I did look up who “Yves Smith” was before posting, and agree that the take seemed odd for someone supposedly neutral and objective. Nevertheless, the content of the article speaks for itself and reads like insidious Russian propaganda masking as geopolitical analysis. So I decided to make my comment anyway.
See, I don’t think you’ve ever looked up anything before posting, that’s the issue.
Ok, so Scott Ritter is untrustworthy regarding Ukraine, proven by the fact that he’s not unabashedly pro-Ukraine? Do y’all even hear how religious y’all get about the State Department line? You’re only worth listening to if you’re madly pro-Ukraine, up until the point you’re not, and then you’re a Putin shill.
One move is to unleash its missiles and take out “decision centers” as in Kiev and the electrical grid in most if not all of Western Ukraine. Russia now needs to prostrate Ukraine.
It’s not just “not unabashedly pro-Ukraine”, it repeats Russian propaganda word for word. That “decision center” is such a Russian propaganda cliche it hurts, not to mention later “Donald Trump should choose Russia to save the world” from Ritter.
Gotta love .ml critical thinking faculties. I link directly to a Wikipedia article about the views of Scott Ritter (to whom Susan Webber decided to give 1/3rd of the space of her article), where he is literally identified as a contributor to Russia Today and Sputnik, and I’m downvoted for calling a Russian shill a Russian shill. chefs kiss to .ml
I did look up who “Yves Smith” was before posting, and agree that the take seemed odd for someone supposedly neutral and objective. Nevertheless, the content of the article speaks for itself and reads like insidious Russian propaganda masking as geopolitical analysis. So I decided to make my comment anyway.
Then I looked up someone who she quoted and gave a 1/3rd of this article to - Scott Ritter. Gotta be some kind of joke if you believe incorporating his perspective is not pro-Russian shill bullshit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter#Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine
See, I don’t think you’ve ever looked up anything before posting, that’s the issue.
Ok, so Scott Ritter is untrustworthy regarding Ukraine, proven by the fact that he’s not unabashedly pro-Ukraine? Do y’all even hear how religious y’all get about the State Department line? You’re only worth listening to if you’re madly pro-Ukraine, up until the point you’re not, and then you’re a Putin shill.
The west isn’t sending their best.
Did you read the article in this post?
It’s not just “not unabashedly pro-Ukraine”, it repeats Russian propaganda word for word. That “decision center” is such a Russian propaganda cliche it hurts, not to mention later “Donald Trump should choose Russia to save the world” from Ritter.
Lmao, thank you.
Gotta love .ml critical thinking faculties. I link directly to a Wikipedia article about the views of Scott Ritter (to whom Susan Webber decided to give 1/3rd of the space of her article), where he is literally identified as a contributor to Russia Today and Sputnik, and I’m downvoted for calling a Russian shill a Russian shill. chefs kiss to .ml