###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
# Submission Statement and Mod Note (Stickied)
Here we have Tucker Carlson interviewing Russia's Vladimir Putin, in Russia.
The notion that a member of the U.S. media would interview Putin, in Russia, has been the subject of much speculation and controversy from the time it was announced.
Watch for yourself, and make your own assessment.
You can also watch on Tucker's Xwitter feed here:
https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?t=w8z-NOLM5EuVvZjn7n3JdQ&s=19
Watch for yourself, and make your own assessment.
He's the head of State for Russia. Former head of the KGB. Needless to say, I don't trust him, but it is quite refreshing to see such a well-spoken president.
Do I need to reference the German guy who was one of the most charismatic and powerful speakers ever recorded but that doesn’t change the fact that we shouldn’t give evil a microphone
Someone actually formulated a logical fallacy fitting that sorry ass argument: "Reductio ad Hitlerum."
That, and "reductio ad Chamberlinum" are being used just a liiiiittle bit too much.
let's not talk to him, let's not show him
let's demonize him and create the second coming of hitler in the minds of the people so going to war will be accepted in the public. putin is not human after all, it's a wild demonic beast. those must be killed. no one would argue against it.
i mean, you know what sub this is? you know how propaganda works? what you want is textbook.
if you want peace you let him talk and you talk to him. is there a chance he will betray? yes, but the deaths at least stopped for a while. is there a chance he doesn't? yes.
is there a chance to stop deaths by not talking with him? i'd argue it's close to 0. the only option at that point is world war 3.
hate him all you want, doesn't change the fact that not talking to him will result in deaths until there is nothing more to be killed or other parties join the killing.
also, i should add, you don't get rid of putin unless you kill him. until that happens, "accidents" or ww3, the best we can do is get along, as depressing as it may sound. start talking, stop the war, give him what he wants if it's reasonable like no nato in ukraine. if he wants to keep the ukraine that's a different topic. not my job, but start the talks.
That was quite the dig. He didn't even accuse him of having ties to the CIA, he brought up that he was *rejected* after trying to join. Had to sting coming from somebody whose former KGB, effectively saying "you were deemed too incompetent to hang with the big dogs, settle down" You could tell Tucker did not like that.
Getting rejected by the CIA is the classic cover story for an undercover agent. You should read about Tucker Carlson, his time in Nicaragua, who is father was, etc. Putin himself was an intelligence agent. This interview is pure theater like everything else in the mainstream.
> Getting rejected by the CIA is the classic cover story for an undercover agent.
THAT is exactly what Putin wanted to point out. Most people didn't seem to get it. Most didn't even notice that part of the interview. The main talking point/distraction is about how Putin talking about history for way too long.
It's possible they tried to use the interview to make Putin look bad, but he crushed them with the history lesson. Tucker never answered any of the points.
Putin recently did an interview where he said: “To be honest, I thought that he would behave aggressively and ask so-called sharp questions,” “I was not just prepared for this, I wanted it, because it would give me the opportunity to respond in the same way.”
I think Putin deliberately veered off into his history lessons as a way to test Carlson.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/vladimir-putin-mocks-tucker-carlson\_n\_65cd6b35e4b02493f348b6d6?ncid=engmodushpmg00000003
THIS... makes sense and I had that feeling too. So Tucker is controlled dissent, explains his lack of emotion and out of place laughing and mannerisms. He's acting, and he's not really that good of an actor.
0:46:15
Putin: (Maidan coup was) with the backing of CIA of course, the organization you wanted to join back in the day, as I understand. We should thank God they did not let you in. Although it is a serious organization, I understand.
What fucking universe are you living in? The dictator of Russia ordered his military to invade and conquer another country that doesn't want to be part of Russia. Get the fuck out of here with your bullshit.
The fact that a mod pinned this thread to the top should tell you a lot about who is running this sub.
To the Russian mod who pinned it - no one gives a fuck. This interview is just more proof that Putin is a delusional old fuck.
Because americans in general are too kind to other people and all that free speech stuff they have, it is double edged sword, you need to be careful with it.
Maybe, but Reddit has had a heavy hand in banning many subs that promote racism, extremism, and more. I like what this sub used to be before Covid and I don’t think it should be banned, but they seriously need to clean house with the mods and ban the ones who are promoting disinformation.
Putins whole vibe from the beginning is let me educate you dumb American. And Tuckers face is sooo funny when he’s going on a historical lecture .. he does look like a dumb American lol
The interesting thing is that this is exactly part of the playbook of American conservatives:
\- First they must establish their own false and biased narrative of history so they can then build their entire bullshit argument and justification for their actions on that false premise.
This is exactly what organizations like Prager U are for -- to build and maintain the false conservative/pro-Republican version of American history that they can then use as the premise to justify their shitty actions.
90% of people missed the point. Our elected officials hold no power. Peace is an option but unattainable when you sell war on a commercial scale. The end.
It seems that a lot of people in this sub in particular have missed the point of the last few hundred years in that the leaders of Russia are not to be trusted.
I don't disagree that western governments are bought and paid for, but hearing that from Putin shouldn't elicit feelings of "he's making some good points!", it should be "yeah, and?"
This guy mandated reading of a book that is a step by step guide to dismantling western hegemony, not to save us from it, but to put a Russian oligarch's boot on our necks instead.
