Russia-Ukrainian War

[Sweet]

1 hour ago, Gamecock-YT said:

It just seems to be an ever increasing series of small escalations via 'red lines' that were previously forbidden, suddenly being allowed. So if you follow it to it's logical conclusion, where is the tipping point? Or the point of no return?

 

I would posit it will be if/when NATO member countries are in Ukraine in an 'official' capacity as trainers, or some similar capacity, and they are attacked by Russia. Until that happens everything else is only building until that potential moment. And what the response of the west will be to it. 

 

The other immediate tipping point is the US election results and should Trump win and likely pulls the plug of American support, what is the European response?

 

But I do think we are ever increasingly spiraling towards a larger conflict. Red lines are continuing to be violated with no parties even remotely interested in a resolution or a reduction in combat activities. 

 

 

My view - Western countries should have been involved to a much greater degree and from much earlier.

 

I think the West should close the sky in Ukraine to Russia jets.  They should be operating artillery, operating drones, destroying weapon depots etc.  No Western infantrymen on the frontline right now, Ukrainians should be the front line soldiers, it's their country and if they want it to remain free they should fight for it.

 

But most of everything else on the table from the West.  

 

I'm OK with Russia keeping what it has if it is peace, and lasting peace, whatever.  Russia should be prepared that Ukraine joins the EU, or even NATO for that concession.

 

 

[Xerxes]

As a side note for fellow North Americans and West Europeans, you do realize that we collectively (aside some energy price spikes) have not seen or felt the impact of Ukraine War at a personal or family level. 
 

So our collective points of view (whatever those may be) is really shaped without having paid the real cost of expanding the war. 

 

 

[cubsfan]

10 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

As a side note for fellow North Americans and West Europeans, you do realize that we collectively (aside some energy price spikes) have not seen or felt the impact of Ukraine War at a personal or family level. 
 

So our collective points of view (whatever those may be) is really shaped without having paid the real cost of expanding the war. 

 

 

 

Well that is an excellent and important point. Ukraine itself will have to judge what price they wish to pay in lives. Our view shouldn't matter in that regard. As an outside observer, I do not think Ukraine can afford to lose a generation of young men and survive as a nation. In that regard, Putin has them over a barrell with an extended campaign. I do hope that Zelenksky is acting in the majority interest, but I have my doubts with all the corruption and thievery in Ukraine.

 

When you've suspended civil liberties, imposed martial law, canceled elections, outlawed the opposition party - one has to wonder about the current leadership.

Edited May 31 by cubsfan

[Luke]

18 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

Well that is an excellent and important point. Ukraine itself will have to judge what price they wish to pay in lives. Our view shouldn't matter in that regard. As an outside observer, I do not think Ukraine can afford to lose a generation of young men and survive as a nation. In that regard, Putin has them over a barrell with an extended campaign. I do hope that Zelenksky is acting in the majority interest, but I have my doubts with all the corruption and thievery in Ukraine.

 

When you've suspended civil liberties, imposed martial law, canceled elections, outlawed the opposition party - one has to wonder about the current leadership.

Yep!

[Xerxes]

2 hours ago, cubsfan said:

When you've suspended civil liberties, imposed martial law, canceled elections, outlawed the opposition party - one has to wonder about the current leadership.

 

Post war, I think there will be structural social divide between those who shed blood “who know better” and those that didn’t  (younger people that lived in the shadow of the war). 
 

post war will continue to have the menace in the east, so those  that fought “that know better” will insist to be vigilant and in control. 
 

I think all these talks about Ukraine becoming like Israel are just fantasy. Israel was in mortal danger as a nation in early decades, there was no room for internal dissent, Ukraine on the other hand may lose a limb but not be in any mortal damage.
 

That grey zone is just enough to have that social divide pulling the country in different directions. 
 

Taiwan was a dictatorship in its early life. Maybe the Taiwan of that era is a better analogy to Ukraine.  

