Nanomachines son said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

Watching this Putin interview I came away with the fact that I hate modern American politics. Putin knows his nation's history and we should expect that from our leaders. We used to have this and we used to have leaders who knew history dating back to Jamestown and back into England and Europe.

Regardless of Putin's motivations or lies, you cannot say he has not studied history and geopolitics extensively. We need to expect this and demand it from our own leaders.

---

Yes but Putin's takes this to entire differently level. Its his religion- the way he recounted Russian history and Poland's invention in that 'holy' history. He blames 13th C Poland for the Ukrainian mess of today. That requires a passion most folk just dont have; dangerous levels of it. The sooner this dude exits this world the better off it will be.

---

We should demand this level of passion from our leaders. Why is this a bad thing? He's not blaming Poland at all, he used all of the historical context to show why those lands belonged to Russia, not that it was all Poland's fault. Our leaders should have an autistic level of of knowledge about US history going back to Jamestown. They should know the reasons and causes for every major conflict and land acquisition. They should know our grievances or claims to specific areas of land. They should know why people made the decisions they did within the historical context of the time period.

This is not dangerous at all. This is what good leaders do. This place constantly harps on how those who forget history are doomed to repeat it yet when confronted by a foreign adversary who has this level of knowledge, it is now condemned. I don't get it, either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?

---

Uh, you could hear it in his tone. And his expression-- as controlled as it was. He loathes Poland. A blind man could see it.

Oh and your last sentence. You think that knowledge and passion for history is binary ?-- yes [A good Thing] or no [bad thing] only? Here you go-- a yes/no 'either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?

"Well, I think the South should succeed and then use its new found industry and tech to burn NY and Chicago to the ground as they did to Atlanta." Is this hyperbolic example a "good thing or is it bad. Which is it"

or

"Yeah the Civil War was awful but Sherman was right to take out Atlanta as an industrial center in order to shorten the war and save lives. We need to learn from history and move on."

Your statement: I don't get it, either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?
is so wrong because its not a binary question nor does it have binary answers. Its about degrees of knowledge and perspective which have a million variations ESPECIALLY when merged to human emotion.

I think your entire premise is wrong.

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Can you imagine having a president as smart, sharp, well spoken, philosophical, and historically knowledgeable as this man? I wish more Americans would watch this interview...especially the super pro-war ones. This guy runs circles around almost all of our politicians cognitively. We are a bunch of clowns in comparison.

Has anyone fact checked this interview yet? I could not find any holes or obvious lies. He just has a different position...but I didn't pick up on any real propaganda whatsoever. I still have 30 min to go though.

I almost wonder if he had an earpiece or something with advanced AI or a van full of brainiacs telling him what to say when he was spouting off 30 min of history and dates like it was nothing. Very impressive man.

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world. Every country has done this at some point. We need to walk away.

Wish we could one day stumble on a president with Putin's good traits and without his bad ones. Pipe dream.

---

Our news services don't want our politicians to be like this. They want them to speak in short pithy (30 second or less sound bytes) that they can use to back stop news stories presenting the news organization's preferred narrative. Our interviewers would never allow a politician to present 30 minutes of history in an interview because the attention span of the average TV viewer is about 30 seconds. We have plenty of smart and knowledgeable politicians (that are mostly not allowed anywhere near leadership positions), but we never get to experience anything like this from them because the way we consume news rarely allows them to speak in an extended way about any given subject.

txags92 said:

---

281TexAg said:

---

AtticusMatlock said:

---

That's the whole point of the US sending arms to Ukraine. Ukraine is in the way of Russia's real targets.

Russia's declining population and indefensible geography have made the more paranoid nationalists like Putin believe that the only way they can survive is to secure chokepoints against future land invasion. This means securing the mountainous region in Moldova and parts of Hungary, taking back Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia and taking over parts of Poland.

---

If this is true, then why didn't Putin invade these countries back in the 2000's when the US had 250,000+ troops tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan? We wouldn't have been able to stop them.

---

They were busy fighting in Chechnya.

---

They could have opened a second front. At the height of the 1999 Russian offensive in Chechnya only 80,000 troops were committed, including pro-Russian Chechens. That is a small fraction of what America had committed in the Middle East.

ttu_85 said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Yes. Keep in mind Putin is the head Oligarch too, effectively. He is a billionaire mostly discreetly, but his focus is power and putting power to use instead of amassing wealth. He drew much of his power by being the politically acceptable and populist face of that group amongst the Russian population, and restoring order from the post breakup chaos, even if it was through authoritarianism. An alliance with his peers in their respective areas of economic power helped him reach and stay at the top, until he had fixed his position. Keeping them satisfied as a group does matter and the war definitely strains that economically, but I think it also helps empower Putin as long as it does not hot terribly badly in the view of the Russian public.