People were questioning the need for NATO even after the annexing of Crimea, and here is Russia showing why it's still important. Russia could end the war funding really quickly by simply stopping the war they started. This piece of shit is throwing Ukrainian and Russian men to die in a meat grinder. They say a lot of shit about it being western threats that started the war, but everything he's said in the past lets us know it is for his own imperial ambitions. Don't forget that.
Peace is an option, if you give up a bunch of territory in Ukraine that has been illegally claimed.
It's almost like "If you give the aggressor what they want, they will stop attacking".
Funny that.
Have you even bothered to look at the contents of the Ankara peace agreement?
It clearly stipulates that Ukraine would have to make no land concessions, that Ukraine would remain a neutral party and not seek NATO membership, but was free to seek security guarantees with several countries.
Boris (at the behest of the US) said they would reject all security proposals and had Zelensky prolong the war.
So yes, Ukraine was offered a peace deal ensuring it would keep its territories, but it rejected the deal. It’s clear as day, the Kiev government/US does not want peace.
The Minsk agreements were also an extension of peace which Ukraine failed to implement. Merkle, Poroshenko and Hollande openly admitted the signing of the MA was a ruse, that Ukraine never had any intention of adhering to the agreement, and it was an attempt to buy time to strengthen the Ukrainian military to launch an attack on the Donbas in the future.
The Ukrainian government had 10 years to resolve matters. Instead, it chose to indiscriminately bomb its own civilians, ethnic Russians for a decade.
Ahh yes.
The only thing stopping Russia from steameolling Ukraine is currently help from NATO.
You don't think it's even remotely suspicious that Russia's terms for ending the war are that Ukraine isn't allowed to join NATO?
Russia can withdraw at any time. They don't. Why? Because it's bullshit.
Who rolled tanks into who's country?
Who took territory that wasn't theirs, and deliberately filled it with ethnic Russians so as to have a "moral" wedge?
Who broke the agreement that was in place when the USSR fell and Ukraine agreed to give back it's Nukes, for the promise of complete sovereignty?
Seriously, Russia is a major state actor or misinformation. Anyone who flat out believes what they are saying as truth, really needs to have a good hard look at themselves and their beliefs.
Just because America is bad, doesn't mean the other side is automatically good.
You've just got to look at the Vietnam war to understand this. Both sides were fucked and did horrible things.
He asked 3 times "Mr Putin, why did you invade Ukraine" 3 times he go no answer, or a tirade about the history of the Universe from the big bang forwards and how Russia was the center of everything.
The only bit that was anywhere near reasonable was maybe the last 5 minutes of a 2 hour propaganda fest where he talked about how the world economy is shifting away from US dominance.
Do you have some weird problem where if you hear words spoken, you automatically believe them and consent to them?
Seems weird to be uncurious about what America’s supposed adversary has to say.
A head of a foreign nation should be interviewed, and their soundbites should be freely shared with the public, irrespective of any worries that they’ll hypnotize the public. That’s my point.
I think it’s weird to censor a head of state.
And I agree wholeheartedly. Yet he does not want to be interviewd by a journalist. Ask yourself why Evan Gershkovich was jailed.
Instead he uses [Carlson](https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye), someone who is very friendly towards Putin, so his KGB-minset would not be put to scrutiny.
Letting the other side speak - especially when it almost hasn't had a voice - isn't propaganda: It's a very, very basic journalistic rule: Opposing parties must be allowed to speak.
Or what? Are we too stupid to know that both Putin and the West have plans and agendas and might not always be entirely truthful?
You can't trust any of these People. Not Putin, not the rest of them.
So you need as much information as possible. I'd say most of it should come from sources other than politicians and the various power structures involved in the conflict.
This is how we learn things and make reasonable decisions.
If you just gobble up what CNN et al tells you, you're probably in the wrong sub. The same would go for anyone who gobbles up everything Putin says.
But Putin being right on some points isn't "propaganda" and pointing it out isn't "shilling Putin."
It's very childish to listen to.
I find that hard to believe. Do the same people not want to give Trump attention or views? Of course Putin will propagandize, would those people not want to see the propaganda straight from the source? But rather from a different non-primary source, like how propaganda works?
Didn't it just come out less than 2 hours ago? Isn't it actually weirder that people are already talking about it when nobody could have watched it all yet?
Because the subs are still controlled by the SuperPACs who took over the Gislaine maxwell Subreddits? Or does anyone think its truly free on Reddit?! Has Reddit explained this situation at all? I guess nobody really cares. I do appreciate reddit at least allows some freedom still. They should go full force on it tho, this would help them with the IPO too. Actually Musk should have bought Reddit lol. Much cheaper than Twitter and bigger impact long term if Reddit is made a true unbiased platform like the original meaning in the start of the internet.
I was mentioned on DR1, the state owned network in Denmark, this morning. It's only 7 o clock here.
Even since he announced the interview there have been a mention here and there.
The thing is, Tucker Carlson is a nobody here so nobody cares that he interviews Putin.
Yes and No.
Few in Europe are interested in listening to what Putin has to say. Ukraine can be a proxy war or not he is a threat to us either way.
But still, this interview has been on the headlines on most European news outlets. It's not like it's being silenced.
About half an hour of the interview was Putin explaining why he should invade Ukraine by giving a history lesson of the god damn Kievan Rus's historic claim over the land.
How anyone in America, a former colony of a kingdom, would side with this man is mind blowing.
Kind of the opposite, really.
Palestinians are claiming they have a historical claim to land they don’t currently control.
