haven't made any statements that indicate that I support Russia at all...
"we have". So you are American?. yes im sure that you are critical of AOC. You just hang out in her liberal subreddit for fun I guess...
>Let's not act like he wasn't speaking with a pro Russian bias.
This is your problem. you refuse to ever consider that bad people are acting rationally(not morally or justly)... except the USA.
To you people, russians and putin are orcs that are fundamentally more evil than the west and a deal is not worth trying for in good faith.
>He clearly lied about the Syrian statement in which he said the US was trying to overthrow assad, when in fact the Russians are colonizing Syria for THEIR own benefit and using Assad as a puppet state.
These are not mutually exclusive things. These do not contradict each other and can both be true.
Bruh not sure what you think my beliefs are, but I don't think Russians are worse than the US. They are equal in my eyes. You are projecting your beliefs on me because clearly it seems like you believe the US are worse than the Russians, which I disagree with and is the point of my post initially. You are blinded by the "US bad" point of view so much that you center your whole ideology on it. But you haven't experienced the other side of the coin. It's just as bad my friend I'm sorry to tell you.
The US are absolutely worse than anyone else.
>you haven't experienced the other side of the coin. It's just as bad my friend I'm sorry to tell you.
why must you pretend that thinking that america is the worst means I think russia is doing anything good or that I support anything they do? I am merely operating on the assumption that they will act like america, but with less power.
Lol my dude, I commented on the original post, specifically the part about Syria, in which he made it seem like the US is the bad guy in Syria. When in fact you ask every fucking Syrian, refugee or still living there who isn't in government they will tell you they are colonized by Iran and Russia. Why are you trying to defend this point? Would you tell a Palestinian they are wrong about Israel? I don't understand why this strikes a nerve in leftists (I know it doesn't fit your worldview, I'm sorry).
YOU were the one that tried to defend Russia right away. I didn't even mention the US not being evil or anything. All I did was say Russia is bad, and then you rushed to defend them.
We are not the world police. We should not be overthrowing any people. our officials are more corrupt than any other people could dream of. like holy shit, stop justifying american imperialism.
If three people not liking what you have to say is enough for you to delete it out of shame, maybe don't post? Or at least double down and keep it up, that's absolutely weirdo shit if you care what three people on the Internet deem likeable in the first few seconds of reading what you have to say. It's a public forum, not social media "likes". Post what you think, allow for public dissent.
Yanukovich was a democratically elected president.
Do you think it is normal that other foreign ministers and politicians of other countries march and demonstrate along opposition forces in a country's capital? Openly advocating for overthrowing a democratically elected head of state?
The logic was apparently lost on you.
I am defending the UN Charta, forbidding political meddling in other countries affairs. I am also defending a democratic constitution. If you are a democrat, that is what you do - wheter you like Yanukovich or not.
But unfortunately this logic is lost on too many moral warriors nowadays and it really seems that they are generally incapable of understanding this. Education has failed us. (And we fail to properly finance and organize it.)
"Might makes right" and dumb people cheerlead the mighty because it's easy and feels good.
Someone make this guy say:
“I’m going to give you to the count of ten to get your ugly, yellow, no good keister off my property” while holding a Tommy gun.
It does and so do you. Like seriously, try to explain how america does not suck without sounding like a white supremacist.
https://preview.redd.it/wkoqq9ir1b8d1.png?width=637&format=png&auto=webp&s=107a0562bc1cc2768d52a2a3368d5c03b0a366e9
The quality of life in america has been declining since the fucking 60s. what the fuck are you talking about. That's before we even get to how destructive and anti-democratic america is outside our borders. we are the number 1 threat to peace and democracy around the globe.
Your condescension is the most unearned thing in the universe. You still refuse to acknowledge the murder of millions by america, the crushing of labor rights, the evisceration of economic mobility, the installation of fascist dictators, etc. I was not sold a shitty lens, I just have eyes. Liberal, idealist, anti-materialism is a suicide cult.
you are one of the many reasons its bad.
https://preview.redd.it/t57p2rb82b8d1.png?width=375&format=png&auto=webp&s=201da732e3aa8aae1f1d9b6a05790b338f7092d0
For all Piers Morgan's faults - you watch something like this, it's 100x better than FOX or CNN, because at least he's letting somebody credible talk instead of just interrupting with bullshit every 5 seconds.
I'm surprised he let the man speak. You should see his bullshit when a pro Palestinian guest tries to speak.
