| In other news 07:20 - Sep 10 with 4411 views | GlasgowBlue |
Lowkey continues to be a c***t and really shouldn’t be courted by crank politicians the way he is.
[Post edited 10 Sep 2022 7:22]
|  |
| |  |
| In other news on 09:36 - Sep 11 with 1041 views | Darth_Koont |
| In other news on 09:28 - Sep 11 by lowhouseblue |
the first use of the word corbyn in this thread was by you in the 4th post? i'm not terribly interested in who or what lowkey is - the thread was about what he said about russia's invasion of ukraine. all the rest - israel and corbyn - has, as ever, been introduced entirely by you. |
The first reference to Corbyn was in the first line of GB's OP. Saying Lowkey shouldn't be courted by "crank politicians".
You. of course, know this. So stop being a bell. |  |
| |
| In other news on 09:42 - Sep 11 with 1022 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| In other news on 09:36 - Sep 11 by Darth_Koont |
The first reference to Corbyn was in the first line of GB's OP. Saying Lowkey shouldn't be courted by "crank politicians".
You. of course, know this. So stop being a bell. |
But he never used the word "Corbyn" just like he never used the word "transphobic"...he should be a politician! |  |
| |
| In other news on 10:16 - Sep 11 with 964 views | Darth_Koont |
| In other news on 09:42 - Sep 11 by BanksterDebtSlave |
But he never used the word "Corbyn" just like he never used the word "transphobic"...he should be a politician! |
Either that or banned from being a politician.
There’s not really much of a line between the two nowadays. | |
| |
| In other news on 10:20 - Sep 11 with 964 views | lowhouseblue |
| In other news on 09:36 - Sep 11 by Darth_Koont |
The first reference to Corbyn was in the first line of GB's OP. Saying Lowkey shouldn't be courted by "crank politicians".
You. of course, know this. So stop being a bell. |
so crank politician = corbyn? great, let's go with that.
however, as my post, which you were replying to, correctly stated the first use of the word 'corbyn' in this thread was by you.
but i will take your lead and from now on assume that any reference to 'crank politician' must mean corbyn. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| In other news on 10:31 - Sep 11 with 929 views | Darth_Koont |
| In other news on 10:20 - Sep 11 by lowhouseblue |
so crank politician = corbyn? great, let's go with that.
however, as my post, which you were replying to, correctly stated the first use of the word 'corbyn' in this thread was by you.
but i will take your lead and from now on assume that any reference to 'crank politician' must mean corbyn. |
Gmpf.
That third-place ribbon for debating has your name on it. | |
| |
| In other news on 12:32 - Sep 11 with 871 views | leitrimblue |
| In other news on 14:47 - Sep 10 by Darth_Koont |
This again?
Go on then — who is calling out the illegal Israeli occupation and apartheid system in our politics and media? At best, it’s described as a conflict as if there’s some parity in the situation for ordinary Palestinians.
If someone reduced the Russian invasion of Ukraine to a conflict between Russia and Ukraine then quite rightly they’d be seen as a Putin apologist. So I’m really struggling to accept the double standards here. |
That's a very good post. Interesting how all yer detractors chose to ignore it |  | | |
| In other news on 12:42 - Sep 11 with 836 views | Darth_Koont |
| In other news on 12:32 - Sep 11 by leitrimblue |
That's a very good post. Interesting how all yer detractors chose to ignore it |
Cheers.
In my unfortunately long experience of dealing with them it’s because they have very few actual standards or principles. And the only ways to make that work is to be in denial mode and/or monumentally disingenuous and deceitful for the most extreme of them. | |
| |
| In other news on 12:59 - Sep 11 with 791 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| In other news on 12:42 - Sep 11 by Darth_Koont |
Cheers.
In my unfortunately long experience of dealing with them it’s because they have very few actual standards or principles. And the only ways to make that work is to be in denial mode and/or monumentally disingenuous and deceitful for the most extreme of them. |
But Lowkey is displaying the same rank hypocrisy that you complain of. What can’t he take the same non-partisan view of the Ukraine War rather than parroting Putin’s lines. “NATO’s War” - he’s either thick, or an edgelord.
If I’d described this as Palestine’s conflict against Israel I’d be rightly condemned. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| In other news on 13:31 - Sep 11 with 768 views | Darth_Koont |
| In other news on 12:59 - Sep 11 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
But Lowkey is displaying the same rank hypocrisy that you complain of. What can’t he take the same non-partisan view of the Ukraine War rather than parroting Putin’s lines. “NATO’s War” - he’s either thick, or an edgelord.