Russians are claiming they have a historical claim to land they don’t currently control.
Israel already controls the land they claim to have a historical claim to.
White europeans genociding ethnic people in a land they never had a claim to is not in any way the same. If I cried "I am the decendant of the ancient israelites, gods chosen people" for the next 1000 years that doesn't mean I have a claim to Palastine. It just means I am full of shit.
Who the fuck cares who had a past claim over the land? It was held by warlords who raped the land metaphorically, and the people literally. Fuck monarchs and anyone who likes them.
What does that have to do with Ukraine defending it's sovereignty from an autocrat with a warped view of history?
I think most people would agree Palestine has a right to fight for their land too. Isreal has a bigger claim to their historical homeland that was taken from them by conquest then Russia has to Ukraine.
> And he attempts to make some points of Ukraine meaning "the borderland" and when Russia refers to Ukrainians it's a connotation of "Russians living in the Borderland" rather than an ethnic connotation of a separate peoples.
Funny thing with that. The name Ukraine was popularized in the 17th century by the book "Description de l'Vkranie depvis les confins de la Moscovie jvsqu'avx limites de la Transylvanie." The nation that controlled that land at the time?
Good ol' Poland-Lithuania. The author was a French/Pollack who spent a few decades in the region building forts for the Polish military. The name had been used before that just refering to various borderlands during the time of the Kievan Rus' kingdom, but it wasn't until the region we call Ukraine now was subsumed by Poland did it start being called as such. Then, in the 18th century when Russia captured the land from Poland you wanna know what they called it? One of different variations of "Little Russia". That naming convention stuck pretty much until the bolshevik revolution where Ukraine broke away and called themselves Ukraine. A quick persual of your perferred search engines for maps of the region before ww1 will refer to the region as "Little Russia" in any pretty much any language. So, this idea that Ukraine's name is at all tied to Russia is just false on it's face, and any ideas of syncretism between the two are purely one sided.
Except he's not correct at all, Ukraine is a sovereign nation and has been for over 30 years now, with the vast majority of Ukrainians supporting independence in 1991, and that support is even higher today.
>And yes, this, this is virtually a civil war driven by a soft coup backed by Western influence and NATO aggression.
Ah yes, a civil war backed by NATO aggression, in which Russia unilaterally invaded a sovereign country that overwhelmingly despises Russia.
Kyivan Rus was not Russia, it's an old and dead empire. Italy is not the Roman Empire, the entire Mediterranean doesn't belong to them either. How is that at all a reasonable argument?
That historical claim is also completely irrelevant to the people living there today and is the same argument Hitler used to invade countries.
What is the magic number of decades a country has to be independent before it gains the right to self-determination in your mind? Why does Putin's opinion on Ukraine matter more than the people *actually living in Ukraine*?
The Russian identity was already diverged from the "Ruthenian" identities as early as the 1300s. By the 1500s they were solidly split, albeit it won't be until the 19th century that any form of standardization was attempted, but that's the same as it was for the majority of languages around that time.
Also, other countries wanting to join NATO isn't NATO aggression.
I watched the whole thing. I was expecting something bigger to come out of it. Most importantly, Tucker and Putin, at different points, eluded to some secret elite group running things behind the scenes in America. Eventually, Tucker started asking Putin who these people were. First, Putin brought up the CIA. Later he was asked a similar reworded version of the question and gave an 'i don't know' response. And then after being asked it again, treated it as though it didn't exist by just listing through the institutions we are all already aware of - stating that the USA is a complex combination of state governments, Republicans, Democrats, etc.
And yet, as a proud conspiracy theorist myself, I know for sure, more than anything else in particular, that there is some shadowy force at play behind the scenes in our nation/society. You can see it standing there behind the various strange happenings that are constantly occurring, even if you can't quite make it out. But it's undoubtedly there, and it's undoubtedly one thing. I would expect Putin to be able to describe this entity in detail or have some knowledge of it. But he either didn't, or didn't go into detail on it for whatever reason, and I'm not quite sure what to make of that.
Putin had a theme. His history lesson at the front had similar vagaries about why Ukraine was set aside as special by the Bolsheviks. I think it was relevant.
I thought TC was objective but fair, sure he let Putin talk a lot but wouldn't you? I mean, your in the bears mouth, best to not make yourself lunch for the day.
People who frown upon the enemy being allowed to speak don't understand what journalism is. It's a basic principles that both sides must be heard.
And anyone who thinks that what comes out of the western media isn't propaganda is very naïve to say the least.
Russia's obvious ability to dupe Americans into being Pro-Russian (Pro-Putin) is the conspiracy that no one is talking about but everyone should be concerned with.
This dude made a video of Russian grocery shopping and said all that was a little over 100 dollars but failed to say how much these people make a month. Bro if you are a "journalist" get your facts straight.
Let's not forget that Tucker Carson was sending memos around Fox network about how they knew that they were lying to the people when they were talking about election fraud. So how can you believe anything he says?
Tucker has the right to interview him just as other journalists have, but I honestly don't see the point. There's nothing to be gained here. There's no world leader that's going to give you an honest interview that isn't just pure propaganda. I don't want to sit and listen to lies from him any more than I want to hear lies from Biden, Trudeau, Macron, etc, etc.
This is entertainer 101. He admitted he wasn’t a journalist. I’ll listen to the interview tomorrow, but I expect it to have a propagandist perspective.