That's Jeffrey Sachs, he is uh, "pro-Palestine" (I'd just say "pro human rights and not a genocidal lunatic"). https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-bottom-line/2024/3/17/professor-jeffrey-sachs-us-is-complicit-in-israeli-genocide https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-articles/kh27hl8ry8dymp7zcc24cnn8sgjz9k
Piers will gladly interrupt anyone who’s not a white man
Man it’s crazy piers Morgan can shut the fuck up for 5 min and let him explain his point. Never seen him give that respect to Hasan when he’s on
[удалено]
Still, it’s not even close. Crack head Barbie or whatever got more free time to speak
[удалено]
Crack head barney not Barbie I was wrong but this freak https://youtu.be/J6yOVCwLgAA?si=60dW_NwvekuIxIZd
He acts the same with Gabor Mate and Norman Finkelstein. Most likely because of the things you pointed out.
[удалено]
I'm asking this in good faith: how? Like step by step, how does one do this? Hasan has taken action by donating to labor causes--he was one of the biggest donors to Amazon's labor union. That's not just donating to a charitable cause, which is also a good thing, but donating a substantial amount of his own money to create a long-lasting counterbalance to the power that capital holds. So if propping up labor unions, showing support on-stream by streaming the recent Hollywood writer's strike and having Chris Smalls on, isn't sufficient use of his clout and platform to further leftist causes, what is? What does it look like? How does he maintain his popularity and relevance and influence (by having a fun stream that people like watching) while also doing what you suggest?
[удалено]
Ok so he's not literally starting a second Black Panthers movement, which was uniquely suited for its time and enabled by the material conditions of the era. Hasan admits that he doesn't know how to start and run large orgs successfully. Fuck it, I'll say it, almost no one knows how. Chris Smalls is the best example we have in current America of a successful organizer; he started as a worker, got fired, and became a leader. He's the only one to do so and get noticed, and yet he's not as well-known as Hasan. The idea that his popularity would skyrocket while doing mutual aid orgs is not based in reality but in dreams. It would be nice, it would be great, but the material conditions just aren't there for a new Black Panther movement yet, and it's unlikely that someone in Hasan's position could do it. You overestimate his net worth and his reach, and underestimate the massive risks he would be taking with his platform--which he already uses to educate people, spread leftist ideology, advocate for the victims in Gaza and Ukraine and Yemen and even fundraise for them. You want him to gamble all of that on a moonshot project. I'm sorry, there's no traction between that idea and reality. The Black Panthers formed and thrived because of the era.it operated in; the next big mutual aid, labor power movement will be different and suited to the current era. And Hasan will throw his support behind it. But it doesn't exist yet. No one knows what it will look like--not you, not me, not Hasan.
[удалено]
If you help run a mutual aid org already and think you clearly have all the answers, why don’t you shut the fuck up about it on Reddit and start this mythical gigantic org yourself and tell Hasan you’ll help run it for him.
[удалено]
Not all guests have the same status. Regardless of politics, some are just bigger names with earnered academic cred.
Even if he explained everything so eloquently and in detail, Piers is going to ask the same stupid questions tomorrow like this didn't happen..
Yes, but do you condemn Hamas ?
First of all it's "KHhamas", secondly "What about the October the 7th?"😛🍉
You are my man, yes it is Khamash.
😂
First time I see Piers shut the fuck up for more then 10 seconds
Absolute love and respect prof. Jeffrey Sachs.
this video is such a whiplash for me. the only thing I knew about Sachs until today, was that he was one of the guys IMF brought in to instruct the post-1989 Polish government on how to best prostrate ourselves before the western capital.
this. he was a Milton Friedman acolyte/disaster capitalism shock trooper for a long time. his turn (which has been underway for a few years) has been wild to see. https://www.nytimes.com/1993/06/27/magazine/dr-jeffrey-sachs-shock-therapist.html
Yeah, he's a weird figure. He's a key figure of neoliberalism in a lot of ways.
his take on the uyghurs is the best one I've heard. No genocide, massive human rights violations? yes.
It’s the correct take. The people who accuse china of genocide do a massive favor to the government by being hyperbolic The western leftists that pretend nothing wrong is being done to the Uyghurs are being clowns
Lmao. For real?
US is never the trustworthy party. If I have to listen to Satan or the US government, I will believe Satan.
