Ukraine War and Politics

[Paul Saver]

 

[BigRed]

 

[cycleguy2300]

Yes, the Bradley gunner learned weak points of the T-90 on Warthunder...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[BigRed]

Looks like T. Carlson is interviewing putin.


I thought it was supposed to be nearly impossible to get within range of putin.

$18B

 

[Johnny Diamond]

Are you Tucker Carlson?
Nuff said.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[Cool 'Horn Luke]

I guess Tucker's camera guy is going to go in with a pistol hidden in the camera.

 

[cycleguy2300]

While I generally like Tucker, this was less of an interview of putin and more giving him a way to present his twisted view of the world.

I wish Tucker had done his homework and asked for clarification when putin accused Poland of bringing Germany's invasion upon themselves during WWII and correcting putin's very incorrect "history lesson" about the orgins of russia and Ukraine.

If you didnt catch it, putin used the example of Poland as an analogy for his invasion of Ukriane. Which would put him in the analogous position of Hitler...

In the end putin said invasion was justified because Ukraine was an "invented state" and many there don't identify as Ukrainian but russian...

It was as angering as when a lib interviews FJB and he spews lie after lie and doesn't get called on any of them. I was really disappointed in Tucker's lack of journalistic integrity.

Putin also claimed russia does not do assassinations...



Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

Did anyone think Putin wasn’t going to push the pro Russian side of things? Even though a lot of what he said was bullshit, he also said a lot of things that made sense.

Tuckers explanation as to why he was conducting the interview was very well thought out.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Did anyone think Putin wasn’t going to push the pro Russian side of things? Even though a lot of what he said was bullshit, he also said a lot of things that made sense.

Tuckers explanation as to why he was conducting the interview was very well thought out.

Of course putin was going to present his side of things.

The issue isn't that putin lied or Tucker interviewed him, but that Tucker neglected his journalistic duty to search for facts. Tucker could have done that by asking pointed, question callong attention to putins lies and inconsistencies during the interview or by a discussion of putin's lies afterwards.

As solidly conservative Tucker can be it was very disappointing (if expected) for Tucker to further the mission of a tyrant by givinging them a platform to spread lies rather than using that platform to expose a tyrants lies...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Johnny Diamond]

Of course putin was going to present his side of things.

The issue isn't that putin lied or Tucker interviewed him, but that Tucker neglected his journalistic duty to search for facts. Tucker could have done that by asking pointed, question callong attention to putins lies and inconsistencies during the interview or by a discussion of putin's lies afterwards.

As solidly conservative Tucker can be it was very disappointing (if expected) for Tucker to further the mission of a tyrant by givinging them a platform to spread lies rather than using that platform to expose a tyrants lies...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Personally if I (at my age) were foolhardy, enough to take on a trip to communist Russia, and interview the Supreme leader.... I think I'd be very careful what I said after arriving, during the interview, and after. Until I were home! And I would probably be fearful of reprisal from my own government as well as theirs.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

Yes, of course, Tucker could've been combative and attacked.

The interview would've been immediately over, with putin throwing his mic on the floor and Tucker would've been shown the door.

The audience for this interview isn't stupid.

People can 'read between the lines'...

 

[cycleguy2300]

Yes, of course, Tucker could've been combative and attacked.

The interview would've been immediately over, with putin throwing his mic on the floor and Tucker would've been shown the door.

The audience for this interview isn't stupid.

People can 'read between the lines'...

All true.

However, Tucker should have highlighted putin mistakes, errors, lies and miscatagoizations rather than leaving others to do his job as a journalist. The nature of his standing as a journalist is if a statement is uncontested the presumption is it is either true or likely true.

What do yall think of what putin said?
Yes, we expected putin to push the russian talking points, just like KJ-P does for FJB, but it is the fact that their points are wrong that is important, not that they push them. Pushing the talking points of your side doesnt discredit or substantiate your points, the points being accurate or true, or not so, do.

Ukraine is no more "invented" than any other nation. No sovereign nation simply existing deserves to be invaded unless they are an imminent and immediate threat, which Ukraine was not and interestingly putin didnt even claim. Even if Ukraine was a puppet state of the USA which is patently ridiculous, it doesn't justify an invasion.

About the only thing putin said which I could be persuaded to believe was that the USA/CIA blew up nord stream, but then putins excuse as to why russia had presented no evidence was absurd... that the USA controls all propaganda, yet here he was sitting with an American journalist where he could present evidence if he had any.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

Of course putin was going to present his side of things.