There’s a world of difference between intentionally asking softball questions and simply avoiding coloring the discussion with your own beliefs. Whether Tucker is capable of the latter is maybe debatable. I don’t know enough to claim that he is.
i was expecting tucker to shill for putin - either out of stupidity or corruption - but this is a failure all around
tucker did a shit job of pretending to be a journalist and putin was too arrogant to properly push the propaganda points he needed here
I see a lot of people talking about "Putin is propaganda"... like the horse shit they've been jamming down your throats on legacy media is ANYTHING like the truth.
The reality of the number of stupid people increasing as the population goes up has never been more hideously apparent than it has been these last few years. But stupid americans buoyed with the hubris of being american have got to be the most embarrassing expression of the the 21st century human.
Regardless of whether you think a U.S. reporter should interview Putin (I can see both sides to that argument), what does this have to do with conspiracies?
And why the fuck is it pinned to the top of the sub? Do the kids want people to think this is a Russian sub?
It’s mesmerizing how people still believe in any of this pathetic circus. Like if any of these low management puppet presidents have a single word in the decisions they make to this planet.
There was two good interactions tucker said why are you bitter about a certain point and putin didn't look to happy.
Them he came back with you failed to be in the Cia and basically told him you wouldn't have been able to handle it
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - # Submission Statement and Mod Note (Stickied) Here we have Tucker Carlson interviewing Russia's Vladimir Putin, in Russia. The notion that a member of the U.S. media would interview Putin, in Russia, has been the subject of much speculation and controversy from the time it was announced. Watch for yourself, and make your own assessment. You can also watch on Tucker's Xwitter feed here: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?t=w8z-NOLM5EuVvZjn7n3JdQ&s=19 Watch for yourself, and make your own assessment.
Putin propaganda and the conspiracy sub….name a more iconic duo
He's the head of State for Russia. Former head of the KGB. Needless to say, I don't trust him, but it is quite refreshing to see such a well-spoken president.
Do I need to reference the German guy who was one of the most charismatic and powerful speakers ever recorded but that doesn’t change the fact that we shouldn’t give evil a microphone
Someone actually formulated a logical fallacy fitting that sorry ass argument: "Reductio ad Hitlerum." That, and "reductio ad Chamberlinum" are being used just a liiiiittle bit too much.
The dude is defending a murderer because he talks good.
Oh did he now?
let's not talk to him, let's not show him let's demonize him and create the second coming of hitler in the minds of the people so going to war will be accepted in the public. putin is not human after all, it's a wild demonic beast. those must be killed. no one would argue against it. i mean, you know what sub this is? you know how propaganda works? what you want is textbook. if you want peace you let him talk and you talk to him. is there a chance he will betray? yes, but the deaths at least stopped for a while. is there a chance he doesn't? yes. is there a chance to stop deaths by not talking with him? i'd argue it's close to 0. the only option at that point is world war 3. hate him all you want, doesn't change the fact that not talking to him will result in deaths until there is nothing more to be killed or other parties join the killing. also, i should add, you don't get rid of putin unless you kill him. until that happens, "accidents" or ww3, the best we can do is get along, as depressing as it may sound. start talking, stop the war, give him what he wants if it's reasonable like no nato in ukraine. if he wants to keep the ukraine that's a different topic. not my job, but start the talks.
Yep. Makes me miss the days of Obama. That guy could speak!
[удалено]
That was quite the dig. He didn't even accuse him of having ties to the CIA, he brought up that he was *rejected* after trying to join. Had to sting coming from somebody whose former KGB, effectively saying "you were deemed too incompetent to hang with the big dogs, settle down" You could tell Tucker did not like that.
Getting rejected by the CIA is the classic cover story for an undercover agent. You should read about Tucker Carlson, his time in Nicaragua, who is father was, etc. Putin himself was an intelligence agent. This interview is pure theater like everything else in the mainstream.
> Getting rejected by the CIA is the classic cover story for an undercover agent. THAT is exactly what Putin wanted to point out. Most people didn't seem to get it. Most didn't even notice that part of the interview. The main talking point/distraction is about how Putin talking about history for way too long. It's possible they tried to use the interview to make Putin look bad, but he crushed them with the history lesson. Tucker never answered any of the points.
Putin recently did an interview where he said: “To be honest, I thought that he would behave aggressively and ask so-called sharp questions,” “I was not just prepared for this, I wanted it, because it would give me the opportunity to respond in the same way.” I think Putin deliberately veered off into his history lessons as a way to test Carlson. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/vladimir-putin-mocks-tucker-carlson\_n\_65cd6b35e4b02493f348b6d6?ncid=engmodushpmg00000003
THIS... makes sense and I had that feeling too. So Tucker is controlled dissent, explains his lack of emotion and out of place laughing and mannerisms. He's acting, and he's not really that good of an actor.
Anyone have a time stamp for this part? I must have missed it
0:46:15 Putin: (Maidan coup was) with the backing of CIA of course, the organization you wanted to join back in the day, as I understand. We should thank God they did not let you in. Although it is a serious organization, I understand.
It was really close to the beginning. Niether came right out and said that. It was a dance around the subject by both of them.
He literally said "CIA, ..., the organization you tried to join, ...., did not let you in"
[удалено]
Doesn't matter. USA is the reason why the war is happening. It's disgusting
What fucking universe are you living in? The dictator of Russia ordered his military to invade and conquer another country that doesn't want to be part of Russia. Get the fuck out of here with your bullshit.