Putin can use wars to reestablish Russian sovereignty or prestige pretty much almost endlessly to keep his population focused on that matter and off of any dissatisfaction they might feel. It is something Russia is culturally used to.

---

Great post as always. It is ingrained in their being. Even the harden Stalinist communist had to refer to WW2 as "The Great Patriotic War." Russia has always had a dark bloody history. Repeated invasions will do that to a people-- The Mongols, French, Germans, etc have killed millions through the centuries.

Look at our 1 big land war fought here at home, the Civil War, and its influences on culture especially the South's. Magnify that X 100.

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

Watching this Putin interview I came away with the fact that I hate modern American politics. Putin knows his nation's history and we should expect that from our leaders. We used to have this and we used to have leaders who knew history dating back to Jamestown and back into England and Europe.

Regardless of Putin's motivations or lies, you cannot say he has not studied history and geopolitics extensively. We need to expect this and demand it from our own leaders.

---

Yes but Putin's takes this to entire differently level. Its his religion- the way he recounted Russian history and Poland's invention in that 'holy' history. He blames 13th C Poland for the Ukrainian mess of today. That requires a passion most folk just dont have; dangerous levels of it. The sooner this dude exits this world the better off it will be.

---

We should demand this level of passion from our leaders. Why is this a bad thing? He's not blaming Poland at all, he used all of the historical context to show why those lands belonged to Russia, not that it was all Poland's fault. Our leaders should have an autistic level of of knowledge about US history going back to Jamestown. They should know the reasons and causes for every major conflict and land acquisition. They should know our grievances or claims to specific areas of land. They should know why people made the decisions they did within the historical context of the time period.

This is not dangerous at all. This is what good leaders do. This place constantly harps on how those who forget history are doomed to repeat it yet when confronted by a foreign adversary who has this level of knowledge, it is now condemned. I don't get it, either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?

---

Uh, you could here it in his tone. And his expression-- as controlled as it was. He loathes Poland. A blind man could see it.

Oh and your last sentence. You think that knowledge and passion for history is binary ?-- yes [A good Thing] or no [bad thing] only? Here you go-- a yes/no 'either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?

"Well, I think the South should succeed and then use its new found industry and tech to burn NY and Chicago to the ground as they did to Atlanta." Is this hyperbolic example a "good thing or is it bad. Which is it"

or

"Yeah the Civil War was awful but Sherman was right to take out Atlanta as an industrial center in order to shorten the war and save lives. We need to learn from history and move on."

Your statement: I don't get it, either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?
is so wrong because its not a binary question nor does it have binary answers. Its about degrees of knowledge and perspective which have a million variations ESPECIALLY when merged to human emotion.

I think your entire premise is wrong.

---

Exactly. Putin is using history to whip up support for the things he wants to do for his own reasons. If he really cared about history of the nations around him, he would include the parts where they decided they were better as independent countries than as part of Russia. He uses his version of history to justify the resources he wants to take and the populations he wants to rule against their consent. While his ability to eloquently speak about his rationalizations is somewhat admirable, His passion for conquering other populations against their will, using absolutely brutal tactics that deliberately target civilians for the worst of his brutality makes him no better than Hitler or Pol Pot, and anybody celebrating him as an example of anything besides pure evil needs their head examined.

Correction said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world.

---

This board never ceases to amaze me. Jesus Christ.

---

Care to refute? Did you watch the whole thing? We are a bunch of clowns. And I am not just talking about "the squad", or the other insanely stupid politicians continuing to wreck this country. Vast majority of republicans too.

281TexAg said:

---

txags92 said:

---

281TexAg said:

---

AtticusMatlock said:

---

That's the whole point of the US sending arms to Ukraine. Ukraine is in the way of Russia's real targets.

Russia's declining population and indefensible geography have made the more paranoid nationalists like Putin believe that the only way they can survive is to secure chokepoints against future land invasion. This means securing the mountainous region in Moldova and parts of Hungary, taking back Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia and taking over parts of Poland.

---

If this is true, then why didn't Putin invade these countries back in the 2000's when the US had 250,000+ troops tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan? We wouldn't have been able to stop them.

---

They were busy fighting in Chechnya.

---

They could have opened a second front. At the height of the 1999 Russian offensive in Chechnya only 80,000 troops were committed, including pro-Russian Chechens. That is a small fraction of what America had committed in the Middle East.