The issue isn't that putin lied or Tucker interviewed him, but that Tucker neglected his journalistic duty to search for facts. Tucker could have done that by asking pointed, question callong attention to putins lies and inconsistencies during the interview or by a discussion of putin's lies afterwards.

As solidly conservative Tucker can be it was very disappointing (if expected) for Tucker to further the mission of a tyrant by givinging them a platform to spread lies rather than using that platform to expose a tyrants lies...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Tucker did a good job with his interview. When do you think the last time a journalist interviewed Putin and laughed in his face when he gave his response the way Tucker did? So far Tucker is the only person that has gone to to Russia and interviewed him on this topic. As he stated before the interview, the goal was to hear the opinion from the other side of the conflict, and that’s what he did. If you want to nitpick the way he conducted the interview, then why don’t you go over there and interview him yourself so that it gets done perfectly?

 

[cycleguy2300]

Tucker did a good job with his interview. When do you think the last time a journalist interviewed Putin and laughed in his face when he gave his response the way Tucker did? So far Tucker is the only person that has gone to to Russia and interviewed him on this topic. As he stated before the interview, the goal was to hear the opinion from the other side of the conflict, and that’s what he did. If you want to nitpick the way he conducted the interview, then why don’t you go over there and interview him yourself so that it gets done perfectly?

Had Tucker interviewed FJB and let him go on for literally hours about Jan 6, would you think it was a good job by Tucker or would you expect him to push FJB on his lies?

Its not a nitpick, it is fundamental to journalism to confront error and misrepresentation.

And as far as so many lefties favorite line to drool " then why dont you do it": I don't go, because quite simply that's not my job or calling, but it is Tucker's job and I don't like seeing half-ass work especially when it causes or contributes to harming my friends and people I know fighting against these lies and spilling their blood because of them

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Johnny Diamond]

Had Tucker interviewed FJB and let him go on for literally hours about Jan 6, would you think it was a good job by Tucker or would you expect him to push FJB on his lies?

Its not a nitpick, it is fundamental to journalism to confront error and misrepresentation.

And as far as so many lefties favorite line to drool " then why dont you do it": I don't go, because quite simply that's not my job or calling, but it is Tucker's job and I don't like seeing half-ass work especially when it causes or contributes to harming my friends and people I know fighting against these lies and spilling their blood because of them

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

I simultaneously stand behind my post and agree with @cycleguy2300 I am reserving my final analysis until Tucker is safely in the U.S. and releases the complete video as well as his analysis.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[Steve In Texas]

Tucker is correct to let those who haven't the pull to conduct such an interview look between the lines. And had he been a hostile interviewer, how long would the interview be?

 

[Johnny Diamond]

Tucker is correct to let those who haven't the pull to conduct such an interview look between the lines. And had he been a hostile interviewer, how long would the interview be?

Exactly

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Tucker is correct to let those who haven't the pull to conduct such an interview look between the lines. And had he been a hostile interviewer, how long would the interview be?

He didn't have to be hostile and if he plans do a "analysis" later, I think it a mistake to spread lies then try to chase them down afterwards... but we shall certainly see.

Here are a few quotes he should explain:


Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

Had Tucker interviewed FJB and let him go on for literally hours about Jan 6, would you think it was a good job by Tucker or would you expect him to push FJB on his lies?

Its not a nitpick, it is fundamental to journalism to confront error and misrepresentation.

And as far as so many lefties favorite line to drool " then why dont you do it": I don't go, because quite simply that's not my job or calling, but it is Tucker's job and I don't like seeing half-ass work especially when it causes or contributes to harming my friends and people I know fighting against these lies and spilling their blood because of them

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

FJB couldn’t sit in front of a camera and hold a conversation for as long as Putin did if his life depended on it. If you already know the truth then what does Tucker have to gain by arguing it and risking not being able to ask the rest of the questions? Do you think Putin is going to admit to anything Tucker accuses him of misrepresenting?

The interview accomplished one major thing though. Anyone with any common sense knew that attacking a NATO country would be a terrible idea. Now, we have Putin admitting to it being a terrible idea, and even gave a good explanation as to why, but of course we already knew the why. So the narrative about him taking over all of Europe as a reason for why we should be funding the proxy war completely fell apart during this interview. That makes this interview quite inconvenient for a lot of people, regardless of anything else that was said.

Besides, there’s nothing to say he won’t follow this up with another video about the interview before long.