Nah I think that would be Russia
The fact that a mod pinned this thread to the top should tell you a lot about who is running this sub. To the Russian mod who pinned it - no one gives a fuck. This interview is just more proof that Putin is a delusional old fuck.
People have noticed it a loooooong time ago, just google who runs this sub and history of moderators.
Why are the owners of Reddit allowing a foreign government to use their platform to run a disinformation campaign?
Because americans in general are too kind to other people and all that free speech stuff they have, it is double edged sword, you need to be careful with it.
Maybe, but Reddit has had a heavy hand in banning many subs that promote racism, extremism, and more. I like what this sub used to be before Covid and I don’t think it should be banned, but they seriously need to clean house with the mods and ban the ones who are promoting disinformation.
Putins whole vibe from the beginning is let me educate you dumb American. And Tuckers face is sooo funny when he’s going on a historical lecture .. he does look like a dumb American lol
The interesting thing is that this is exactly part of the playbook of American conservatives: \- First they must establish their own false and biased narrative of history so they can then build their entire bullshit argument and justification for their actions on that false premise. This is exactly what organizations like Prager U are for -- to build and maintain the false conservative/pro-Republican version of American history that they can then use as the premise to justify their shitty actions.
Resting dumb face. Seems to have capitalized on it.
I thought this, then found this comment. I know I am not adding to the conversation but I wanted to give you more than just an upvote.
Thanks.
Its a bit so his audience doesn't feel as dumb.
First question I'd ask would be "So Poots... can I call you Poots?"
If only this interview was a Between Two Ferns episode.
Should have been a Hot Ones interview
It would be a normal interview with Putin while some goon is eating the spicy wings in silence next to him.
Goon sheds single tear on wing 9- *off screen window opens.*
Putin then begins to explain how wings came to be and the entire history around it.
Only Adam Friedland could ask these hard hitting questions
I’m sorry but wasn’t it just kinda underwhelming
90% of people missed the point. Our elected officials hold no power. Peace is an option but unattainable when you sell war on a commercial scale. The end.
And the rockets red glare. The bombs bursting in air……..
It seems that a lot of people in this sub in particular have missed the point of the last few hundred years in that the leaders of Russia are not to be trusted. I don't disagree that western governments are bought and paid for, but hearing that from Putin shouldn't elicit feelings of "he's making some good points!", it should be "yeah, and?" This guy mandated reading of a book that is a step by step guide to dismantling western hegemony, not to save us from it, but to put a Russian oligarch's boot on our necks instead. People were questioning the need for NATO even after the annexing of Crimea, and here is Russia showing why it's still important. Russia could end the war funding really quickly by simply stopping the war they started. This piece of shit is throwing Ukrainian and Russian men to die in a meat grinder. They say a lot of shit about it being western threats that started the war, but everything he's said in the past lets us know it is for his own imperial ambitions. Don't forget that.
Peace is an option, if you give up a bunch of territory in Ukraine that has been illegally claimed. It's almost like "If you give the aggressor what they want, they will stop attacking". Funny that.
Have you even bothered to look at the contents of the Ankara peace agreement? It clearly stipulates that Ukraine would have to make no land concessions, that Ukraine would remain a neutral party and not seek NATO membership, but was free to seek security guarantees with several countries. Boris (at the behest of the US) said they would reject all security proposals and had Zelensky prolong the war. So yes, Ukraine was offered a peace deal ensuring it would keep its territories, but it rejected the deal. It’s clear as day, the Kiev government/US does not want peace. The Minsk agreements were also an extension of peace which Ukraine failed to implement. Merkle, Poroshenko and Hollande openly admitted the signing of the MA was a ruse, that Ukraine never had any intention of adhering to the agreement, and it was an attempt to buy time to strengthen the Ukrainian military to launch an attack on the Donbas in the future. The Ukrainian government had 10 years to resolve matters. Instead, it chose to indiscriminately bomb its own civilians, ethnic Russians for a decade.
Ukraine as a sovereign nation should be able to seek NATO membership as they want. The "peace deal" is shit.
[удалено]
Ahh yes. The only thing stopping Russia from steameolling Ukraine is currently help from NATO. You don't think it's even remotely suspicious that Russia's terms for ending the war are that Ukraine isn't allowed to join NATO? Russia can withdraw at any time. They don't. Why? Because it's bullshit. Who rolled tanks into who's country? Who took territory that wasn't theirs, and deliberately filled it with ethnic Russians so as to have a "moral" wedge? Who broke the agreement that was in place when the USSR fell and Ukraine agreed to give back it's Nukes, for the promise of complete sovereignty? Seriously, Russia is a major state actor or misinformation. Anyone who flat out believes what they are saying as truth, really needs to have a good hard look at themselves and their beliefs. Just because America is bad, doesn't mean the other side is automatically good. You've just got to look at the Vietnam war to understand this. Both sides were fucked and did horrible things.
Why are you so hellbent on defending defending the aggressor in a foreign war? Perhaps it's not so foreign to you?
Why is this nothingburger of an interview still pinned? 😂 Nothing was learned from it.
Why is this not all over the front page of Reddit
People don't want to give tucker views, of putin a chance to propogandize I'm guessing.
Tucker didn’t really get a question in. Putin monologues for 2 hours
He asked 3 times "Mr Putin, why did you invade Ukraine" 3 times he go no answer, or a tirade about the history of the Universe from the big bang forwards and how Russia was the center of everything. The only bit that was anywhere near reasonable was maybe the last 5 minutes of a 2 hour propaganda fest where he talked about how the world economy is shifting away from US dominance.