---

What have you seen from Russias military over the last two years that suggests they are capable of a two country invasion?

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Correction said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world.

---

This board never ceases to amaze me. Jesus Christ.

---

Care to refute? Did you watch the whole thing? We are a bunch of clowns. And I am not just talking about "the squad", or the other insanely stupid politicians continuing to wreck this country. Vast majority of republicans too.

---

Well the idea that other sovereign nations are "theirs" for starters…

Teslag said:

---

281TexAg said:

---

txags92 said:

---

281TexAg said:

---

AtticusMatlock said:

---

That's the whole point of the US sending arms to Ukraine. Ukraine is in the way of Russia's real targets.

Russia's declining population and indefensible geography have made the more paranoid nationalists like Putin believe that the only way they can survive is to secure chokepoints against future land invasion. This means securing the mountainous region in Moldova and parts of Hungary, taking back Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia and taking over parts of Poland.

---

If this is true, then why didn't Putin invade these countries back in the 2000's when the US had 250,000+ troops tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan? We wouldn't have been able to stop them.

---

They were busy fighting in Chechnya.

---

They could have opened a second front. At the height of the 1999 Russian offensive in Chechnya only 80,000 troops were committed, including pro-Russian Chechens. That is a small fraction of what America had committed in the Middle East.

---

What have you seen from Russias military over the last two years that suggests they are capable of a two country invasion?

---

Then why is anyone so concerned about them taking over the 6 different countries listed in the post I quoted?

Teslag said:

---

Correction said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world.

---

This board never ceases to amaze me. Jesus Christ.

---

"no one here is pulling for Russia"

---

I think I am one of the only ones, to be fair. I think some others just admire some of Putin's qualities, or think we shouldn't be funding Ukraine to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars....I don't know of any other people actively pulling for them to take what they think is theirs. There may be a few of us, out of a forum with hundreds of active posters.

Go Russia! Go Putin! You do you. Sorry our politicians are so stupid, corrupt and meddling. Bunch of hypocrite slimeballs.

We are no better than Russia. Our alphabet agencies literally colluded to rig/influence our last election. We see a lot of the corruption on a daily basis...but imagine what we don't see and will never see.

This American stands with Russia!

Teslag said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Correction said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world.

---

This board never ceases to amaze me. Jesus Christ.

---

Care to refute? Did you watch the whole thing? We are a bunch of clowns. And I am not just talking about "the squad", or the other insanely stupid politicians continuing to wreck this country. Vast majority of republicans too.

---

Well the idea that other sovereign nations are "theirs" for starters…

---

Don't care, way of the world since the dawn of time...trying to take back lands that were theirs for a LONG time.

Why should we care. Why should we sacrifice and compromise our childrens' futures just that much more over this?

Teslag said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Correction said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world.

---

This board never ceases to amaze me. Jesus Christ.

---

"no one here is pulling for Russia"

---

I think I am one of the only ones, to be fair. I think some others just admire some of Putin's qualities, or think we shouldn't be funding Ukraine to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars....I don't know of any other people actively pulling for them to take what they think is theirs. There may be a few of us, out of a forum with hundreds of active posters.

Go Russia! Go Putin! You do you. Sorry our politicians are so stupid, corrupt and meddling. Bunch of hypocrite slimeballs.

We are no better than Russia. Our alphabet agencies literally colluded to rig/influence our last election. We see a lot of the corruption on a daily basis...but imagine what we don't see and will never see.

This American stands with Russia!

---

Thank you. I'll now use this post when people try to use the "no one is pulling for Russia" bit. And I'm sure you'll get plenty of blue stars too.

---

Cool. I may go back and dig up posts of you freaking out over people using fake vaccine cards to keep their jobs and you saying they should be reported to HR and law enforcement lol. Would make a funny sig.

txags92 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Can you imagine having a president as smart, sharp, well spoken, philosophical, and historically knowledgeable as this man? I wish more Americans would watch this interview...especially the super pro-war ones. This guy runs circles around almost all of our politicians cognitively. We are a bunch of clowns in comparison.

Has anyone fact checked this interview yet? I could not find any holes or obvious lies. He just has a different position...but I didn't pick up on any real propaganda whatsoever. I still have 30 min to go though.

I almost wonder if he had an earpiece or something with advanced AI or a van full of brainiacs telling him what to say when he was spouting off 30 min of history and dates like it was nothing. Very impressive man.

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world. Every country has done this at some point. We need to walk away.