Edited May 31 by Xerxes

[ValueArb]

6 hours ago, Gamecock-YT said:

It just seems to be an ever increasing series of small escalations via 'red lines' that were previously forbidden, suddenly being allowed. So if you follow it to it's logical conclusion, where is the tipping point? Or the point of no return?

 

I would posit it will be if/when NATO member countries are in Ukraine in an 'official' capacity as trainers, or some similar capacity, and they are attacked by Russia. Until that happens everything else is only building until that potential moment. And what the response of the west will be to it. 

 

The other immediate tipping point is the US election results and should Trump win and likely pulls the plug of American support, what is the European response?

 

But I do think we are ever increasingly spiraling towards a larger conflict. Red lines are continuing to be violated with no parties even remotely interested in a resolution or a reduction in combat activities. 

 

 

Russia loves at drawing red lines. 

 

No aid for Ukraine or we might use nukes.

If you give HIMARS to Ukraine we might use nukes.

if you give Patriots to Ukraine we might use nukes.

If you give ATACMS to Ukraine we are going to use nukes.

If you give F-16s to Ukraine we are going to check our nukes to find out how many haven't been dissembled and sold for reactor fuel by kleptocrats and might use any that still work. 

 

[Luke]

19 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

 

Russia loves at drawing red lines. 

 

No aid for Ukraine or we might use nukes.

If you give HIMARS to Ukraine we might use nukes.

if you give Patriots to Ukraine we might use nukes.

If you give ATACMS to Ukraine we are going to use nukes.

If you give F-16s to Ukraine we are going to check our nukes to find out how many haven't been dissembled and sold for reactor fuel by kleptocrats and might use any that still work. 

 

Maybe because Russia has valid security concerns regarding their own country? Is only the US allowed to threaten foreign countries establishing military operations close to them but the rest has to put up with 800+ developing bases? 

[ValueArb]

6 hours ago, Luca said:

Michael von der Schulenburg, former diplomat with the UN and OSCE, was Assistant Secretary-General in UN peace missions in Iraq and Sierra Leone: 

 

So you post two different screeds from the same failed diplomat?

 

6 hours ago, Luca said:

 

https://michael-von-der-schulenburg.com/understanding-the-ukraine-conflict-michael-von-der-schulenburgs-insights/

 

One must Negotiate with Putin

 

Anyone who says this is being willfully obtuse about Putin's history of abiding by his agreements.

 

6 hours ago, Luca said:

"The situation must be extremely difficult for the Ukrainians. Through more than two years of war, Ukraine has paid a heavy price in blood on both sides of the front lines, with large parts of the country having been destroyed. The country is deeply divided politically, has become the poorest country in Europe, continues to suffer from widespread corruption, and is in the process of becoming increasingly depopulated. The military situation also looks extremely unfavorable. The Ukrainians are today the cheated people of Europe, also cheated by us. Their country has become a battlefield for geopolitical interests, including Western geopolitical interests. It could now even face the risk of collapsing. If we really want to be friends with Ukraine, as we like to claim, we should now do everything we can to end this war through a negotiated peace."

 

When he talks about a  "negotiated peace" without providing good strong arguments on why it won't be a temporary peace, how we can trust Putin, or acknowledging how untrustworthy Putin is,  he's actively misleading his audience. 

 

6 hours ago, Luca said:

 

"What he wants is pretty clear: Putin does not want NATO or foreign military bases so close to Russia in Ukraine; he wants to secure Russia’s access to the Black Sea and to protect the security of the pro-Russian population in Ukraine. We can assume that these goals are shared by the vast majority among the Russian elites and among the Russian population. As early as 1997, President Yeltsin already warned US President Clinton against wanting to bring Ukraine into NATO; he emphasized that there is a thick red line for Russia. Russia’s position has not changed since.