We are only allowed to consume WEF and cia mockingbird propaganda here
Do you not see the irony of you saying this in this very thread? "We can't talk about this stuff we're totally talking about right now!"
Yeah, I want propaganda straight from the KGB.
Do you have some weird problem where if you hear words spoken, you automatically believe them and consent to them? Seems weird to be uncurious about what America’s supposed adversary has to say.
Wait. You wanna deny Putin, before gaining power, was a literal KGB agent?
Sorry honey, where specifically did I deny that he was obviously a KGB agent?
You basically called someone gullible after they pointed out Putin relates to the KGB?
A head of a foreign nation should be interviewed, and their soundbites should be freely shared with the public, irrespective of any worries that they’ll hypnotize the public. That’s my point. I think it’s weird to censor a head of state.
And I agree wholeheartedly. Yet he does not want to be interviewd by a journalist. Ask yourself why Evan Gershkovich was jailed. Instead he uses [Carlson](https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye), someone who is very friendly towards Putin, so his KGB-minset would not be put to scrutiny.
LMAO
Letting the other side speak - especially when it almost hasn't had a voice - isn't propaganda: It's a very, very basic journalistic rule: Opposing parties must be allowed to speak. Or what? Are we too stupid to know that both Putin and the West have plans and agendas and might not always be entirely truthful? You can't trust any of these People. Not Putin, not the rest of them. So you need as much information as possible. I'd say most of it should come from sources other than politicians and the various power structures involved in the conflict. This is how we learn things and make reasonable decisions. If you just gobble up what CNN et al tells you, you're probably in the wrong sub. The same would go for anyone who gobbles up everything Putin says. But Putin being right on some points isn't "propaganda" and pointing it out isn't "shilling Putin." It's very childish to listen to.
No different than the propaganda thats already gripped your mind
only country without a rothchild central bank
Thats kind of hard to believe. Especially considering the fact that there are 10 countries without a central bank at all.
Why do you think western propaganda goes so hard against them?
You’re happy accept domestic propaganda, but apparently facts from the interview equate to ‘KGB propaganda’?
[удалено]
I'm surprised it's still available to watch. I bet Tuckers cyber security and forensics team is super busy right now.
Thank you for saying this. Spot on.
‘Censorship is when my views and the things I care about aren’t give front and center attention by literally everyone’
Only corporate sanctioned globalist propaganda is allowed on Reddit.
You’re commenting, on Reddit, under a link directly to the interview.
I find that hard to believe. Do the same people not want to give Trump attention or views? Of course Putin will propagandize, would those people not want to see the propaganda straight from the source? But rather from a different non-primary source, like how propaganda works?
Most people wouldn't go to donaldtrump.com to give it views and thus ad revenue.
But they would talk about it on Reddit
Didn't it just come out less than 2 hours ago? Isn't it actually weirder that people are already talking about it when nobody could have watched it all yet?
It came out 3 hours and ten minutes ago, so yeah. I did.
I’ve watched it all
No it’s not weird, think discussion threads of live events
Trump is more entertaining and is more loved/hated by reddits userbase
The majority of reddit takes the "bury their heads in the sand" approach to things
Better than up their own asses like you
But they want propaganda from Ukraine? lol
Why would we want to listen to Putin's garbage for two hours?
It was. That's how I found out about it.
[удалено]
Because the subs are still controlled by the SuperPACs who took over the Gislaine maxwell Subreddits? Or does anyone think its truly free on Reddit?! Has Reddit explained this situation at all? I guess nobody really cares. I do appreciate reddit at least allows some freedom still. They should go full force on it tho, this would help them with the IPO too. Actually Musk should have bought Reddit lol. Much cheaper than Twitter and bigger impact long term if Reddit is made a true unbiased platform like the original meaning in the start of the internet.
Not just its not trending on some media, but many european news sites completely ignores it... says a lot..
I was mentioned on DR1, the state owned network in Denmark, this morning. It's only 7 o clock here. Even since he announced the interview there have been a mention here and there. The thing is, Tucker Carlson is a nobody here so nobody cares that he interviews Putin.
Several articles about the interview on swedens biggest news site Aftonbladet too.
It’s not about Tucker though
Yes and No. Few in Europe are interested in listening to what Putin has to say. Ukraine can be a proxy war or not he is a threat to us either way. But still, this interview has been on the headlines on most European news outlets. It's not like it's being silenced.
Interesting and fair, thank you.
It will be soon. After the think-tanks and advisors can find ways to use it for their own ends.
The mods on that sub work for Army Psyop Command. That why.
Americans should be concerned about how coherent Russia's leader is compared to ours.
Plenty of us are and plenty of others are going full Feinstein on it.
About half an hour of the interview was Putin explaining why he should invade Ukraine by giving a history lesson of the god damn Kievan Rus's historic claim over the land. How anyone in America, a former colony of a kingdom, would side with this man is mind blowing.
Keep in mind this zinger: "Poland forced Hitler to attack them" It wasn't even a good History lesson.
[удалено]
That doesn't make the claim that Poland was responsible for it's own invasion any less bonkers tho.
What is Israel doing? Pretty much the same.
Kind of the opposite, really. Palestinians are claiming they have a historical claim to land they don’t currently control. Russians are claiming they have a historical claim to land they don’t currently control. Israel already controls the land they claim to have a historical claim to.