Wish we could one day stumble on a president with Putin's good traits and without his bad ones. Pipe dream.

---

The spirit of Chamberlain awakens! Hitler was just "settling old border skirmishes" in Europe too, right?

---

Apples and oranges. Comparing Hitler and Putin...or their motivations? This board cracks me up.

Yall must be high if you think Putin wants to take over Europe and create some sort of empire. Or exterminate a gigantic group of people.

Do Israel now. Who does that belong to? I say Israel. But has it always been theirs? What do you say? It's a little more nuanced than people like to make it, and only our business because it is our self interest to preserve Israel in a large sea of unstable/violent Islamic countries.

Funding Ukraine is NOT in our interest. It hurts our people.

txags92 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Can you imagine having a president as smart, sharp, well spoken, philosophical, and historically knowledgeable as this man? I wish more Americans would watch this interview...especially the super pro-war ones. This guy runs circles around almost all of our politicians cognitively. We are a bunch of clowns in comparison.

Has anyone fact checked this interview yet? I could not find any holes or obvious lies. He just has a different position...but I didn't pick up on any real propaganda whatsoever. I still have 30 min to go though.

I almost wonder if he had an earpiece or something with advanced AI or a van full of brainiacs telling him what to say when he was spouting off 30 min of history and dates like it was nothing. Very impressive man.

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world. Every country has done this at some point. We need to walk away.

Wish we could one day stumble on a president with Putin's good traits and without his bad ones. Pipe dream.

---

The spirit of Chamberlain awakens! Hitler was just "settling old border skirmishes" in Europe too, right? I am sure he spoke quite eloquently about the terrible impact the Jews had on Germany to anybody who would sit and listen to his ramblings. So would you have been rooting for him too because he was so strong and powerful and unafraid to explain his carefully thought out rationalizations for what he was doing? Should we have "walked away" from Germany and let Europe deal with the extermination of the Jews and the takeover of the continent by a lunatic?

Putin is telling you what he wants to do to free countries that have decided they do not want to be a part of Russia, and we have seen the tactics he is willing to use against civilians in Chechnya, Syria, and Ukraine, and your takeaway is to root FOR him and think we should walk away? Wow...I guess even the NYT had apologists for the Germans during WWII, but it is still stunning to see it firsthand in people that should know better.

---

But Hitler was justified because "it's the way of the world".

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

txags92 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Can you imagine having a president as smart, sharp, well spoken, philosophical, and historically knowledgeable as this man? I wish more Americans would watch this interview...especially the super pro-war ones. This guy runs circles around almost all of our politicians cognitively. We are a bunch of clowns in comparison.

Has anyone fact checked this interview yet? I could not find any holes or obvious lies. He just has a different position...but I didn't pick up on any real propaganda whatsoever. I still have 30 min to go though.

I almost wonder if he had an earpiece or something with advanced AI or a van full of brainiacs telling him what to say when he was spouting off 30 min of history and dates like it was nothing. Very impressive man.

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world. Every country has done this at some point. We need to walk away.

Wish we could one day stumble on a president with Putin's good traits and without his bad ones. Pipe dream.

---

The spirit of Chamberlain awakens! Hitler was just "settling old border skirmishes" in Europe too, right?

---

Apples and oranges. Comparing Hitler and Putin...or their motivations? This board cracks me up.

Yall must be high if you think Putin wants to take over Europe and create some sort of empire. Or exterminate a gigantic group of people.

---

He has explicitly stated he wants to restore the Russian empire. He and his sycophants have explicitly stated all the countries they believe should be part of Russia and threatened to invade any who try to stand in his way. He sent units into Ukraine with explicit instructions to rape, pillage, and terrorize the civilian population in order to force the Ukrainian government to capitulate sooner. These things have been the "way of the world" for centuries for sure, and we have been trying to stamp them out for the last 80 years after seeing them firsthand in WWII.

By your logic, the French had no reason to assist the colonists in trying to rebel against England, right? It was just a border skirmish and England taking what was theirs, right? The right of a people to self determine their own government shouldn't factor into it? Pathetic...

ttu_85 said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

Watching this Putin interview I came away with the fact that I hate modern American politics. Putin knows his nation's history and we should expect that from our leaders. We used to have this and we used to have leaders who knew history dating back to Jamestown and back into England and Europe.

Regardless of Putin's motivations or lies, you cannot say he has not studied history and geopolitics extensively. We need to expect this and demand it from our own leaders.