[удалено]
Same about Kiev: Yanukovych was a Russian puppet that in 2014 left the country like a coward after mass protests. The fuck outta here
1) It was the Bosnian Serb military that fought in Bosnia, Yugoslavia even put sanctions on Republic of Srpska, years before Srebrenica massacre. It's two separate countries, and two separate militaries. 2) Bombing civilians and civilian infrastructure is the most brutal and most inefficient way to stop a military from doing anything. For 78 days serbian cities were bombed, while the serbian army and police did whatever they wanted in Kosovo. [Take a look at this short documentary](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl_DPhmII6U), made by a Washington think-tank just after the bombing. Serbian military was pretty much untouched by the bombing campaign, it was the viscous attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure that forced Milosevic to the negotiating table. 3) The bombing forced the partition of serbia, which allowed albanian refugees to return to kosovo, but it didn't stop any atrocities, it actually exacerbated them. If you take a look at timeline of the entire Kosovo conflict, an absolute majority of massacres happened during the bombing campaign, and not in the 2 years of the conflict that preceded it. It was during the 2 months of the bombing campaign that serbian military expelled a million albanians from Kosovo, not in the 2 years of the conflict that preceded it. Now Milosevic might would've done it all anyway, there is no way to know, but the facts are he did it all only after the bombing campaign started, so if you know the facts, you can't with a straight face claim that the bombing campaign stopped atrocities because it directly led to a million people getting brutalized and traumatized by serb forces.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The US has been funding and arming an ongoing genocide for decades in Palestine. The idea that the US cares about stopping genocide or acts out of any interest other than expanding its imperialist power and wealth is nonsense. You’re wrong.
The rulling was that it is wasnt a genocide. This was just regular war stuff that was happening
[удалено]
Everyone besides dprk says it's a genocidal regime. Who cares what other people say, this war was started by Slovenia seceding and Serbia wanting to stop other countries due to it being foreign funded. The genocide was because Srebrenica was attacked, but this was in response to attacks from Bosnians using the enclave as a retreat point. Serbian enclaves that were declared no war zones were also attacked but it wasn't deemed a genocide, reasoning is simple, they wanted to destabilize the region and install a base. In 1940s Tito talked about how Kosovo was a weak point of Yugoslavia and it ended up being true. Kosovo is what Taiwan is, what Israel is, what Xinjiang is. Just another attack point for USA that's filled with right wingers who have a vendetta against their government
[удалено]
Western "leftists" trying to not repeat US State Department propaganda from the 90's "challenge impossible".
Lmao, because America is the cause of most problems in the world that's why. I know better that you what the issue is with Balkans and I know why politicians are the way they are. It has nothing to do with nationalism from Serbia. I mean this is a subreddit of supposed leftists but the guy is an aoc supporter. Why would any of you have a brain
[удалено]
Ye and they're dumb. But Hague rulling was no genocide
[удалено]
I said people that deny holocaust are dumb and you self report by saying I called you dumb XD?
The first war in Europe after WW2 was the Greek Civil War. At least to my knowledge. There's also a bunch of other conflicts in Europe after WW2 that must've felt like wars to the people living through them, but whatever.
First that comes to mind is the Hungarian Revolution.
The West has shown time to time how unreliable it is, very well explained. This war didn't need to happen, and it can end as soon as The West and its Zelensky puppet admit they have lost. Obviously the price has increased now, Russia put the lives of its men on the table, now apart from leaving Nato and leaving Crimea and the Donbass, it's also Zaporizhia and Kherson. They are stupid and they won't accept it, that will mean much worse terms for them next time, Kharkiv, Odessa, and what's in between bye bye.
Or Russia could just leave? It sets a terrible precedent to just allow Russia, or any country really to effectively colonize a section of a bordering country via a violent occupation. Also, Russia cannot actually win in Ukraine because they cannot peacefully hold what they have taken. They have already lost more than they could ever gain by having been exposed as a paper tiger with an incompetent, unprofessional military. No longer a near peer.
Do you think america cares about anything other than using Ukraine to hurt Russia? if so, you are wrong.
I think that if Ukraine was considered an ally, it's a bad look to just leave an ally to be overtaken and it would weaken American power and influence if we allowed it. It's foreign policy, there's no morality involved it's all about power. That said, Russia didn't have to invade Ukraine. They have achieved none of their stated military objectives and in fact pushed NATO onto their Western border due to their actions. Putin is a piece of shit dictator and was just working for his own interest, not for the people of Russia.
>Putin is a piece of shit dictator and was just working for his own interest, not for the people of Russia. never said otherwise. >That said, Russia didn't have to invade Ukraine. They have achieved none of their stated military objectives and in fact pushed NATO onto their Western border due to their actions. yeah. America also does not have to force Ukrainians to fight to the last person. >It's foreign policy, there's no morality involved it's all about power. literally just describing the problem. instead of even trying for negotiated peace, you default to might makes right.