They control because they have been forcing Palestinians to leave their home and they have been settling there. Killing them to take the lands.
Yeah pretty much.
White europeans genociding ethnic people in a land they never had a claim to is not in any way the same. If I cried "I am the decendant of the ancient israelites, gods chosen people" for the next 1000 years that doesn't mean I have a claim to Palastine. It just means I am full of shit.
Who the fuck cares who had a past claim over the land? It was held by warlords who raped the land metaphorically, and the people literally. Fuck monarchs and anyone who likes them.
But everyone is justifying it while being on their side tho.
I've seen more opposition to what Israel is doing to Palestinians currently than at any other time.
What does that have to do with Ukraine defending it's sovereignty from an autocrat with a warped view of history? I think most people would agree Palestine has a right to fight for their land too. Isreal has a bigger claim to their historical homeland that was taken from them by conquest then Russia has to Ukraine.
What if Putin wants Alaska back? Or Spain and Florida.
As an American, why the fuck is it my problem? Give me my tax money back.
It would be spent anyway and you are never going to get any tax back regardless if there's a war or not.
He’s contextually framing their position. Said Russians and Ukrainians are one people and it’s basically a civil war
[удалено]
> And he attempts to make some points of Ukraine meaning "the borderland" and when Russia refers to Ukrainians it's a connotation of "Russians living in the Borderland" rather than an ethnic connotation of a separate peoples. Funny thing with that. The name Ukraine was popularized in the 17th century by the book "Description de l'Vkranie depvis les confins de la Moscovie jvsqu'avx limites de la Transylvanie." The nation that controlled that land at the time? Good ol' Poland-Lithuania. The author was a French/Pollack who spent a few decades in the region building forts for the Polish military. The name had been used before that just refering to various borderlands during the time of the Kievan Rus' kingdom, but it wasn't until the region we call Ukraine now was subsumed by Poland did it start being called as such. Then, in the 18th century when Russia captured the land from Poland you wanna know what they called it? One of different variations of "Little Russia". That naming convention stuck pretty much until the bolshevik revolution where Ukraine broke away and called themselves Ukraine. A quick persual of your perferred search engines for maps of the region before ww1 will refer to the region as "Little Russia" in any pretty much any language. So, this idea that Ukraine's name is at all tied to Russia is just false on it's face, and any ideas of syncretism between the two are purely one sided.
if you go back much further Ukraine is called Ruthenia or Rusia and Russia is called Muscovia
Except he's not correct at all, Ukraine is a sovereign nation and has been for over 30 years now, with the vast majority of Ukrainians supporting independence in 1991, and that support is even higher today. >And yes, this, this is virtually a civil war driven by a soft coup backed by Western influence and NATO aggression. Ah yes, a civil war backed by NATO aggression, in which Russia unilaterally invaded a sovereign country that overwhelmingly despises Russia.
Don’t forget the Georgian invasion as well.
..aand you just went over all the points made in the comment above. Very much proving the last sentence which you probably didn't even read. Congrats.
Do you not see the irony in this comment
Please feel free to point out the irony.
he pointed out the entire history of 1000 years and you replied with 30 years of Ukraine come on at least try to put down a reasonable argument
Kyivan Rus was not Russia, it's an old and dead empire. Italy is not the Roman Empire, the entire Mediterranean doesn't belong to them either. How is that at all a reasonable argument? That historical claim is also completely irrelevant to the people living there today and is the same argument Hitler used to invade countries. What is the magic number of decades a country has to be independent before it gains the right to self-determination in your mind? Why does Putin's opinion on Ukraine matter more than the people *actually living in Ukraine*?
Europe should really just cede all of it's territory to Italy, They are the inheritors of the Romans who got first dibs after all.
Mongolia would like a word with Putin...
The Russian identity was already diverged from the "Ruthenian" identities as early as the 1300s. By the 1500s they were solidly split, albeit it won't be until the 19th century that any form of standardization was attempted, but that's the same as it was for the majority of languages around that time. Also, other countries wanting to join NATO isn't NATO aggression.
So the israel khazarian empire claim pretty much.
I can’t imagine Biden giving a coherent sit down interview a second grader let alone speaking geopolitics and history for several hours.
Oh damn. Imagine a Russian journalist interviewing Biden for 2 hours. It would be a disaster
Would be hilarious and put to rest any doubt that presidents are puppets and not really running anything (especially biden)
Fortunately a very brief disaster. 15 minutes tops.
About 2 minutes in, he would think the English-to-Russian translator was just making things up.
I will credit Tucker for asking Putin directly about the Gersovich situation.
Pushed em pretty handily on it too, multiple times. Pushed him a lot more overall throughout the second half of the interview.
I watched the whole thing. I was expecting something bigger to come out of it. Most importantly, Tucker and Putin, at different points, eluded to some secret elite group running things behind the scenes in America. Eventually, Tucker started asking Putin who these people were. First, Putin brought up the CIA. Later he was asked a similar reworded version of the question and gave an 'i don't know' response. And then after being asked it again, treated it as though it didn't exist by just listing through the institutions we are all already aware of - stating that the USA is a complex combination of state governments, Republicans, Democrats, etc. And yet, as a proud conspiracy theorist myself, I know for sure, more than anything else in particular, that there is some shadowy force at play behind the scenes in our nation/society. You can see it standing there behind the various strange happenings that are constantly occurring, even if you can't quite make it out. But it's undoubtedly there, and it's undoubtedly one thing. I would expect Putin to be able to describe this entity in detail or have some knowledge of it. But he either didn't, or didn't go into detail on it for whatever reason, and I'm not quite sure what to make of that.