 

Michael von der Schulenburg was actually involved with the draft of the piece treaty in Istanbul 2022: 

 

"Yes, I mean the Istanbul Communiqué of March 30, 2022, which both sides accepted and initialed. It was drawn up by the Ukrainians and consisted of 10 proposals. It is an amazing document, a brilliant achievement of Ukrainian diplomacy. In it, Ukraine did not formally give up a single square meter of land. Kiev only accepted that the status of Crimea would be decided peacefully in 15 years. There was no mention of Donbass; that was to be negotiated directly between Zelensky and Putin. At its core, the Istanbul peace proposal was a deal between Ukraine and Russia in which the Ukraine committed itself to remaining neutral and not to allow any other state to establish military bases on its territory. Russia, in return, would guarantee the territorial integrity of Ukraine and withdraw all invading troops.

In this document, Russia even undertook to support Ukrainian membership of the EU. But the West did not want the treaty. A week before Istanbul, there was a special NATO summit in Brussels, which Biden also attended. There, it was decided not to support any negotiations with Russia until Russia withdrew from the whole of Ukraine. This meant nothing other than NATO demanding Russia’s military defeat and, hence, clearing the way for Ukraine’s membership in NATO. When Zelensky nevertheless stuck to the peace negotiations with Russia, British Prime Minister Johnson paid an unexpected visit to Kiev on April 9, 2022, making it unmistakably clear to the Ukrainians that they would lose all support from the West if they signed a peace treaty with Russia. This put an end to the possibility of an early peace."

 

A document from a negotiation forced upon Ukrainians in their darkest hour, with Russian troops surrounding Kyiv, when they still didn't know the extent of western support they'd receive, and written by a Ukrainian team that was alleged to include Russian double agents, that would allow Russia to keep territory they had seized in the war, and leave Ukraine nearly indefensible in any future invasion. And then the Bucha massacre became public right in the middle of negotiations.

 

Zelenskyy rightly demanded more protections and Russia rejected them. Yet this lying "diplomat" doesn't even address those concerns, just pretends that in his fairy world filled with chocolate streams and gumdrop rain showers everyone would have been happy.

 

Quote

In response Zelenskyy said that he would not agree to a ceasefire that would freeze the conflict while Russia occupied 22% of Ukraine: "We explained that there will be no Minsk-3, Minsk-5, or Minsk-7. We will not play these games, we have lost part of our territories this way ... it is a trap."

 

Quote

 

Following the talks, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian warned that Russia was only "pretending to negotiate", in line with a strategy it has used elsewhere.^[65]

Quote

According to U.S. officials who spoke to Foreign Affairs, a provisional agreement was reached in April, whereby the Russian forces would withdraw to the pre-invasion line and Ukraine would commit not to seek to join NATO in exchange for security guarantees from a number of countries. However, in a July interview with Russian state media, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that this compromise was no longer an option, saying that even the Donbas was not enough and that the "geography had changed.

6 hours ago, Luca said:

 

 

 

"If the USA continues to escalate with NATO support and, as announced, now sends weapons with which Russia can be hit at its strategically important locations, Russia, as indicated, would not shy away from extreme reactions. The danger of this conflict escalating into a nuclear war is therefore higher today than ever before. NATO should not underestimate Russia’s determination again."

 

"Such demonization of the opponent is common among warring parties. The other party is always the embodiment of evil against whom we, as the good guys, must fight to save the world. We will certainly find similar demonization of the West in Russia. What is perhaps unusual here is that we in the EU behave like a warring party, even though we always claim not to be a party in this war."

 

 

Russia invaded Ukraine. It has performed numerous massacres such as a Bucha. It has targeted civilians with military weapons. 

 

If this donkey doesn't draw a good/evil line against those actions, he's an idiot. Seriously, he's so disingenous he's either a deluded pacifist or he's a paid FSB proxy.