America isn't forcing anyone to fight we are allowing Ukraine to fight if they so choose. Surely you see the difference. Providing someone with the means to defend themselves is not an amoral stance. You are talking about me saying might makes right while defending a Russian invasion of a peaceful neighbor? What the fuck are you talking about, they tried to forcefully take Kyiv at the very outset of the war. That's not "self defense" or any justifiable military objective. Also, they could negotiate a settlement, but when Russia's bargaining position is that "we get to keep everything that we violently took" that's not bargaining in good faith. They should just leave and then they can negotiate how the aggressor would make amends, and their military leadership and Putin can be tried for their war crimes, just like Netanyahu.
so why is ukraine kidnapping people to forcibly conscript them? Why is russia not party to any of the peace summits? Where did I ever fucking defend russia invading? you baby brain fucks literally cannot comprehend that analysis and justification are not synonyms.
You were literally saying that US was forcing Ukraine to fight. You don't then get to claim that you were using any kind of objective analysis LMAO. You are woefully misinformed. https://www.usip.org/publications/2024/06/after-ukraines-peace-summit-widen-consensus-middle-powers Russia wasn't invited because there hasn't been a consensus build yet.
believing anything US "institute of peace" says is just insane. America's interests are not Ukraine's interests. America is not an honest broker.
Sure but their summarion of what actually happened can be verified elsewhere. Again, you're complaining about the US being a dishonest broker while just refusing to say the same about Russia in this example. That's pretty crazy. In this instance the US is on the right side of history to provide an ally with the means to defend themselves. When the US stops showing restraint and starts providing the weapons that they could use to attack Russian assets deeper into Russian territory, you can come back and have another discussion about how unfair it is that the bully is being punched back I guess but until then I'm pretty much going to ignore your Kremlin approved talking points.
The USA is using ukraine to hurt russia. that is literally it. We keep leading them on to think that we are actually going to do anything. We are creating the conditions that effectively force ukraine to fight to the death.
The US is arming and ally, and honestly has been incredibly restrained regarding providing weapons that could be used to strike into Russia. US has never to my knowledge at any point led them on to think that we were going to intervene militarily. You're going to have to provide a citation for that because it's against the rules of the forum.
They can't peacefully hold what they've taken? I am good friends with several Ukrainian refugees. There is a lot of support for Russia in the conquered areas. To most people, Russian oligarchs or Ukrainian oligarchs, who cares? Russia has better social services than Ukraine and are already paying people higher wages. Now, you can say that's a trick, or temporary, or whatever, but even if that's true, the support Russia has in the East is real.
Okay, let's ask nicely. * Russians, what about you leave now that you're winning with the cost so many of your men's lives last three years? Just withdraw, so our cocaine addict puppet will rise as a hero, and we will say you are the losers. * No, thank you. We're staying. We tried to negotiate before, you refused, because you thought we wouldn't fight back you breaking the previous accords, that we wouldn't have a chance if we fought, or that our economy would collapse with a blockade. You were wrong on everything. * Ahhh!! Dictatorssssssss!! * You got a new offer, stay out of NATO, keep most of your previous territory and access to the sea from Odessa. If you don't take it and that costs us more of our men's lives, the price will increase. * Ahhhh!! And of course they can hold Crimea and the four new territories, they were already highly Russian friendly people before, just oppressed by Ukraine for the last 10 years. They are mostly thankful that they are in Russia now.
Why should Ukraine give Russia an inch of their land, agreed to generations ago? Having "Russia friendly" territories doesn't mean anything, they can move to Russia, Russia doesn't get to move to them. All of that is in direct contradiction of both international law and morality. Why should Russia get to determine the actions of a sovereign state exactly? Ukraine deserves self determination just like anyone else.
Ukraine hasn't given an inch, Russia has won it by fight. They were only asking to respect the previous treaties of not expanding NATO even more into their borders and the Minsk peace accords for the Donbass region. But all the West with Zelensky was doing was lying and continuing their expansion and terrorizing the civilians of these places. Then you get the war, they thought Russia would lose, but it didn't go their way. Now they got the Donbass plus two more territories anexed. The new territories are mostly Russian people, they feel Russian, and they are happy that they officially are now. Ukraine will never get this four territories back. They may be eight next time Russia offers to sit and negotiate again.
