It's not Russia, it's Putin

[_Robert_]

Unseen wrote:

@robert I remember Dr. Campbell, who seldom does anything other than read and interpret learned documents, actually saying that Covid deaths are certainly undercounted since so much of it depends on reporting and since often people die of something other than Covid who might have lived were it not for Covid. I’d like to see him saying they were overcounted in general. Perhaps he might have referred to some particular situation. So, he gets a lot of views. He’s lucky.

He is not “lucky”.  He is immoral. He may have been sincere when he started but once the money started rolling in, it became pandering (“misinterpreting”) to the huge anti-vax, Trumpet crowd. It’s not hard to do. Read the comments, they are all right there. Let’s see him debate an actual COVID researcher or even a general statistician about his kitchen table “interpretations” and he would be shredded to protoplasm in a blink. Why doesn’t he publish his interpretations in a peer reviewed paper, you know, like a real scientist? Ah, because he is a politicized YouTube blogger, that’s why.

[_Robert_]

jakelafort wrote:

Robert, If the claim has no substance beyond hearsay and unnamed sources then credibility may be the only criteria to assess a claim.

Jake, if you recall credible news sources used to print retractions for news reported in error. They also made very clear and bold distinctions between news and opinion. It is fine to give your opinion on what might have happened if it is clear the information portion is over, and it is now conjecture and bullshit entertainment time. At some point entire news programs have become all opinion.

Politics is the new religion, and the media is the preacher.

[Unseen]

_Robert_ wrote:

He is not “lucky”.  He is immoral. He may have been sincere when he started but once the money started rolling in, it became pandering (“misinterpreting”) to the huge anti-vax, Trumpet crowd. It’s not hard to do. Read the comments, they are all right there. Let’s see him debate an actual COVID researcher or even a general statistician about his kitchen table “interpretations” and he would be shredded to protoplasm in a blink. Why doesn’t he publish his interpretations in a peer reviewed paper, you know, like a real scientist? Ah, because he is a politicized YouTube blogger, that’s why.

He’s “anti-vax? I suspect I watch his videos far more often than you and, yes, he does occasionally discuss side effects or alternative studies done by reputable journals or public health agencies in other countries (uncivilized countries like Germany and Israel, perhaps). However, he is clearly FOR vaccination but not for treating contrary data as disinformation, the way Youtube, Twitter, and the main media sources do seemingly at the behest of the American public health authorities, ignoring equally qualified authorities elsewhere.

I’m a retired philosopher who publishes his views all the timed. Here, for example. Should I publish them in a philosophical journal first?

Does the word “retired” mean anything to you? LOL

 

[Unseen]

@Robert

Here is Dr. John discussing Ivermectin. What do you object to about his treatment of the medicine? He has a wide following having little to do with “don’t get jabbed.” Just read the comments. I read the first few and found no rabid anti-vaxxers. I suspect a true anti-vaxxer would excoriate him for not drawing their conclusions.

[jakelafort]

From Robert..Politics is the new religion, and the media is the preacher. Nice!

[Unseen]

_Robert_ wrote:

Jake, if you recall credible news sources used to print retractions for news reported in error. They also made very clear and bold distinctions between news and opinion. It is fine to give your opinion on what might have happened if it is clear the information portion is over, and it is now conjecture and bullshit entertainment time. At some point entire news programs have become all opinion.

Well, Robert, there is NO evidence Russia blew up the pipelines whereas there IS evidence that the U.S. did it (military activity in the area, public statements by Biden and Blinken) plus little or no benefit to Putin vs. a potential windfall for American producers.

Lacking conclusive evidence, we are left with speculation, which by its very nature is opinion.

So, which side is the more harebrained? The “It’s bad so Russia must have done it” or the “Well, if you look at who benefits, it’s certainly not Russia” side?

• This reply was modified 3 years, 6 months ago by Unseen.
• This reply was modified 3 years, 6 months ago by Unseen.

[Unseen]

@Robert

Here Dr. John discusses vaccination status in a video that got him a Youtube “Warning.” While he does find it interesting that Dr. Fauci and top Pfizer execs, all of them fully vaccinated and boosted, nevertheless contracted Covid-19. None died or even got seriously ill, but presumably could still transmit the disease. Nowhere does he advise against getting jabbed. He doesn’t say anywhere not to do so. He certainly doesn’t even imply that it might be a bad idea for even some segment of the population to avoid vaccination.

Rather than hiding from comments, encourages us to read through them.

[TheEncogitationer]

Fellow Unbelievers,

Here’s an article from a man who claims experience in the realm of offshore drilling and piping. He gives a very plausible (and humorously-expressed) explanation for how the Nordstream Pipeline exploded. Yes, it was the Russians, but not for the reason you may think:

Nordstream
https://thelawdogfiles.com/2022/09/nordstream.html

It makes even more sense when you consider that Russia is still an economy where the State and State Cronies run everything and they’re still trying to allot goods and services without an unfettered Free Market Supply-And-Demand pricing system…and that includes services for maintaining pipelines. The end result is always chaos and destruction.

I don’t know who originally said it, but never attribute to malevolence what is best attributed to incompetance and stupidity.

