On President Putin's Interview with Tucker Carlson | Cynthia Chung

[Scott]

Putin has the same motivation that Trump does. https://fortune.com/2022/03/26/elon...the-world-putin-significantly-richer-than-me/ We are led by money-grabbing narcissists who only think of themselves and money. They never have enough money.

Putin may be the richest man on earth, but his vast knowledge of Russian history as evidence in his interview with Tucker makes it clear that money clearly isn't the only thing he thinks about. Did you listen to his interview?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Let's get real, shall we?

Putin's KGB training was to exploit useful idiots in other countries. He's done this with any and every US interviewer, because NONE of those interviews tells anything surprising. What, he's going say, "well, ya got me!" and confess to all the murders, unjust jailings and imperialistic BS under his quasi authoritarian rule? No. Never has, never will.

Here's a question for you- did you actually see Tucker's interview with Putin? It's easy to make up all sorts of claims, what I'd like to know is what knowledge you actually have of the interview. If you -have- actually seen the interview, my next question would be if you'd read at least the first dozen paragraphs from Cynthia Chung's article, which I quoted in the opening post of this thread.

I've done both...which does NOT alter my observation one iota. If you have some earth shattering revelation that Carlson got out of Putin throughout that what, 2 hour lecture/speech, then please share it.

 

[Guno צְבִי]

Phoenyx is a Russian operative trying to sound reasonable

 

[Taichiliberal]

Phoenyx is a Russian operative trying to sound reasonable

More like just parroting the somewhat confused MAGA mindset. They hate federal gov't ... especially during a Dem administration ... so they'll soft soap cretins like Carlson and Putin. Yet both are doing exactly what our Trump chumps swear they are against ... promoting a "deep state/authoritarian" gov't and giving a partial pass to a imperialistic communist gov't.

Strange people, these MAGA folk.

 

[goat]

US elections and US provoked wars are for the sole purpose of making money.

I don't see how U.S. elections could be seen as done for the purpose of making money, but I certainly agree with you when it comes to wars.

Billions are spent every 2 or 4 years on electing politicians who have no say over policy. Look what happened to the Squad. Schumer and McConnell are both paid by AIPAC to do what they are told.

Trump and Biden are financed by 2 different billionaires, both with the same goal of protecting Israel.

HUD has a $72 billion budget that half is stolen off the top by administrators and the other half is paid out to contractors. Little to none goes to finding the homeless a stable place to live. NYC just gave $52 million in debit cards to the illegal immigrants shitting on the sidewalks.

Politics is about making money, not solving problems. Talk to people who are recently here from Russia, Jordan, or Beijing, they will all tell you things are a lot more advanced back home. Why is that? We're the wealthiest nation in history.

 

[goat]

Phoenyx is a Russian operative trying to sound reasonable

You're a zionist justifying genocide.

 

[Scott]

Let's get real, shall we?

Putin's KGB training was to exploit useful idiots in other countries. He's done this with any and every US interviewer, because NONE of those interviews tells anything surprising. What, he's going say, "well, ya got me!" and confess to all the murders, unjust jailings and imperialistic BS under his quasi authoritarian rule? No. Never has, never will.

Carlson is still butt hurt over getting the heave-ho from Fox. He craves that public recognition, the need to be touted as a voice of knowledge and authority. The fact that his "voice" drips with the venom of racism, bigotry, fascism and misogyny is not a problem for him.

Nor is it for Putin, because he knows that giving the spotlight to Carlson will further sow the seed of discourse in America....which can translate to congressional/White House actions.

Now, if we're dumb enough to put Trump back in power, granting Carlson's little interview will not have been in vain.

Here's a question for you- did you actually see Tucker's interview with Putin? It's easy to make up all sorts of claims, what I'd like to know is what knowledge you actually have of the interview. If you -have- actually seen the interview, my next question would be if you'd read at least the first dozen paragraphs from Cynthia Chung's article, which I quoted in the opening post of this thread.

I've done both...which does NOT alter my observation one iota. If you have some earth shattering revelation that Carlson got out of Putin throughout that what, 2 hour lecture/speech, then please share it.

First, I'd like to say that I'm happy you have apparently seen the interview and read the first 12 paragraphs I quoted of Cynthia Chung's article. It's hard to have a real discussion with someone if they refuse to inform themselves of the subject matter being debated.