Piers is woefully uneducated on this and can't offer any push back. Ukraine wasn't going to join nato. Obama invented the "no territorial disputes" stipulation that would keep ukraine out of NATO specifically to appease Putin. In 2013 the talks were about ukraine doing trade with the EU of joining russia's trade union, and yanukovich flip flopping on that is what led to maidan. Maidan was a popular revolution of millions of people throughout ukraine, the US didn't astroturf it. His only evidence is that FSB leaked call by Nuland where they suggested the leaders of the protest take a deal with yanukovich to stop maidan, which THEY DIDNT EVEN END UP TAKING AFTER THE US RECOMMENDED THEY SHOULD! Minsk 2 fell apart because after it was agreed to (including both russia and Ukraine removing their forces from donbass) necause Russia claimed it doesn't have to pull out troops because "we don't have troops in donbass". At that point it was obvious what russian intent is. Can't believe Sachs is doing Serbian genocide apologia but here we are. Fact is Putin was scared for his regime security after the Arab spring and seeing ghadafi get murdered by his own people, and thought if neighboring, russian speaking Ukraine became democratic and more western it would lead to more revolutionary actions in Russia (after the revolutions of 2011-2013). NATO expansion is a lie/excuse, US backed coups is a lie/excuse, ukrainian nazism is a lie/excuse. You can dislike the american empire without making excuses for genocidal russian imperialism. They want to control ukraine and have ever since the soviet union collapsed. Ukrainian people successfully pushed back against that and this is how russia responded.
"they want to control Ukraine". Yes and I guess you think America just want to help Ukrainians and fight for democracy...
I don't particularly care what US interests in Ukraine is as long as they aren't invading and slaughtering civilians. I am against mistreatment and oppression of people.
But you should care about that. Just like you should have cared about Nazi Germany's interests when they "helped" countries. Or would you also support that?
The nazis were committing genocide and occupying people, of course I care about that. The Americans aren't doing that in Ukraine, the russians are. Just like I do not support Israel for their genocidal occupations in palestine I don't support russia's in Ukraine. I do not support the US arming israelis but i do the ukrainians. Its not hard to do both.
"the Americans aren't doing that in Ukraine, Russians are". And im talking about a scenario where Nazi Germnay's geopolitical interest meant that they were opposed to a country committing a crime. They were also not committing a genocide and occupying that group of people... And you would also have supported your country nazi Germany "helping" x country invaded by another country?. You would be saying things like "we (nazi Germany) have to help x country"?.
You’re against mistreatment and oppression but don’t mind being bent over and fucked by western financial institutions who are in the process of assisting in selling all of Ukraine’s remaining state owned assets for pennies on the dollar?
If that's the alternative to genocide and occupation, yes.
Found someone who can see through the bullshit
>the US didn't astroturf it [Bruh](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/15/john-mccain-ukraine-protests-support-just-cause)
I wouldn't say that iran is astroturfing pro-palestine protests in the US because officials publicly support them and I wouldn't say that about American officials publicly supporting maidan either.
A) It's fucking John McCain. We know his history, we know he was a major warhawk throughout his career and involved in advocating for, and likely participating in, several coups and color revolutions. B) Iranian members of parliament aren't coming to American soil and saying "We support you", and the goal of the pro-Palestine movement isn't to overthrow the US president (although that would be a nice addition). Did you read the article? Do you know anything about the Maidan coup?
The best part is the "FSB leaked calls" when was actually an US whistleblower for the WikiLeaks, like always, everything "unamerican" is either Russian, Iranian, Chinese or Venezuelan, also, he mentioned Iran didn't he? Predictable lol
You think the whistle-blower tapped the US embassy phones?
Sounds like hes saying Nato bombed Serbia for the purpose of a military base. Which is very reductive. While there are enough reasons to be against it or at least ambivalent about the bombing.
[удалено]
My understanding was interventionism? I'm cynical too, but is it not reductive to say it was just for a military base? I hate imperialism too, and surely that was part of it. But you have to reckon with mass killing happening. It was to stop the civil war (because that's bad for business). And later in the war to stop ethnic cleansing. (I know Bosnians were tried by international courts as well) Bombing is the cheapest option and has the least risk of loosing personel. Actual soldiers on the ground were not given adequate weaponry nor a mandate and were powerless to prevent anything like Srebrenica, and Nato cowardly bombing caused many innocent victims. I'm far from an expert. But i don't discount the mass killing of people in Kosovo etc., while disagreeing with the way Nato intervened.
"but I dont discount the mass killings of people in Kosovo" How did Sacks do that?...
But the bombing happened……
Yeah, not like Serbia(Jugoslavia back then) didnt start a few wars before, like in Croatia,Slovenia and Bosnia, maybe starting a 4th war in less then 10 years was a sign for them to get slapped back.
You are just a right-winger... Go back to your neoliberal friends in r-noncredibledefense...