😁

[Unseen]

@Enco

Just what we needed. One more theory to add to the “Russia did it” side, though this one removes any mens rea, which makes a lot more sense than proposing Putin did it intentionally. It also comports with the Russian incompetence on the battlefield.

[PopeBeanie]

Oh no, not this topic again? Yeah, you betchya.

I really like the following interview about Putin’s historical motivation to go to war, largely because it’s not two or more guys trying to trash other media, commentators, or griping about the establishment (although sometimes it’s worthwhile), or about stirring up conspiracy theories or starting new ones, or revving up the anger machines. It’s about an experienced Russian diplomat’s past experience, partly about how Russians are “different” from Americans, and Progozhin’s effects. Power amongst oligarchs, and so forth.

I skip about halfway into the video because it’s just over an hour, but if you decide later to watch the whole thing (like I did), the first half is still informative.

[_Robert_]

Let’s fix the threat of sharing a border with NATO by invading, annexing Ukraine and thereby making a border with NATO, LOL. Meanwhile as their boys bleed out, Russian civilians just go about their business with their nads sucked up good and high, being too scared to say or do anything. What a life. The Ukrainians are on to them, they got a taste of Western Europe and don’t want to “live” like Russians. You can see it in their eyes as the walk past dead “orcs”.

Russia’s war strategy so far has been so inept it will be studied by militaries all over the world as bad example for decades. The only thing they are good at is killing civilians like the war criminals they are.

[PopeBeanie]

I waited too long to say this: From now on, I’m going to enforce a stay-on-topic policy here. It will be be okay to counter my “it’s Putin not Russia” theme. A few side-notes here or there, like hurricane news or AI aren’t so bad, but please, no off-topic, time-sinking personal crusades.

Onward. Pregozhin/Wagner militarily have been both a boon and a threat to Putin. Ever since they escaped and weren’t eliminated in Belarus, I’ve had some thoughts, but haven’t researched them.

How serious was/is Putin about eliminating this threat, vs how much might he be hoping to make use of them again? All narratives I’ve seen so far are about the threats posed, but can’t loyalties and alliances adapt to Putin’s favor again?

I’ve been saying, for example, that letting Putin win because he threatens to use nuclear weapons is a terrible reason to let him win. If Pregozhin or his alliances build to defeat Putin or Putin’s power, nuclear threats and actions could become even more likely, right? But then more likely may be chaos and paralyzation in Moscow.

Is there any reason to believe that if Putin wins Ukraine, his style of winning with (e.g.) widespread attacks on civilians and denial of food exports to countries that need it will be curtailed forever? Would Putin and/or oligarchy winning Ukraine somehow be better for the region and the world? Would it encourage China to be more aggressive, too?

10-1/2 minutes long:

[jakelafort]

Assessing Putin’s intentions is a fool’s errand. It is just speculation. Even though he may have evinced his intentions the pressure of the moment might cause him to alter course. If he is defeated or dies there is a chance a power vacuum will be occupied by an even more reactionary dictator or government. If you are a hawk(supported the war effort from the outset) then i agree P’s threat of nucs is not a valid reason to capitulate. All of the awful consequences that have transpired were foreseeable including threat of nucs or actual deployment. Thus no reason to about-face now.

Meanwhile it is the march of folly two by two into the sea and threatening our ultimate extinction. I suspect the west has been fighting a war by proxy. God, Zeus and Mary Poppins knows governments don’t care about welfare of humans or violation of human rights. Their actions have proven that again n again.

The west should have done its utmost to foster cooperation and settle matters in compromise. Privately Russia should have been informed that any aggression beyond whatever was ceded will be met with a ferocious response. I can’t prove it but i strongly suspect China is more apt to invade Taiwan under the current trajectory. It all comes out in the wash and the sangfroid of the moment is the part of the play before the last syllable of recorded time.

[Simon Paynton]

jakelafort wrote:

I suspect the west has been fighting a war by proxy.

Why would the West want a war with Russia?  That’s Putin’s propaganda.  Since when did we threaten them, and why would we?

Russia has an age-old history of attacking its neighbours.  The Russian bear is paranoid, aggressive and domineering.

[_Robert_]

Simon Paynton wrote:

jakelafort wrote:

I suspect the west has been fighting a war by proxy.

Why would the West want a war with Russia? That’s Putin’s propaganda. Since when did we threaten them, and why would we? Russia has an age-old history of attacking its neighbours. The Russian bear is paranoid, aggressive and domineering.

Exactly. You know who understands Russia? Finland, Poland, and Slavic countries. Unlike hapless Bush and co-conspirator Trump, Hilary Clinton had his number. And every Western intelligence agency has been warning of the pending aggression.  He is on record saying the fall of the USSR was facilitated by traitors and believes the former bloc is really Russian property.

And we know paranoid Putin is very afraid of dying. He has amassed huge wealth along with his kiss-ass oligarchs, has his young Russian beauty. During Covid he cancelled all meetings unless his ridiculous meeting table was 100 feet long. He knows all too well there is no bunker deep enough. The Russian economy is suffering, and the rumblings are beginning. He believed the lies of yes-men and vastly underestimated Ukranian resolve and cleverness and is looking for a way out to save himself. Even if this overrated, conscripted, Russian military was capable of taking Kyiv, there would be insurrection on a scale we have yet to see.

[Author]

Posts