If I’d described this as Palestine’s conflict against Israel I’d be rightly condemned. |
Here he’s talking about the West and the problems it’s facing.
I don’t take it as read from this that he thinks Putin and Russia are justified in the invasion. I’ll be more than happy to criticise him if he thinks so and says so.
Personally I think it was a real shame we courted and excused Putin for so long, even over the Crimea annexation. We helped created a militaristic strongman who we can’t be surprised reacted according to type when we threatened his perceived strength by generally fiddling around with and extending our influence into Ukraine over recent years. And, of course, we talk the talk but don’t walk the walk ourselves with our own unpalatable strategic partnerships and interventions around the world.
So I think even knowing that Putin is a monstrous despot and this is an illegal and inhuman invasion, we need an understanding that you can still criticise NATO and western governments for their role in the build up. And also if you think that the war is going to be worse and more drawn out with them funding/supplying arms. Proxy wars, just like any other wars, are rarely beneficial to civilians and their lives. But in recent decades they also mean leading countries are a bit too happy to let them run on as we’re not committing our own troops and civilians.
In this atmosphere where Ukraine needs to be painted as good vs. evil and right vs. wrong we are so hypocritical based on our own record and how we unquestioningly support the “wrong/evil” side when that coincides with our own interests and sphere of influence. | |
| |
| In other news on 18:10 - Sep 11 with 707 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| In other news on 13:31 - Sep 11 by Darth_Koont |
Here he’s talking about the West and the problems it’s facing.
I don’t take it as read from this that he thinks Putin and Russia are justified in the invasion. I’ll be more than happy to criticise him if he thinks so and says so.
Personally I think it was a real shame we courted and excused Putin for so long, even over the Crimea annexation. We helped created a militaristic strongman who we can’t be surprised reacted according to type when we threatened his perceived strength by generally fiddling around with and extending our influence into Ukraine over recent years. And, of course, we talk the talk but don’t walk the walk ourselves with our own unpalatable strategic partnerships and interventions around the world.
So I think even knowing that Putin is a monstrous despot and this is an illegal and inhuman invasion, we need an understanding that you can still criticise NATO and western governments for their role in the build up. And also if you think that the war is going to be worse and more drawn out with them funding/supplying arms. Proxy wars, just like any other wars, are rarely beneficial to civilians and their lives. But in recent decades they also mean leading countries are a bit too happy to let them run on as we’re not committing our own troops and civilians.
In this atmosphere where Ukraine needs to be painted as good vs. evil and right vs. wrong we are so hypocritical based on our own record and how we unquestioningly support the “wrong/evil” side when that coincides with our own interests and sphere of influence. |
Wow he said all that in about 5 words.
Impressive. | | | |
| In other news on 18:26 - Sep 11 with 696 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| In other news on 18:10 - Sep 11 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Wow he said all that in about 5 words.
Impressive. |
Or you could engage with the content! | |
| |
| In other news on 18:52 - Sep 11 with 677 views | lowhouseblue |
| In other news on 13:31 - Sep 11 by Darth_Koont |
Here he’s talking about the West and the problems it’s facing.
I don’t take it as read from this that he thinks Putin and Russia are justified in the invasion. I’ll be more than happy to criticise him if he thinks so and says so.
Personally I think it was a real shame we courted and excused Putin for so long, even over the Crimea annexation. We helped created a militaristic strongman who we can’t be surprised reacted according to type when we threatened his perceived strength by generally fiddling around with and extending our influence into Ukraine over recent years. And, of course, we talk the talk but don’t walk the walk ourselves with our own unpalatable strategic partnerships and interventions around the world.
So I think even knowing that Putin is a monstrous despot and this is an illegal and inhuman invasion, we need an understanding that you can still criticise NATO and western governments for their role in the build up. And also if you think that the war is going to be worse and more drawn out with them funding/supplying arms. Proxy wars, just like any other wars, are rarely beneficial to civilians and their lives. But in recent decades they also mean leading countries are a bit too happy to let them run on as we’re not committing our own troops and civilians.