 

6 hours ago, Luca said:

 

"I find it frightening that I am now getting reactions from senior German diplomats who are full of hatred for Russia. Such “diplomats” would never be in a position to conduct peace negotiations. But why do we have them then? In wars you need diplomats with a cool head, diplomats who can also understand their opponents and thus look for feasible compromises to end the killing in wars. In doing so, they must not allow themselves to be captured by their own war propaganda or pro-war media. It also plays a role here that we in Germany find it difficult to accept a different point of view, even if it advocates the silencing of weapons and peace negotiations. It’s no coincidence that I can only give this interview to a Swiss magazine, which then also publishes it."

 

Russia has genocided tens of millions in the last century alone. Russian troops raped their way through Europe in WW2. They murdered millions in the cold war to keep half of Europe as their slaves. And then after the breakup of the USSR when the west spent hundreds of billions helping them and the former republics they impoverished, they became a dictatorship again. And kept killing and murdering political opponents across Europe and the world, until finally invading free Ukraine to murder and genocide tens of thousands more.

 

And he's confused why Russians are hated? 

 

6 hours ago, Luca said:

 

"The closest we came to a solution was when the Ukrainians and Russians talked to each other directly, without Western interference. I’m sure there will be talks between the military on both sides; they all know each other because nobody wants all their people to be slaughtered. But we won’t find out about the talks until the time comes. Then it could happen very quickly. I can well imagine that the Russians are making offers to the Ukrainian military that are better than something that could be negotiated here in Switzerland, especially now that Switzerland is likely to have lost a lot of international sympathy as a neutral state due to its stance on the Gaza war."

 

 

 

Our job is to support Ukraine to the hilt. It's the Ukrainians job to decide when peace negotiations are necessary. 

[cubsfan]

Don't forget - those 800+ bases are largely to the benefit of our many, many allies - much to the unhappiness of aggressor nations such as Russia, N Korea, China and Iran. 

 

Without those bases - you can count on the whole world nuking up to defend themselves.

[Luke]

1 hour ago, ValueArb said:

When he talks about a  "negotiated peace" without providing good strong arguments on why it won't be a temporary peace, how we can trust Putin, or acknowledging how untrustworthy Putin is,  he's actively misleading his audience. 

Under that premice, it will be ever lasting war. 

1 hour ago, ValueArb said:

A document from a negotiation forced upon Ukrainians in their darkest hour, with Russian troops surrounding Kyiv, when they still didn't know the extent of western support they'd receive, and written by a Ukrainian team that was alleged to include Russian double agents, that would allow Russia to keep territory they had seized in the war, and leave Ukraine nearly indefensible in any future invasion. And then the Bucha massacre became public right in the middle of negotiations.

Is Ukraine in a better position now to "negotiate" anything? And how many ten thousand Ukrainian men died since then or are disabled? 

1 hour ago, ValueArb said:

Zelenskyy rightly demanded more protections and Russia rejected them. Yet this lying "diplomat" doesn't even address those concerns, just pretends that in his fairy world filled with chocolate streams and gumdrop rain showers everyone would have been happy.

NATO is off the table for Russia and it's a ridiculous demand by the west, nobody in their right mind would accept it, the US wouldn't accept it either themselves if they were in that situation. 

1 hour ago, ValueArb said:

Russia invaded Ukraine. It has performed numerous massacres such as a Bucha. It has targeted civilians with military weapons. 

Violence as a reason for more violence, that's not how to de-escalate. 

1 hour ago, ValueArb said:

If this donkey doesn't draw a good/evil line against those actions, he's an idiot. Seriously, he's so disingenous he's either a deluded pacifist or he's a paid FSB proxy.

Well, you see why I am saying that YOU should go to war too if shit hits the fan!

1 hour ago, ValueArb said:

Russia has genocided tens of millions in the last century alone. Russian troops raped their way through Europe in WW2. They murdered millions in the cold war to keep half of Europe as their slaves. And then after the breakup of the USSR when the west spent hundreds of billions helping them and the former republics they impoverished, they became a dictatorship again. And kept killing and murdering political opponents across Europe and the world, until finally invading free Ukraine to murder and genocide tens of thousands more.

