Search results

The fallacy is your insistence that something is either perfect or completely corrupt, with no middle ground in between. Which is absurd and ignorant. Really, the fact that you put Russia, China, and fucking NATO side-by-side and conclude that they're all the same thing should clue you in that...

Jesus fucking Christ, Crni, where do I start? Your silly demand that NATO has to consist of perfect democracies, otherwise it's a whore is ridiculous. As is your insistence that because at some point in the past a given nation wasn't democratic or free, it completely destroys their credibility...

This just in: War is hell, news at 11. At least NATO mostly consists of democratic, free countries. And, you know, doesn't repress minorities on a comparable scale.

Always at your service. The point is still valid. As heinous as the Soviet policy was, it did not invalidate the issues raised by them, concerning the conduct of Nazi troops in the East.

Tu quoque fallacy. The fact that America fucks up doesn't excuse Russian fuck ups.

Won't be necessary.

You certainly do not understand the concept of history or changing circumstances. It's funny how you ignore the casus of the Baltic States. Or the mass executions of Polish officers at Katyń and elsewhere. The Holodomor genocide in Ukraine. Now, tell me, why do you do that? Isolationist like...

Poland was not a newly created state. You do realize that we would have wound up invaded and occupied by the Soviet Union, like the Baltic States, right? Are you really claiming that Stalin wasn't a war-mongering, insane dictator who terrorized everyone to maintain his power?

That's a nice bit of apologism right there. What next? Us Poles had it coming? Soviets were liberating us? Katyń, Charków, Miednoje, and other mass executions were fabricated by ze Germans to slander the Soviets? Wondrous Soviet apologetics, ahoy.

Google Ribbentrop-Molotov and learn, child.

And also, this gem: Yeah, the 1920 war, World War II, Afghanistan, and so on were reactionary to aggressive U.S. foreign policy.

I'm not sure, are you describing the Soviet Union or the United States?

I'm interested and involved in politics - I simply reject conspiracy thinking out of hand and take facts for what they are, not what I'd prefer them to be.

Hundreds, actually, but to list every single reference would be a bit tiresome.

Ah yes, another Putin apologist. The presence of Russian armed forces in Donbass is well documented (in no small part thanks to the assassinated Russian opposition leader, Boris Nemtsov), but of course, you will post some video by Krul making a fool of himself, with no sources to back it up than...

Yeah, Russian volunteers serving in the Russian military, ordered there by Russian officers, under Russian policy, using Russian army weapons and vehicles. And no, I don't agree, given that the Falklands were never Argentinian. Uh, you do realize that Ukraine is not ruled by Nazis, right...

I predict lots of sources from RT.com and one or two jabs at how people fall for American deception. Perhaps claims that there are no Russian troops in Ukraine and the dead bodies transported back from Donbass are actually pig carcasses, imported... Uh, for science.

For Argentina, it was a righteous, just cause. For Britain, it was another Friday.

So in your opinion, the Falklands War was an Argentinian Civil War?

No, we abolished that title. Now it's Prelate Sander and Prelate Tagaziel. Off to the gallows with you, peasant!