In this atmosphere where Ukraine needs to be painted as good vs. evil and right vs. wrong we are so hypocritical based on our own record and how we unquestioningly support the “wrong/evil” side when that coincides with our own interests and sphere of influence. |
that's waffle and self delusional cant (and also what's known as ad hoc ex post rationalisation) when what he actually said was "nato's war in ukraine". what a thing to feel you have to defend. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| In other news on 20:28 - Sep 11 with 615 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| In other news on 18:26 - Sep 11 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Or you could engage with the content! |
It’s been done many times, so I don’t see the point of rehashing it all.
Yes our politicians are bent and shouldn’t have ever taken money from Putins buddies. Germany tried the opposite strategy and tried to bring Russia into the world economy, building cars over there and huge infrastructure project like Nord Stream (which I’ll add the US and Eastern Europe warned them against). Either way Putin couldn’t be contained, his geopolitical plans trump any ambitions of economic growth or soft power.
NATO is separate from all of that ans as you know a defensive alliance against a country with a long history of aggression to Europe. Even in WW2 the Soviets were aligned to the Nazis, helping them carve up Poland, training Nazi pilots before the Battle of Britain and providing them with fuel for their war machine. It’s little wonder the Baltic states and Poland were enthusiastic to join NATO. Sweden and Finland have seen the danger of remaining outside the alliance. Putin is just a compulsive liar, NATO is just a strawman he thinks excuses his aggression. And it seems those on the hard left and hard right are the ones that lap it up. NATO have had a border with him since the 1950s and he’s just tried to annexe a counter with guess what… a border with NATO. | | | |
| In other news on 21:30 - Sep 11 with 580 views | Darth_Koont |
| In other news on 18:10 - Sep 11 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Wow he said all that in about 5 words.
Impressive. |
Sigh. | |
| |
| In other news on 21:34 - Sep 11 with 571 views | Darth_Koont |
| In other news on 20:28 - Sep 11 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
It’s been done many times, so I don’t see the point of rehashing it all.
Yes our politicians are bent and shouldn’t have ever taken money from Putins buddies. Germany tried the opposite strategy and tried to bring Russia into the world economy, building cars over there and huge infrastructure project like Nord Stream (which I’ll add the US and Eastern Europe warned them against). Either way Putin couldn’t be contained, his geopolitical plans trump any ambitions of economic growth or soft power.
NATO is separate from all of that ans as you know a defensive alliance against a country with a long history of aggression to Europe. Even in WW2 the Soviets were aligned to the Nazis, helping them carve up Poland, training Nazi pilots before the Battle of Britain and providing them with fuel for their war machine. It’s little wonder the Baltic states and Poland were enthusiastic to join NATO. Sweden and Finland have seen the danger of remaining outside the alliance. Putin is just a compulsive liar, NATO is just a strawman he thinks excuses his aggression. And it seems those on the hard left and hard right are the ones that lap it up. NATO have had a border with him since the 1950s and he’s just tried to annexe a counter with guess what… a border with NATO. |
It hasn’t “been done” at all. It’s been rejected as an acceptable and discussable viewpoint because apparently we need a black/white narrative. | |
| |
| In other news on 11:55 - Sep 12 with 475 views | Darth_Koont |
| In other news on 18:52 - Sep 11 by lowhouseblue |
that's waffle and self delusional cant (and also what's known as ad hoc ex post rationalisation) when what he actually said was "nato's war in ukraine". what a thing to feel you have to defend. |
As I said from the start, Lowkey’s framing is too crude and narrow. And Russia is without doubt the aggressor and responsible for their own awful actions.
But talking about the energy crisis and instability much of the West is facing now as a result of the Russian invasion shouldn’t ignore that we have been more than a little cavalier with Ukraine in recent years and in particular Putin over decades. And most disturbingly perhaps because we ourselves were always safe with the nuclear deterrent so the stakes were clearly never as high as for the Ukrainians on the outside.
It’s a question of trying to be truthful and honest instead of shouting down any criticism of NATO/western governments or even the suggestion that this isn’t as clearly black and white as people would like to pretend.
Also, and I think this is critical to understanding why there is a different perspective and why many people are so challenged by it, it depends on whether you think imperialism is a good or bad thing in general. I’m definitely coming from the anti-imperialist perspective and don’t excuse our attempts to keep controlling and even forcing our own interests on the global stage. I get the feeling that many people are absolutely OK with that approach, in fact they welcome it.
But there’s been long and valid criticism of that approach over the years. It’s not going to stop because of Ukraine and Putin being the villain, and certainly not when it’s evident that we’ve been involved in the build-up of both Putin as a militaristic strongman and in the rising tensions over Ukraine itself. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