 

And he's confused why Russians are hated? 

So if what you think is a general view of the West, it is understandable that Putin sees a threat that wants his government and their current country removed. Imagine being a Russian speaking Ukrainian with a government that gets supported by people who think like you...why is Putin defending Russians in the East...? BECAUSE, as you said, they are hated  (rightfully so, according to you) So many Russians (huge majority), surprisingly still stand behind Putin but the west just says its a kleptocrat, corrupt, propaganda blablabla...the more you share your view, the more understandable this conflict becomes and the more understandable russias reactions are. 

[Luke]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

Don't forget - those 800+ bases are largely to the benefit of our many, many allies - much to the unhappiness of aggressor nations such as Russia, N Korea, China and Iran. 

 

Without those bases - you can count on the whole world nuking up to defend themselves.

It's never good to rely on one country that has a crazy orange man, now convicted felon, upcoming as president and a more and more unstable "democracy". 

[cubsfan]

You are a funny guy @Luca!

[ValueArb]

44 minutes ago, Luca said:

Under that premice, it will be ever lasting war. 

 

Nope. Eventually Putin will fold or be deposed and his successor will find a face saving way out. Thats if Ukraine isn't able to mount an offensive to cut the rail lines into Crimea and force a panicked dash for the last ferries out by Russian forces in Crimea first.  The Ukrainians deeply care about winning, Russians are just meat fodder.

 

44 minutes ago, Luca said:

Is Ukraine in a better position now to "negotiate" anything? And how many ten thousand Ukrainian men died since then or are disabled? 

 

Better position after Russia's mass retreat from the gates of Kyiv? Are you joking? By your logic the Russians were in a worse position after retaking Stalingrad in WW2, given the massive losses it required.

 

44 minutes ago, Luca said:

NATO is off the table for Russia and it's a ridiculous demand by the west, nobody in their right mind would accept it, the US wouldn't accept it either themselves if they were in that situation. 

 

That Zelenskyy quote said nothing about NATO, it said he needed stronger security guarantees. You keep ducking the issue and have no answer for how Ukraine can be assured of its security. And only a putin simp would find NATO membership ridiculous given Poland, Estonia and Finland are members.

 

 

44 minutes ago, Luca said:

Violence as a reason for more violence, that's not how to de-escalate. 

 

Your response to a history of Russian genocides and their invasion of Ukraine is to blame Ukraine for not de-escalating? My comment said literally nothing about how Ukraine should respond, just pointed out how reluctant your failed diplomat was to condemn Russia's documented public atrocities and aggression.

 

44 minutes ago, Luca said:

Well, you see why I am saying that YOU should go to war too if shit hits the fan!

 

Again, this is in response to pointing out doofus diplomat refusing to use the word "evil" for documented russian atrocities and aggression. Are you even capable of having a rational honest conversation where you actually address what was said?

 

44 minutes ago, Luca said:

So if what you think is a general view of the West, it is understandable that Putin sees a threat that wants his government and their current country removed. Imagine being a Russian speaking Ukrainian with a government that gets supported by people who think like you...why is Putin defending Russians in the East...? BECAUSE, as you said, they are hated  (rightfully so, according to you) So many Russians (huge majority), surprisingly still stand behind Putin but the west just says its a kleptocrat, corrupt, propaganda blablabla...the more you share your view, the more understandable this conflict becomes and the more understandable russias reactions are. 

 

You are deluded if you think Russians stand behind Putin willingly. Russia is a police state, and everyone who speaks up against him is rapidly imprisoned, if not murdered. You may believe that the Russian people are so lacking in moral character that they don't care about Russia's genocides and how its caused them to be perceived in the world, but I don't. All of the things Russians are hated for were initiated by its terrible governments and leaders, the same ones who've been oppressing them for hundreds of years back to when they were serfs. 