---

Yes but Putin's takes this to entire differently level. Its his religion- the way he recounted Russian history and Poland's invention in that 'holy' history. He blames 13th C Poland for the Ukrainian mess of today. That requires a passion most folk just dont have; dangerous levels of it. The sooner this dude exits this world the better off it will be.

---

We should demand this level of passion from our leaders. Why is this a bad thing? He's not blaming Poland at all, he used all of the historical context to show why those lands belonged to Russia, not that it was all Poland's fault. Our leaders should have an autistic level of of knowledge about US history going back to Jamestown. They should know the reasons and causes for every major conflict and land acquisition. They should know our grievances or claims to specific areas of land. They should know why people made the decisions they did within the historical context of the time period.

This is not dangerous at all. This is what good leaders do. This place constantly harps on how those who forget history are doomed to repeat it yet when confronted by a foreign adversary who has this level of knowledge, it is now condemned. I don't get it, either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?

---

Uh, you could here it in his tone. And his expression-- as controlled as it was. He loathes Poland. A blind man could see it.

Oh and your last sentence. You think that knowledge and passion for history is binary ?-- yes [A good Thing] or no [bad thing] only? Here you go-- a yes/no 'either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?

"Well, I think the South should succeed and then use its new found industry and tech to burn NY and Chicago to the ground as they did to Atlanta." Is this hyperbolic example a "good thing or is it bad. Which is it"

or

"Yeah the Civil War was awful but Sherman was right to take out Atlanta as an industrial center in order to shorten the war and save lives. We need to learn from history and move on."

Your statement: I don't get it, either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?
is so wrong because its not a binary question nor does it have binary answers. Its about degrees of knowledge and perspective which have a million variations ESPECIALLY when merged to human emotion.

I think your entire premise is wrong.

---

I agree with Sherman's methods to end the war despite disagreeing with the North's reasons for the war. History is nuanced, you cannot break it down to a binary right or wrong scenario. Each side has its own worldview based upon their own experiences.

As for Putin, of course he loathes Poland, there is legitimate historical animosity between Russia and Poland. The peope of those nations do not like each other at all. Why does this shock you? Go ask the Polish leaders and you'll get similar answers about historical issues with Russia and why they are justified regarding aggression towards Russia. Neither side is incorrect and their opinions have been shaped by what has happened to their people in the past.

You are right that human emotion comes into play. That's exactly what passion and devotion to your nation means. This is why it took until WWII for the US to develop decent relations with the UK. This is why the South retains significant animosity towards Yankees. War and conflict create generational issues that can last hundreds of years or more. Many nations never get over past issues. The point is that your leaders should know about these things and understand why certain worldviews exist.

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Correction said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world.

---

This board never ceases to amaze me. Jesus Christ.

---

Care to refute? Did you watch the whole thing? We are a bunch of clowns. And I am not just talking about "the squad", or the other insanely stupid politicians continuing to wreck this country. Vast majority of republicans too.

---

Reaction to Putin interview illustrates todays problems:

- Neocons won’t debate the assertions, they call Putin and Tucker names.

- Goobers can’t listen to two men discussing serious matters. Too boring. They need more jump cuts and bull horns.

— Cernovich (@Cernovich) February 9, 2024

oysterbayAG said:

---

Could Biden do a 2 hour interview with Tucker?

---

Lol. Biden couldn't make it ten minutes with a mostly sympathetic press.

txags92 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Can you imagine having a president as smart, sharp, well spoken, philosophical, and historically knowledgeable as this man? I wish more Americans would watch this interview...especially the super pro-war ones. This guy runs circles around almost all of our politicians cognitively. We are a bunch of clowns in comparison.

Has anyone fact checked this interview yet? I could not find any holes or obvious lies. He just has a different position...but I didn't pick up on any real propaganda whatsoever. I still have 30 min to go though.

I almost wonder if he had an earpiece or something with advanced AI or a van full of brainiacs telling him what to say when he was spouting off 30 min of history and dates like it was nothing. Very impressive man.

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world. Every country has done this at some point. We need to walk away.

Wish we could one day stumble on a president with Putin's good traits and without his bad ones. Pipe dream.

---

Our news services don't want our politicians to be like this. They want them to speak in short pithy (30 second or less sound bytes) that they can use to back stop news stories presenting the news organization's preferred narrative. Our interviewers would never allow a politician to present 30 minutes of history in an interview because the attention span of the average TV viewer is about 30 seconds. We have plenty of smart and knowledgeable politicians (that are mostly not allowed anywhere near leadership positions), but we never get to experience anything like this from them because the way we consume news rarely allows them to speak in an extended way about any given subject.

