You could put one of those bubble dialogue thingies they use in cartoons over Putin’s head, with a title like ‘what do the fox say?!?’…
And it’s consistent with how strongly he feels about Assad using the military on his own people… Oh wait…
Are you sure about “his own people” part?
Don’t mind me less you miss the tail.
So clever for words, it shouldn’t be written.
Really.
The bear has been baited. All that’s left to do is turn it into a rug and light the fireplace.
Jam on the one.
Seacrest out.
Positive.
Hey, at least when western media gets something wrong they retract it.
And the hate for Russia is obvious. You blame the west for interfering in Ukraine’s affairs but give a pass to Russia, because…uhm…fuck America. Fuck the west.
When armed groups take over buildings, any country will respond by force. But Putin is telling Ukraine to leave the militant groups alone. So, do nothing and lose parts of the Ukraine slowly to pro-Russian groups, or act and lose parts of the Ukraine immediately to the Russian military. Win-win for Russia. And of course the west is standing by making idle threats so Putin has no incentive to back off.
Oh us clever westerners. We want Ukraine as our own, so we stand back and watch as Russia annexes their country piece by piece. With such a strategy Ukraine will be our puppet in no time.
Oh, just sitting back and watching you perform. It’s quite amusing really. The taste of hypocrisy in the air…it smells like…victory. No doubt.
What do the bear say? Well, with Red behind it, it say all your base are belong to us!! 
– bolding mine.
Is this what you speak of:
I should hope not. Rather embarrassing don’t you think? Or is there anything the US can do that would be embarrassing? Bueller?
Good read: Obama Plays with Fire in Ukraine
– more at source.
I’m a bit confused by your choice in sources.
Is your opinion that slavery was good and that African-Americans belonged as slaves?
I ask because that seems to be the opinion of the people you’ve used a a reference and I’m a bit puzzled because I honestly thought you hated racism and white supremacy?
Was I wrong?
I remember earlier you used a Francoist website as a major source even though you never struck me as a fan of the Generalissimo.
Are you actually checking the beliefs and reliability of your sources or are you just looking for articles that say extreme things?
That’s because you direct your focus in the in the wrong direction. The source is irrelevant. The only thing that is of any matter is the words of the individual articles.
Huh?
That’s a rather bizarre view of the world.
You seem to be arguing that Mein Kampf and Abraham Sachar’s “A History of the Jews” should be regarded as equally valid and equally reliable sources.
From my point of view such an attitude is jaw-dropingly stupid.
Could you explain why I’m wrong?
Or are you saying that RedFury doesn’t actually care about the reliability of his sources and just looks for sources that, to use your terminology, “have words in their articles” that gain notice?
Thanks in advance for your answer.
What is bizarre? Any source - including Mein Kampf and “A History of the Jews” - should be judged on its own merit, not that of its author, the publication it is published in, the quality of paper, the choice of font, or any other external thing. I haven’t read “A History of the Jews”, and only some small snippets of Mein Kampf, but I strongly assume that you’d find that after reading the two books that the history book is the more reliable.
I can’t comment on RedFury, but I assume he reads the articles he posts and find the arguments presented convincing. A convincing argument presented in The National Enquirer is as valid as a convincing argument presented in The Washington Post.
If you have any problem with a link to an article he has posted, the correct thing would do would be to point out where it’s wrong, not comment on the publication.
Jesus, all this media/megaphone diplomacy reminds me how, once it starts, the US never stops - like the words worst bullshit, nagging housewife.
I guess the idea is still to fill the front page space with your stories. Tony Bliar’s people used to be good at that as well - just keep the stories coming on a daily basis and keep the focus on you.
Also, I do wonder a little if the US is slightly worried about the general abilities and flake potential of this particular puppet. Not exactly yer charismatic hardman the US likes to front their operations.
OK.
Let’s judge the piece on its words:
This is such silly nonsense as to render the rest of the piece worthless.
The “rulers” of the U.S. have never believed that the U.S. was destined to rule the world. There was a brief period during the Cold War when a few leaders in government (or finance if one prefers conspiracy theories) thought that the U.S. should extend its power to “lead” the world, but extending that belief back to the 18th century demonstrates such a failure of historical knowledge as to discredit any other conclusions by anyone who would advance them.
The U.S. has always been a fairly isolationist country, and that perspective was only briefly challenged after WWII, but even then, interventionist interests have never translated into a desire to “rule” and the isolationist perspective has always been a factor in U.S. policy and power even during the Cold War.
It should also always be mentioned that the Ukrainian armed groups in this case have a major grievance against an unelected interim government. The elected president, presumably put in office by them, was removed from office by violent force and replaced unconstitutionally by a regime that changed 180 degrees the political
direction of Ukraine.
Yup. Hence the need for a free and fair election three weeks from now.