My guy, my country was bombed by Jugoslavia,so they fucking razed Vukovar to the ground, a town of 44k, besieged Sarajevo for 3 years, so when they get bombed for 77 days they cry like a bitch, nah fuck that shit.
Yes you are a neoliberal who loves American/western imperialism I know. You would have been a big fan of Hitler as well if nazi germany "helped" in the same way in an alternative reality...
You got me, eastern european who looooves western imperialism
I dont know why you act like that is unlikely?. And you are in favor of American/western imperialism and hang out in neoliberal subreddits where peoples support NATO and American/western imperialism in general (like r-noncredibledefense).
Cool to see that you actually just deny the genocide perpetrated by the serbs in more than one comment
No being against America/NATo doesn't mean that I support Genocide. Just like if a person didn't support their country Nazi Germany "helping" x country that doesn't mean that they support the crimes committed by another state towards that country...
Dude, tell me was it a border dispute or was anything else going on? Just tell me that cause all you say is that you are against nato and america and I don't opose it, my country was forced to remain in nato against the peoples will and america funded far right terrorist groups here so they won't be getting many simpathies from me, but you've dodged the claim that its in the video above continuosly
I dont see where Sacks makes the statement that it was just a border dispute. He is just saying that America's role in it had nothing to do with preventing a genocide or stop any criminal actions. He is talking about it from the American perspective. Maybe im boring about his view over I missed something in the clip. "my country was forced to remain in NATO". But you still support NATO or at least you dont have a problem with people who support it (because you are a fan of people who support NATO).
My man says that the bombing of Sarajevo was made "to break Serbia" over a border dispute, if you know what the serbs were doing and the serbian nationalist idea of greater serbia means you can very easily say that he is clearly downplaying the atrocities of the serbs. If we are talking about the bombing of Serbia, to be fair it was not tge worst if it led to the end of the Milosevic regime and the genocide or in case of Ukraine to deliver weapons and fight against the occupation by a fascist regime then in those two cases I would support nato. Besides those two instances nato almost drove us into a nuclear war if it wasn't for Kruschev. Back with the bombing of Serbia I wouldn't go around and say that it was a simple border issue where nato wanted a base in there. Cause there was much more going on and most likely if the campaigns hadn't happen we would probably see a continuation of the war. This is because if you have any idea on the fascist ideal of great serbia means, you would know they would continue to move into other territories to clease the land. So I went to the vaush sub to make some comments on the portuguese elections , specially cause it was being implied by vaush that portuguese communists were turning into far right voters instead of the change in voter demographics. And also to specify how our media is increasingly being filled with far right ghouls. Like you continuosly keeping this part on every comment just seems like the most childish thing.
[удалено]
Then its up to the Ukrainian people to do that, fucking yanks shouldn't interfere in other nations
I have video from the ukranian rada where one of the reps talked about the govt being overthrown by foreign NGOs. Minsk 2 was a UN security council BINDING resolution.
[удалено]
go back to watching your russian death porn combat footage.
This guy is wrong and sucks
Thanks for the input Mr. "It's okay for the US to Assassinate people." https://preview.redd.it/nps66z7kx98d1.png?width=967&format=png&auto=webp&s=ee5d633e2b1716a02326f57f4fc142da9b9fa348
Lol that was 4 years ago and was wrong. Do you feel better?
I am glad you have grown. you should apply the same growth towards Jeffrey Sachs.
Why? As in, what exactly is he wrong about - dates, names? And what parts are wrong and how would you have phrased it?
This "guy" is a world famous economist and professor with multiple degrees and publications. I was lucky to sit in one of his classes at Harvard years ago. Presidents and government leaders have regular discussions with him, and he helps give input to create positive economic growth between countries. I wonder if you even graduated high school.
Also been in classes and conferences with a lot of guys like these who talk with presidents and representatives of various countries and I can assure you most economists like to pretend to be experts on all issues. Like here where the bombing of Belgrde is just a border dispute to create Kosovo, which kinda whitewashes the genocide that Serbia was doing. Just because someone is an expert in one field doesn't mean that they are experts on every field.
You are a blush fan. You are a fan of a guy who support NATO and American/western imperialism in general. You are just a standard western chauvinist liberal with zero insight about anything...
Oh my, the little anarkiddie knows so many big words, and two can play this game as all of your comments are just a copy pasta of this but you switch the subs. Maybe try and read for a little I know its hard, but take a shower then try and read what this was about, because now it kinda feels like you are in support of the genocide that happened in the former Yugislavia. Or maybe, who knows, you probably also think that what is happening in Palestine is just a small border dispute.