---

It isn't the news services; it's the voters. The news services would love it if two-hour interviews with politicians paid the bills. It would make them more relevant. But the general public couldn't care less how it is governed. When is the last time anyone here went to a school board meeting or city council meeting? The city of Houston, for example, spends about $5 billion a year to operate, and HISD spends another $2.5 billion or so. Yet the public can't be bothered to read a synopsis of the meetings unless there is something titillating to grab its attention.

I don't disagree with what you're saying. I'm certainly grateful for the French support during our fight for independence.

I support a free Ukraine. I think their freedom could have been maintained another way, though.

More importantly, the reason for our support is where I take issue. We aren't defending Ukraine because we feel morally obligated to do so. We're paying for their defense because 1.) they've lured very powerful people in the US into bed and lined their pockets for years. They set us up. They knew exactly what they were doing and they executed it so that our leaders are in their pockets at the risk of exposure. 2.) our MIC makes a fortune doing so and that also lines the pockets of those very powerful people.

Nothing that happens over there benefits you or me or the rest of the American public, but we're going to pay for it. Our only conciliation is that we get to believe "we're doing the right thing" based on our world view. Our kids kids are so deeply in debt before they are even born, but we did the right thing. Not only are we paying for it, your tax dollars are going directly into the pockets of the people that take jets over to WEF meetings as they decide that you and me shouldn't grow our own food, we shouldn't eat meat, we shouldn't have vehicles. It's just furthering the divide between the elites and me and you. They get more powerful, we get more poor.

BlueTaze said:

---

Ukraine is a money laundering op. No oversight or controls on 100s of billions of taxpayer funds in "aide". Not hard at all to cyphon off 100s of millions and set up dozens of DC politicians for life.

---

And it started well before the current war. That's why the Democrats went berserk when Trump started nosing around and asking questions. He was messing with their playpen.

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Correction said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world.

---

This board never ceases to amaze me. Jesus Christ.

---

Care to refute? Did you watch the whole thing? We are a bunch of clowns. And I am not just talking about "the squad", or the other insanely stupid politicians continuing to wreck this country. Vast majority of republicans too.

---

Refute what?

That you're impressed by Putin's obsession with Russian revisionist history and actively cheerleading their invasion of Ukraine? That you're openly "rooting" for them?

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

txags92 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Can you imagine having a president as smart, sharp, well spoken, philosophical, and historically knowledgeable as this man? I wish more Americans would watch this interview...especially the super pro-war ones. This guy runs circles around almost all of our politicians cognitively. We are a bunch of clowns in comparison.

Has anyone fact checked this interview yet? I could not find any holes or obvious lies. He just has a different position...but I didn't pick up on any real propaganda whatsoever. I still have 30 min to go though.

I almost wonder if he had an earpiece or something with advanced AI or a van full of brainiacs telling him what to say when he was spouting off 30 min of history and dates like it was nothing. Very impressive man.

But my main takeaway was how stupid and trashy our politicians are in comparison. I was fine with Russia doing their own thing and for us letting them settle old border skirmishes that we have no business involving ourselves in. Now I'm actively rooting for them to take what is theirs...it's the way of the world. Every country has done this at some point. We need to walk away.

Wish we could one day stumble on a president with Putin's good traits and without his bad ones. Pipe dream.

---

The spirit of Chamberlain awakens! Hitler was just "settling old border skirmishes" in Europe too, right?

---

Apples and oranges. Comparing Hitler and Putin...or their motivations? This board cracks me up.

Yall must be high if you think Putin wants to take over Europe and create some sort of empire. Or exterminate a gigantic group of people.

Do Israel now. Who does that belong to? I say Israel. But has it always been theirs? What do you say? It's a little more nuanced than people like to make it, and only our business because it is our self interest to preserve Israel in a large sea of unstable/violent Islamic countries.

Funding Ukraine is NOT in our interest. It hurts our people.

---

I will answer this that you added in your edit separately. Israel is a free country that has been attacked by its surrounding neighbors since the very beginning of its existence as a country. You can go back and forth about who has owned it for how long and any particular group can make an at least somewhat compelling argument for why the land Israel currently exists on should be theirs. But the fact of the matter is that Israel owns it now and the people who live there have decided to live as a free people. Those who live around them have been given that same opportunity and turned it down in favor of continuing to live solely for the purpose of trying to destroy Israel and exterminate the people who live there.