[Luke]

36 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

 

Nope. Eventually Putin will fold or be deposed and his successor will find a face saving way out. Thats if Ukraine isn't able to mount an offensive to cut the rail lines into Crimea and force a panicked dash for the last ferries out by Russian forces in Crimea first.  The Ukrainians deeply care about winning, Russians are just meat fodder.

 

 

Better position after Russia's mass retreat from the gates of Kyiv? Are you joking? By your logic the Russians were in a worse position after retaking Stalingrad in WW2, given the massive losses it required.

 

 

That Zelenskyy quote said nothing about NATO, it said he needed stronger security guarantees. You keep ducking the issue and have no answer for how Ukraine can be assured of its security. And only a putin simp would find NATO membership ridiculous given Poland, Estonia and Finland are members.

 

 

 

Your response to a history of Russian genocides and their invasion of Ukraine is to blame Ukraine for not de-escalating? My comment said literally nothing about how Ukraine should respond, just pointed out how reluctant your failed diplomat was to condemn Russia's documented public atrocities and aggression.

 

 

Again, this is in response to pointing out doofus diplomat refusing to use the word "evil" for documented russian atrocities and aggression. Are you even capable of having a rational honest conversation where you actually address what was said?

 

 

You are deluded if you think Russians stand behind Putin willingly. Russia is a police state, and everyone who speaks up against him is rapidly imprisoned, if not murdered. You may believe that the Russian people are so lacking in moral character that they don't care about Russia's genocides and how its caused them to be perceived in the world, but I don't. All of the things Russians are hated for were initiated by its terrible governments and leaders, the same ones who've been oppressing them for hundreds of years back to when they were serfs. 

Again, if this is what you have to say regarding Russia and their current leadership and if Western diplomats and leaders think similarly, there is no way that there is any de-escalation happening in this war until the US/UK/GERMANY/FRANCE literally raid Russia and take over the country. And because that is a serious risk and because Russians and Russian-speaking Ukrainians received huge backlashes in the country, he attacked the country. 

 

As long as the West is unable to establish relations with the Russian state without an absolute evil/black-and-white view, this war will escalate further where either Ukraine completely collapses because of getting close to tactical nukes or we will have full blown war with western forces. 

 

Do you have friends in russia? Were you ever in russia? I have multiple russian friends that still today regularly fly there and putins support is not at all as bad as you try to portrait it. 

Edited May 31 by Luca

[Luke]

But the west is of course obsessed with Navalny and playing this "oppression" story to prepare their societies for further war support and in the end maybe send some of their citizens there for Operation Freedom. 

[Luke]

We will see how this plays out! 

[Spekulatius]

On 5/29/2024 at 2:48 PM, ValueArb said:

 

I stand corrected. Putin was clearly well informed when he thought Ukrainians would greet Russian troops as liberators, that the special operation would only take three days, that their logistics were adequate, that their trucks were well maintained, that their troops were well trained, led and motivated, that their navy would dominate the black sea against an opponent without a navy, that their air bases and oil refineries were safe from drone attacks, and that the EU/UK/US wouldn't lift a finger to help Ukraine.

 

I'll make sure not to share any alternative points of view in the future, esp. from youtubers no matter how well informed they've been on military topics.

LOL. Putin is  like any other dictator who kills of disidends over time. it’s clear he is as isolated than Hitler in his Wolfsschanze.

 

On Abraham’s ranks, I agree they are not the right tool for Ukraine, too heavy, to thought to maintain, too plus tanks are vulnerable to attack from drones as it has been shown. they are breakthrough weapons who need to be protected from above and as this has become  astairc war, they basically serve just as mobile artillery and are not of all that much use. the much simpler Bradley are much more useful.

 

Ukraine will need an airforce to won this war. No major war has been won without air superiority since (and including ) WW1.