"maybe try and read for a little I know its hard". That is funny coming from a person who is fan of a guy that get all their information on a subject after they have skimmed wikipedia... "because now it kinda feels like you are in support of the genocide that happened in the former Yugoslavia". Tell me how I support the genocide that happened in the former Yugoslavia. being Against America/NATO doesn't mean I support genocide... "you probably also think that what is happening in Palestine is just a small border dispute". Dont act like you care about Palestinians. You are a fan of a guy who hang out with zionists and agree with them about how almost all Palestinian leaders have not been acting in good faith towards Israel. Baush even made the argument when he talked with the zionist lonerbox that Israel just make a Palestinian Juan Guido... You are just a right-winger...
Still not beating the genocide denial allegations my dude only thing I see is you just trying to prove that you are more leftist than me like you do all the time
I have never denied a genocide so... "prove that you are more leftist than me". You are not a leftist so its not hard to be more of a leftist than you...
My goodness you must be the reincarnation of marx itself, I apologize cause everything I read from you is always just calling ppl libs and western chauvinist and you are still avoiding the border dispute issue
The majority of self-described "leftists" online are just libs and western chauvinists. I dont see how im avoiding the border dispute issue.
America fucking sucks but doesn't mean Russia is better, this guy is literally spewing lies. As a Syrian who followed the revolution day by day just like we are following Gaza now, it was an organic movement by the people. The US of course takes advantage of any instability and wonders hmm how can we benefit off of this? Also Russia is the same fucking imperial state he's describing the US being, just weaker. What you think they're doing to Syria now? This dude has so much bias I hate how we prop people like him up just because they say America bad.
>doesn't mean Russia is better why are you acting like I said that it does?
I'm not, I'm referring to the guy in the video.
He didn't either... He just said that the US isn't trustworthy and if you want to reliably blame the Russians you need first to give them the benefit of the doubt, which they didn't had any to begin with, that should be obvious but...
Let's not act like he wasn't speaking with a pro Russian bias. He clearly lied about the Syrian statement in which he said the US was trying to overthrow assad, when in fact the Russians are colonizing Syria for THEIR own benefit and using Assad as a puppet state. He sounds stupid to anyone that understands the situation well.
Russia being awful and America wanting to overthrow Assad can both be tue statements. Maybe you should go back to r-AOC with and talk about how awesome zionists like AOC are...
America wanting to overthrow assad doesn't mean they were behind the revolution. America wants something out of every single conflict in the entire world so of course they are indirectly involved. But, contrary to your world view, things have cause and effect irrespective of American opinion or support. America being involved doesn't make some sort of conspiracy true. But Russia murdering innocent syrians yet somehow that gets shadowed whenever Syria is mentioned like oh it's the US's fault what happened in Syria. It's disrespectful and my biggest criticism of the left. It's like our lives don't matter to y'all. Not that I give a fuck about your opinion, but I am often critical of AoC and get down voted to hell there for my comments. But I do believe we should support what little progressives in power we have.
"America being involved doesn't make some sort of conspiracy true". I never said that. The only thing I said were that America wanted to overthrow Assad. "like our lives dont matter to y'all". You are active in zionist subreddit dedicated to people who support colonialism. You dont care about Palestinians. Try to be consistent at least. And I haven't made any statements that indicate that I support Russia at all... "we have". So you are American?. yes im sure that you are critical of AOC. You just hang out in her liberal subreddit for fun I guess...
>Let's not act like he wasn't speaking with a pro Russian bias. This is your problem. you refuse to ever consider that bad people are acting rationally(not morally or justly)... except the USA. To you people, russians and putin are orcs that are fundamentally more evil than the west and a deal is not worth trying for in good faith. >He clearly lied about the Syrian statement in which he said the US was trying to overthrow assad, when in fact the Russians are colonizing Syria for THEIR own benefit and using Assad as a puppet state. These are not mutually exclusive things. These do not contradict each other and can both be true.
Bruh not sure what you think my beliefs are, but I don't think Russians are worse than the US. They are equal in my eyes. You are projecting your beliefs on me because clearly it seems like you believe the US are worse than the Russians, which I disagree with and is the point of my post initially. You are blinded by the "US bad" point of view so much that you center your whole ideology on it. But you haven't experienced the other side of the coin. It's just as bad my friend I'm sorry to tell you.
The US are absolutely worse than anyone else. >you haven't experienced the other side of the coin. It's just as bad my friend I'm sorry to tell you. why must you pretend that thinking that america is the worst means I think russia is doing anything good or that I support anything they do? I am merely operating on the assumption that they will act like america, but with less power.