I will always choose the side of the people who have self determined their own government and who are willing to live in peace with their neighbors, and I will always be against people or countries who invade their neighbors and decide to usurp the power of self determination from them. It is easy to be consistent when you side with freedom and against evil. People who deliberately kill, rape, or terrorize civilians including women and children to cow others into accepting their rule are evil. People who fight against them and do their utmost best to limit civilian casualties and who help rebuild afterwards and allow them to select their own governments are not.

Russia is one of 2 main geopolitical and economic rivals. They are destroying themselves long-term attempting to conquer Ukraine. The long term effects on their demographics and loss of top-tier military equipment will take decades to overcome. The nations of Europe will not soon trust them with their energy needs again and that is a benefit to us in the long-term. We are spending a tiny fraction of our GDP to prolong irreparable harm to Russia's future ambitions. To me that is worth it as long as we are supporting a free people fighting for their very existence against a country led by the face of evil incarnate.

Did you listen to the interview?

Putin makes the case that the sanctions placed upon it have not hurt them at all. They're doing fine and it's only actually hurting us.

I've always thought that about sanctions. At least those levied against another formidable country like Russia or China. If we "We will not buy any more oil from Russia" well then they jsut sell it to Brazil and Brazil sells it to us. These things don't seem to be effective in my estimation. They traded it in ruples instead of dollars.

I'm not well versed in this area, this is just how I've always questioned the power of our sanctions.

2nd thing I wanted to ask you with regard to Israel as you said you'd always support a people determining they would like to be free and self govern. Israel is really nuanced as has been stated. I support them and believe it's important we continue to do so, but to play devil's advocate to your statement what if me and my posse saddled up and came to your residence and removed you from the premises, declared ourselves a free people with the ability to govern ourselves in what was YOUR house. Are you justified in fighting to the bitter end to take it back?

ttu_85 said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

Watching this Putin interview I came away with the fact that I hate modern American politics. Putin knows his nation's history and we should expect that from our leaders. We used to have this and we used to have leaders who knew history dating back to Jamestown and back into England and Europe.

Regardless of Putin's motivations or lies, you cannot say he has not studied history and geopolitics extensively. We need to expect this and demand it from our own leaders.

---

Yes but Putin's takes this to entire differently level. Its his religion- the way he recounted Russian history and Poland's invention in that 'holy' history. He blames 13th C Poland for the Ukrainian mess of today. That requires a passion most folk just dont have; dangerous levels of it. The sooner this dude exits this world the better off it will be.

---

We should demand this level of passion from our leaders. Why is this a bad thing? He's not blaming Poland at all, he used all of the historical context to show why those lands belonged to Russia, not that it was all Poland's fault. Our leaders should have an autistic level of of knowledge about US history going back to Jamestown. They should know the reasons and causes for every major conflict and land acquisition. They should know our grievances or claims to specific areas of land. They should know why people made the decisions they did within the historical context of the time period.

This is not dangerous at all. This is what good leaders do. This place constantly harps on how those who forget history are doomed to repeat it yet when confronted by a foreign adversary who has this level of knowledge, it is now condemned. I don't get it, either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?

---

Uh, you could here it in his tone. And his expression-- as controlled as it was. He loathes Poland. A blind man could see it.

Oh and your last sentence. You think that knowledge and passion for history is binary ?-- yes [A good Thing] or no [bad thing] only? Here you go-- a yes/no 'either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?

"Well, I think the South should succeed and then use its new found industry and tech to burn NY and Chicago to the ground as they did to Atlanta." Is this hyperbolic example a "good thing or is it bad. Which is it"

or

"Yeah the Civil War was awful but Sherman was right to take out Atlanta as an industrial center in order to shorten the war and save lives. We need to learn from history and move on."

Your statement: I don't get it, either knowledge of history is a good thing or it is bad. Which is it?
is so wrong because its not a binary question nor does it have binary answers. Its about degrees of knowledge and perspective which have a million variations ESPECIALLY when merged to human emotion.

I think your entire premise is wrong.

---

Some of you are really something else. The liberals holding on to their narratives is embarrassing. Poland? Really? He says specifically that he doesn't give a **** about Poland.

Do you think it was Putin that alerted Trump to what was going on?

Agthatbuilds said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

If the Tucker interview and the response to it from people like Richard Hanania show anything, it's that there's an enormous gulf in historical sense between the West and Russia. Tucker knew Putin would take the discussion further back than most in the West would expect it to go,…

— RAW EGG NATIONALIST (@Babygravy9) February 9, 2024

Absolutely, this was my biggest takeaway.

---

Ultimately, putins/russias opinion on historical Russian territories is irrelevant.

It's the same logic hilter used.

It's the same logic leftist use today regarding native Americans

It would justify mexico invading the southwest to claim back ancestral lands.