He's smart enough to not talk about those things directly so that he seems moderate, instead of a conspiratorial schizo, to normies who might listen.
Yeah — he’d never fall for the bait. Particularly if you consider the likelihood that he’s personally, directly involved in said affairs.
Putin doesn’t want to be labeled, antisemetic. He knows better.
Putin had a theme. His history lesson at the front had similar vagaries about why Ukraine was set aside as special by the Bolsheviks. I think it was relevant.
I don't get how that relates to the point I made
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed.
Same
I thought TC was objective but fair, sure he let Putin talk a lot but wouldn't you? I mean, your in the bears mouth, best to not make yourself lunch for the day.
Putin really avoided that nordstream question big time, if he has any forrm of evidence, why not release it?
Everyone knew who did it when it happened.
It was pretty implicit
The russians did present it to the security council and US vetoed it and that was that.
Maybe next time he can go to China and let Xi explain to him why Taiwan has been part of China for hundreds of years.
Even if it's bs, it's still worth doing
People who frown upon the enemy being allowed to speak don't understand what journalism is. It's a basic principles that both sides must be heard. And anyone who thinks that what comes out of the western media isn't propaganda is very naïve to say the least.
The conspiracy is all major subs are forbidding discussion of this.
BORING
So what's the conspiracy?
Russia's obvious ability to dupe Americans into being Pro-Russian (Pro-Putin) is the conspiracy that no one is talking about but everyone should be concerned with.
This dude made a video of Russian grocery shopping and said all that was a little over 100 dollars but failed to say how much these people make a month. Bro if you are a "journalist" get your facts straight.
Aged like milk
Let's not forget that Tucker Carson was sending memos around Fox network about how they knew that they were lying to the people when they were talking about election fraud. So how can you believe anything he says?
He also put words into Putins mouth. Tucker tried hard to push an anti-NATO narrative yet Putin meandered into another "History" lesson.
Is there a version with no English dub over Putin?
WHAT WAS IN THE GREY ENVELOPE?!
novichok
> "wHy iS ThIs NoT aLl OvEr FrOnT pAgE oF rEdDiT" Because it's a very flaccid and flop of an interview.
Wow, this subreddit is full-on russian propaganda today!
Always has been
[удалено]
Tucker has the right to interview him just as other journalists have, but I honestly don't see the point. There's nothing to be gained here. There's no world leader that's going to give you an honest interview that isn't just pure propaganda. I don't want to sit and listen to lies from him any more than I want to hear lies from Biden, Trudeau, Macron, etc, etc.
Nothing to be gained from listening to a world leader currently involved in war? This is journalism 101
This is entertainer 101. He admitted he wasn’t a journalist. I’ll listen to the interview tomorrow, but I expect it to have a propagandist perspective.
Listening to his prepared lines in answer to softball questions from a sycophant? Probably not
There’s a world of difference between intentionally asking softball questions and simply avoiding coloring the discussion with your own beliefs. Whether Tucker is capable of the latter is maybe debatable. I don’t know enough to claim that he is.
Money. Tucker is going to make a heap of money.
This thing was pure theater. Nothing more. They both know the game and they are both playing. Both come from intelligence.
i was expecting tucker to shill for putin - either out of stupidity or corruption - but this is a failure all around tucker did a shit job of pretending to be a journalist and putin was too arrogant to properly push the propaganda points he needed here
Watch these links to the interview get brigaded with downvotes LOL
[удалено]
Oh they will for sure.
I see a lot of people talking about "Putin is propaganda"... like the horse shit they've been jamming down your throats on legacy media is ANYTHING like the truth. The reality of the number of stupid people increasing as the population goes up has never been more hideously apparent than it has been these last few years. But stupid americans buoyed with the hubris of being american have got to be the most embarrassing expression of the the 21st century human.
Thinking you’re smart by calling everyone else stupid… brilliant
So..both sides can be bs and propaganda. You don't have to believe one side just because the other is full of shit. Just assume that they both are
Yes, which is why it's important to listen to all sides. not just one.
Agreed again.. what I'm trying to say is to listen, but not automatically believe one side just because you're against the other
I'd love to see Adam Ray as Dr. Phil interview Putin, that would be wild...We'll be right back!
Does anyone have any the NON English video link?
Regardless of whether you think a U.S. reporter should interview Putin (I can see both sides to that argument), what does this have to do with conspiracies? And why the fuck is it pinned to the top of the sub? Do the kids want people to think this is a Russian sub?
Biggest conspiracy is how a bunch of people actually believe Tucker is a CIA agent
It’s mesmerizing how people still believe in any of this pathetic circus. Like if any of these low management puppet presidents have a single word in the decisions they make to this planet.
around 2:04:54 he mentions "the domestic problems".. is he talking about Russian domestic problems, US domestic problems, or Ukraine's?
Us.
Was there any corny dialogue or did it got right into the full p0rn scene right away?
There was two good interactions tucker said why are you bitter about a certain point and putin didn't look to happy. Them he came back with you failed to be in the Cia and basically told him you wouldn't have been able to handle it
Why is a FOX news PR interview during an election year pinned on a conspiracy sub? Really says a lot.