[Gamecock-YT]

10 hours ago, ValueArb said:

 

Russia loves at drawing red lines. 

 

No aid for Ukraine or we might use nukes.

If you give HIMARS to Ukraine we might use nukes.

if you give Patriots to Ukraine we might use nukes.

If you give ATACMS to Ukraine we are going to use nukes.

If you give F-16s to Ukraine we are going to check our nukes to find out how many haven't been dissembled and sold for reactor fuel by kleptocrats and might use any that still work. 

 

 

Invert it and do the Americans. Basically just perpetually making the Ukrainians fight with an arm behind their back, only to acquiesce and let them have artillery/tanks/planes/missiles/where they can shoot those missiles whenever it becomes apparent they might start to be forced to fight with both hands behind their back. 

[Luke]

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/ukraine-war-frontline/

 

Life on Ukraine’s front line: ‘Worse than hell’ as Russia advances

[cubsfan]

3 hours ago, Luca said:

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/ukraine-war-frontline/

 

Life on Ukraine’s front line: ‘Worse than hell’ as Russia advances

 

Quite the article @Luca - I'd encourage those interested in Ukraine to read it.

 

Soldiers need rest & recuperation to be effective. Definitely not happening.

Edited June 1 by cubsfan

[Xerxes]

Dear “Globalists” please do not shoot Xerxes for posting this. 
 

I have listened only to bits of it. I think I am going to put some hours to listen to the full thing.
 

PS: I wish Tucker would improve his facial expressions during his interviews. 

 

s

[Luke]

2 hours ago, Xerxes said:

Dear “Globalists” please do not shoot Xerxes for posting this. 
 

I have listened only to bits of it. I think I am going to put some hours to listen to the full thing.
 

PS: I wish Tucker would improve his facial expressions during his interviews. 

 

s

Great Stuff, listening right now

[CGJB]

For many years, Jeffrey Sachs would appear on mainstream corporate media networks and be quoted in the major publications. Then he appeared on Bloomberg TV and, in an interview with Tom Keene, said that the US was behind blowing up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Keene's reaction was priceless. It was a textbook case of someone going against the approved "narrative" and Keene didn't know what to do.

I don't think Sachs has appeared on any of the mainstream corporate media outlets since. Total black eye for Bloomberg and the rest of the media.

[Luke]

8 minutes ago, CGJB said:

For many years, Jeffrey Sachs would appear on mainstream corporate media networks and be quoted in the major publications. Then he appeared on Bloomberg TV and, in an interview with Tom Keene, said that the US was behind blowing up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Keene's reaction was priceless. It was a textbook case of someone going against the approved "narrative" and Keene didn't know what to do.

I don't think Sachs has appeared on any of the mainstream corporate media outlets since. Total black eye for Bloomberg and the rest of the media.

Yeah, it's insane, pretty much the same is true in Germany right now. If you have a different opinion than the current government you get cancelled, verbally attacked, not invited, slandered. The level of balls you need to put yourself out there in public and stand for different opinions never had higher personal costs since the DDR in my opinion. Thanks to Tucker Carlson who really provides extremely high quality journalism with risk taking (like going and talking directly with Putin). Obama should give Tucker his nobel peace price. 

[Xerxes]

2 hours ago, CGJB said:

For many years, Jeffrey Sachs would appear on mainstream corporate media networks and be quoted in the major publications. Then he appeared on Bloomberg TV and, in an interview with Tom Keene, said that the US was behind blowing up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Keene's reaction was priceless. It was a textbook case of someone going against the approved "narrative" and Keene didn't know what to do.

I don't think Sachs has appeared on any of the mainstream corporate media outlets since. Total black eye for Bloomberg and the rest of the media.

i love Tom Keene but he blew a gasket somewhere within. 
 

I remember that interview 

 

Doesn’t mean Sachs is right about everything though. 

Edited June 2 by Xerxes