It doesn't matter what happened 1000 years ago, or even 100.

Ukraine is a sovereign state. He has no justification for this invasion.

---

One thing history teaches; borders only exist in peoples minds and sovereignty is fleeting.

Woods Ag said:

---

Did you listen to the interview?

Putin makes the case that the sanctions placed upon it have not hurt them at all. They're doing fine and it's only actually hurting us.

I've always thought that about sanctions. At least those levied against another formidable country like Russia or China. If we "We will not buy any more oil from Russia" well then they jsut sell it to Brazil and Brazil sells it to us. These things don't seem to be effective in my estimation. They traded it in ruples instead of dollars.

I'm not well versed in this area, this is just how I've always questioned the power of our sanctions.

2nd thing I wanted to ask you as you said with regard to Israel as you said you'd always support a people determining they would like to be free and self govern. Israel is really nuanced as has been stated. I support them and believe it's important we continue to do so, but to play devil's advocate to your statement what if me and my posse saddled up and came to your residence and removed you from the premises, declared ourselves a free people with the ability to govern ourselves in what was YOUR house. Are you justified in fighting to the bitter end to take it back?

---

What would you expect Putin to say about the sanctions to an interviewer from their chief world enemy? He knows the world will see his answers so he is going to project strength. The fact that he had to cut sweetheart deals to sell oil to China well below market, had to buy artillery shells from North Korea and drones from Iran, etc. should tell you how it is going. The fact they are having to pull T-62s and T-55s out of retirement instead of replacing them with modern T-80s and T-90s should tell you how the sanctions are hitting their production. The fact they are using S-300 and S-400 missiles for ground attack instead of guided missiles designed for that purpose should tell you about what sanctions have done to them.

As far as reselling that oil from Brazil to us, do you think they are getting full market price from that oil from Brazil? Even if they are still able to sell it eventually, they are taking a significant hit on the price and their economy needs that money. They lost a huge chunk of their best and brightest who fled the country to avoid mobilization/conscription. They already had a screwed up demographic profile that is getting worse to an abyssmally low birth rate. He NEEDS new resources and conquered populations that he can put to work to replace what he has lost. There is absolutely no plausible case to be made that losing several hundred thousand dead or severely wounded soldiers from his work force is a net positive for his country.

As for your 2nd thing, if Israel had attacked its neighbors completely unprovoked and decided to take their land and force them off of it, yes, you would have a point. But that is not what happened. If you attack somebody and try to take their land, and instead lose the war and they take yours instead? I firmly believe you FAFO'd and deserve what you got. The Israelis have tried for decades to come up with a solution that allows the Palestinians to live in peace and have the freedom they desire, even offering them their own state. The Palestinian leadership realizes quite correctly that it is far easier to play the victim and keep sucking on the world's teat than it would be to actually have to build a functioning economy and rule their own country without handouts from the rest of the world. Israel's reward for every attempt to give the Palestinians more freedom and autonomy has been more attacks and more dead Israelis. One side is willing to live in peace, one wants to exterminate the other. Seems like an easy choice of who to support, recognizing the real world situation as it is today.

I'm glad Carlson did the interview, but it's amazing how gullible some of you are.

Putin's version of history has been discussed on this board before. This is nothing new. The fact that he can ramble on with this propaganda for an extended period of time indicates only that he's more mentally competent than our president, but that's an extremely low bar to clear. Let's just say that his version of a number of historical points is "debatable."

He's also got some of you fooled on the economy. He's spending at apocalyptic levels in order to ramp up military production. This boosts GDP, but when the products you are building get blown up on the battlefield, that's not really a boost to your economy. The application of sanctions by the US and Europe has always been half-hearted because the Europeans have been dependent upon Russia for energy, and Biden doesn't want Russian oil off the market for fear of what it would do to gas prices, so, no, sanctions have not crippled Russia. The tepid sanctions imposed so far have had an effect, but nothing like the scale of problems cause by Russia's demographic problem, which the war has exacerbated in a big way, through battlefield casualties and emigration.

No Spin Ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

And many will justify him attacking the Poles and blame the US for it. What a time to be alive.

---

Justifying the deaths of innocent people just doesn't make sense to me. But, yes, what a time to be alive.

---

How many innocent people has the US justified killing? No one has clean hands in geopolitics, but everyone claims to be the righteous in their specific pursuit..

Quote:

---

Putin makes the case that the sanctions placed upon it have not hurt them at all. They're doing fine and it's only actually hurting us.

---

Do you think he admit they are hurting if they were?