As to whether there was some earth shattering revelation that Carlson got out of Putin, perhaps, but if so, I didn't see it. What I -did- see in the interview simply reinforced what I'd already believed for some time, which is that Putin may have his flaws but he is also highly intelligent and knowledgeable on Russia's history. Cynthia Chung goes into great depth on Putin's description of Russian history as it relates to Ukraine. You've told me you've read the first 12 paragraphs of Cynthia's article, but perhaps you didn't read what she wrote further down that I think is quite illuminating in regards to the conflict in Ukraine. Quoting another 10 paragraphs from her article:

**
President Putin begins with a history lesson of how the Russian state was created, which included the region of Kiev over 1000 years ago. Obviously if we were to talk about the merits of today’s U.S. borders, including its possession of Puerto Rico and Hawaii, we would expect there to be some degree of history to explain how such things came to be and why, at least from an American point of view, those regional possessions are justified.

However, what stands in stark contrast to what Putin is outlining here vs. the very existence of the United States which was, whether we like it or not, formed at the expense of the indigenous peoples who were already living there - in stark contrast to this large elephant in the room, Putin is actually outlining a Russian history with Ukraine (which was originally Russian until relatively recently) that dates back over 1000 YEARS!

Let’s think about this a little more shall we? President Putin was actually given a bit of a hard time even from Tucker Carlson for this long account of Russian history with the region that is known as Ukraine today, but in reality has only come recently into existence through artificial means (we will get into why this is shortly).

So, unlike the American territories, Ukraine was originally Russian over 1000 years ago and has continued to have a strong Russian identity, culture and language TO THIS DAY, with about 1/3 of the Ukrainian population speaking predominantly Russian.

Note the region in brown is Crimea which is ethnic Russian and Russian speaking as even Tucker Carlson in his overview of the interview back at his hotel room admitted and did not disagree with Crimea’s referendum vote to return to Russia. He brought Crimea up in context to the attempt to come to an agreement in ending the war in Ukraine, and that one of the conditionalities that were being demanded by the West was that Crimea would be given back to Ukraine…against the Crimean people’s referendum vote. Even Carlson agrees that this is an insane demand and that the Crimean people are essentially Russian and wish to remain so.​

Whereas the United States was founded not just at the expense of the indigenous peoples already living there, but would also later commit a genocide against the indigenous peoples in the 19th century! I am not saying here that the founding of America was all bad, but what has been the overall conduct of the American government and its people against the indigenous peoples is not something one can simply pardon themselves of as if such actions were justified. The matter is indeed very complicated, for those who wish to know more about the British and Scottish Rite manipulations of the situation they can refer here.

But, suffice to say, it is still a general American failure that a genocide along with concentration camps otherwise known as reservations were committed and implemented against the indigenous peoples without too much opposition from the American people. There needs to be at least a public acknowledgment of this wrongdoing.

This is the supreme irony of the United States who has made incessantly loud and bombastic interferences with the relationship between Russia and Ukraine, and yet cannot even justify its own existence using the same black and white standard it is applying to Russia.

Just to be clear here, this subject of the indigenous peoples is not what President Putin mentioned in his discussion with Carlson. However, this is a point that has been made numerous times by the Russian government and its PR and press and is a view that has been frequently brought up and is largely shared by the non-western world (which amounts to over 70% of the world’s population at this point).

And most importantly, it is a VALID point.
**

Full article:
On President Putin's Interview with Tucker Carlson... | Cynthia Chung

 

[Hawkeye10]

I agree on the first point- Tucker didn't have the patience for many of Putin's long answers and seems to have assumed that this meant that Putin wasn't explaining himself well. He was explaining himself just fine, the problem is that Tucker couldn't grasp that many of his questions required answers far longer than he was capable of immediately absorbing. As to your second point, I agree that Tucker's knowledge of Russia and China is somewhat lacking, but I don't think it's as big a problem as you seem to think. First of all, though Tucker is certainly a fairly well known journalist, in this case, the main source of information is clearly Putin, not Tucker. Tucker may well have been quite brave to go to Moscow and conduct this interview, but the golden nugget here is Putin's answers to Tucker's questions. It is my genuine hope that Americans and anyone else listening to Putin's responses will learn at least a little more of Russia's reasons for entering the Ukraine conflict militarily and that this may perhaps help form the basis for an end to this war.

Its my hope that Americans will generlly decide to learn, and to generally attempt to become better people.

My first 62 years have been almost non stop disappointment.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I'm not sure what you mean by "decider", but I think we can agree that Tucker wouldn't have been able to do the interview at all without Putin's permission and he made it clear to Tucker that he would take as long as he desired to answer Tucker's questions. This clearly frustrated Tucker, but I think he had the intelligence to realize that Putin was unlikely to change his stance on this. I'm also glad that Putin did this- as Cynthia Chung said in her article that I quote in the opening post, "This method of discussion is not President Putin being “tyrannical” or “not used to being questioned about his reasons for doing things,” it is in fact the manner in which a truly civilized person responsibly discusses subjects that will affect the lives of billions of people on this planet. Why would we think that such large questions deserve such small answers in the first place?".