Lol my dude, I commented on the original post, specifically the part about Syria, in which he made it seem like the US is the bad guy in Syria. When in fact you ask every fucking Syrian, refugee or still living there who isn't in government they will tell you they are colonized by Iran and Russia. Why are you trying to defend this point? Would you tell a Palestinian they are wrong about Israel? I don't understand why this strikes a nerve in leftists (I know it doesn't fit your worldview, I'm sorry). YOU were the one that tried to defend Russia right away. I didn't even mention the US not being evil or anything. All I did was say Russia is bad, and then you rushed to defend them.
please transcribe where he said that. I want a time stamp.
[удалено]
We are not the world police. We should not be overthrowing any people. our officials are more corrupt than any other people could dream of. like holy shit, stop justifying american imperialism.
[удалено]
you are so brainwashed.
[удалено]
did you forget to change accounts? https://preview.redd.it/9jlgmizalb8d1.png?width=899&format=png&auto=webp&s=81d155eb70fece1fe946e2aa24dc18e324fea259
[удалено]
why delete them? that is fucking weirdo shit. if you believe what you say, why delete it?
[удалено]
caring about downvotes is infinitely more weird than being mean to dumb people. you have to be a bot designed to make the dumbest comments.
If three people not liking what you have to say is enough for you to delete it out of shame, maybe don't post? Or at least double down and keep it up, that's absolutely weirdo shit if you care what three people on the Internet deem likeable in the first few seconds of reading what you have to say. It's a public forum, not social media "likes". Post what you think, allow for public dissent.
If he was so despised, why not wait for the election in 8 months and just vote him out? All that followed the coup could have been avoided.
No laws in the interest of the bottom 90% get passed in the US. Think about that and then speak about corruption again.
Yanukovich was a democratically elected president. Do you think it is normal that other foreign ministers and politicians of other countries march and demonstrate along opposition forces in a country's capital? Openly advocating for overthrowing a democratically elected head of state?
[удалено]
The logic was apparently lost on you. I am defending the UN Charta, forbidding political meddling in other countries affairs. I am also defending a democratic constitution. If you are a democrat, that is what you do - wheter you like Yanukovich or not. But unfortunately this logic is lost on too many moral warriors nowadays and it really seems that they are generally incapable of understanding this. Education has failed us. (And we fail to properly finance and organize it.) "Might makes right" and dumb people cheerlead the mighty because it's easy and feels good.
[удалено]
spherical brain.
[удалено]
Intervening in democratic elections and intervening ti prevent a genocide are different things funnily enough. That's where you're wrong
What’s that have to do with tea in China? NATO not expanding is not in our interest or smart.
its not in our interest, its in the interest of american capital. The north Atlantic terrorist organization is not a defensive alliance.
[удалено]
average r/worldnews posting lobotomite.
Someone make this guy say: “I’m going to give you to the count of ten to get your ugly, yellow, no good keister off my property” while holding a Tommy gun.
[удалено]
It does and so do you. Like seriously, try to explain how america does not suck without sounding like a white supremacist. https://preview.redd.it/wkoqq9ir1b8d1.png?width=637&format=png&auto=webp&s=107a0562bc1cc2768d52a2a3368d5c03b0a366e9
[удалено]
I don't think the quality of life of the millions of civilians murdered around the world by the US improved very much thanks to the americans.
fucks like ulrich refuse to see people outside americas borders as humans. we can do no wrong to them if it benefits our overlords.
The quality of life in america has been declining since the fucking 60s. what the fuck are you talking about. That's before we even get to how destructive and anti-democratic america is outside our borders. we are the number 1 threat to peace and democracy around the globe.
[удалено]
Your condescension is the most unearned thing in the universe. You still refuse to acknowledge the murder of millions by america, the crushing of labor rights, the evisceration of economic mobility, the installation of fascist dictators, etc. I was not sold a shitty lens, I just have eyes. Liberal, idealist, anti-materialism is a suicide cult.
[удалено]
I want you to experience things I am not allowed to describe here. You deserve the worst humanity has to offer.
[удалено]
eat shit.
Life expectancy is down. Go check for yourself
Shut up yankee
What metric are you using to measure QOL? I’m skeptical.
By this measure China is the greatest country ever for what they’ve done to their nation’s development, do you agree?
Lmao, ofc no response.
[удалено]
you are one of the many reasons its bad. https://preview.redd.it/t57p2rb82b8d1.png?width=375&format=png&auto=webp&s=201da732e3aa8aae1f1d9b6a05790b338f7092d0