*** Official Putin Started Shootin' Thread ***

[OngBonga]

Are you worried that Germany will try to conquer europe?

Not really, but I'm not going to pretend I'm comfortable with the idea of them restoring their military to the point it's the third best funded in the world, behind only USA and China. That's happening. Is it just history that causes that concern? Of course, I don't think they're likely to become aggressive again, but it's uneasy.

There's a whole generation of people brainwashed to hate the west

We're brainwashed to hate the Russians. Remember all that bollocks about poisoning in Salisbury? Did you buy that? I certainly didn't. We've had "Russia bad" drummed into us by media for a long time to the point of false flag events. Every time a Russian military plane comes near British airspace, it's news, even though they didn't actually enter. Meanwhile, we're always doing military things in the Black Sea, exercising our rights to international waters and airspace. That's not news unless the Russians respond. The media are not balanced when it comes to geopolitics.

I know there are varying degrees of bad. But I also know that I don't know the facts in nearly all geopolitical matters. We know what we're told. You might have more trust in Western governments and media than the Russian, but for the most part, I don't. Not when it comes to the major Western powers... USA, UK, France, Germany. We're all just as corrupt as the Russians, and we're all playing the same global influence game, we just go about it differently.

Let's not forget Syria. The West were intent on regime change in Syria, but Russia intervened and propped up their government, saving them from collapse. Of course you'll probably argue that's a bad thing, because the Syrian government used chemical weapons and whatnot, while I'll argue that's absolute bollocks, Western propaganda or, worse, Western-sponsored acts of terrorism.

It looked to me like Russia were the good guys in the Syria matter. Maybe I'm wrong, idk, but it at least serves to demonstrate why I don't default to "them bad us good". I don't trust our governments any more than I trust the Russians.

But, I also have skin in the game. So I do want NATO to prevail in this fight for dominance. That doesn't mean I'm going to blindly support Western aggression, and I'll continue to compare our aggressive posture with the Russians. We're not that different underneath it all.

[CoccoBill]

We're brainwashed to hate the Russians. Remember all that bollocks about poisoning in Salisbury? Did you buy that? I certainly didn't. We've had "Russia bad" drummed into us by media for a long time to the point of false flag events.

Wait so there's one case which (I suppose?) was a false accusation of a political assassination, so we must have been brainwashed? Sergei Yushenkov, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Alexander Litvinenko, Galina Starovoitova, Anna Politkovskaya, Paul Klebnikov and others might disagree. Invasions of Afghanistan, Chechnya twice, Georgia and Ukraine, indiscriminate civilian bombings in Syria and Ukraine, raping and pillaging, execution and torture of civilians, attacks against schools and hospitals and goddamn nuclear plants, which other current country or regime would you expect these kind of actions from? ISIS maybe, but how many NATO countries? Maybe, just maybe, Russia has actually given people multiple good reasons over decades and centuries to hate them.

I know there are varying degrees of bad. But I also know that I don't know the facts in nearly all geopolitical matters. We know what we're told. You might have more trust in Western governments and media than the Russian, but for the most part, I don't. Not when it comes to the major Western powers... USA, UK, France, Germany. We're all just as corrupt as the Russians, and we're all playing the same global influence game, we just go about it differently.

The difference being use or lack thereof of systematic human rights violations and war crimes. Like I said the west is definitely not a bunch of boy scouts, but the level and number of dick moves are on entirely different scales.

Let's not forget Syria. The West were intent on regime change in Syria, but Russia intervened and propped up their government, saving them from collapse. Of course you'll probably argue that's a bad thing, because the Syrian government used chemical weapons and whatnot, while I'll argue that's absolute bollocks, Western propaganda or, worse, Western-sponsored acts of terrorism.

It looked to me like Russia were the good guys in the Syria matter. Maybe I'm wrong, idk, but it at least serves to demonstrate why I don't default to "them bad us good". I don't trust our governments any more than I trust the Russians.

We are looking at things very differently then. Could you point to just one source that would justify questioning what happened in Syria?

Here's an independent OSI report on it: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena...emical-attack/

But, I also have skin in the game. So I do want NATO to prevail in this fight for dominance. That doesn't mean I'm going to blindly support Western aggression, and I'll continue to compare our aggressive posture with the Russians. We're not that different underneath it all.

Look, I get it. You've lost faith in western media and governments, and for a large part for good reasons. It just simply doesn't follow that the opposite must be true, and doesn't justify giving more credit to the opposing side. Almost all of media have angles in their reporting (mainly to make money, not political ones), and all governments typically first and foremost look after their own interests. Lies or colored truths are spewed from all sides, but that doesn't mean the frequency and level of boldness is the same. Every news article should always be read like it's April 1st, but to say that the reporting of BBC, NYTimes and RIA Novosti are equally bad is to me laughable.

Btw re: the Salisbury poisoning, what exactly are you referring to? I'm assuming this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poison..._Yulia_Skripal