Putin decided that there was to be a conversation, Tucker was always a hard yes.

U seem to become confused easily.

 

[Taichiliberal]

First, I'd like to say that I'm happy you have apparently seen the interview and read the first 12 paragraphs I quoted of Cynthia Chung's article. It's hard to have a real discussion with someone if they refuse to inform themselves of the subject matter being debated.

As to whether there was some earth shattering revelation that Carlson got out of Putin, perhaps, but if so, I didn't see it. What I -did- see in the interview simply reinforced what I'd already believed for some time, which is that Putin may have his flaws but he is also highly intelligent and knowledgeable on Russia's history. Cynthia Chung goes into great depth on Putin's description of Russian history as it relates to Ukraine. You've told me you've read the first 12 paragraphs of Cynthia's article, but perhaps you didn't read what she wrote further down that I think is quite illuminating in regards to the conflict in Ukraine. Quoting another 10 paragraphs from her article:

**
President Putin begins with a history lesson of how the Russian state was created, which included the region of Kiev over 1000 years ago. Obviously if we were to talk about the merits of today’s U.S. borders, including its possession of Puerto Rico and Hawaii, we would expect there to be some degree of history to explain how such things came to be and why, at least from an American point of view, those regional possessions are justified.

However, what stands in stark contrast to what Putin is outlining here vs. the very existence of the United States which was, whether we like it or not, formed at the expense of the indigenous peoples who were already living there - in stark contrast to this large elephant in the room, Putin is actually outlining a Russian history with Ukraine (which was originally Russian until relatively recently) that dates back over 1000 YEARS!

Let’s think about this a little more shall we? President Putin was actually given a bit of a hard time even from Tucker Carlson for this long account of Russian history with the region that is known as Ukraine today, but in reality has only come recently into existence through artificial means (we will get into why this is shortly).

So, unlike the American territories, Ukraine was originally Russian over 1000 years ago and has continued to have a strong Russian identity, culture and language TO THIS DAY, with about 1/3 of the Ukrainian population speaking predominantly Russian.

View attachment 25903

Note the region in brown is Crimea which is ethnic Russian and Russian speaking as even Tucker Carlson in his overview of the interview back at his hotel room admitted and did not disagree with Crimea’s referendum vote to return to Russia. He brought Crimea up in context to the attempt to come to an agreement in ending the war in Ukraine, and that one of the conditionalities that were being demanded by the West was that Crimea would be given back to Ukraine…against the Crimean people’s referendum vote. Even Carlson agrees that this is an insane demand and that the Crimean people are essentially Russian and wish to remain so.​

Whereas the United States was founded not just at the expense of the indigenous peoples already living there, but would also later commit a genocide against the indigenous peoples in the 19th century! I am not saying here that the founding of America was all bad, but what has been the overall conduct of the American government and its people against the indigenous peoples is not something one can simply pardon themselves of as if such actions were justified. The matter is indeed very complicated, for those who wish to know more about the British and Scottish Rite manipulations of the situation they can refer here.

But, suffice to say, it is still a general American failure that a genocide along with concentration camps otherwise known as reservations were committed and implemented against the indigenous peoples without too much opposition from the American people. There needs to be at least a public acknowledgment of this wrongdoing.

This is the supreme irony of the United States who has made incessantly loud and bombastic interferences with the relationship between Russia and Ukraine, and yet cannot even justify its own existence using the same black and white standard it is applying to Russia.

Just to be clear here, this subject of the indigenous peoples is not what President Putin mentioned in his discussion with Carlson. However, this is a point that has been made numerous times by the Russian government and its PR and press and is a view that has been frequently brought up and is largely shared by the non-western world (which amounts to over 70% of the world’s population at this point).

And most importantly, it is a VALID point.
**

Full article:
On President Putin's Interview with Tucker Carlson... | Cynthia Chung

As to whether there was some earth shattering revelation that Carlson got out of Putin, perhaps, but if so, I didn't see it.

Then that's it! Period.

The regurgitation of Mother Russia's original territory and who belonged to it is old hat. And guess what? THINGS CHANGE! SHIT HAPPENS!

A country that went from monarchy to fascist dictatorship to communist to a brief spat of democracy to whatever-the-hell you want to call it now (oh, don't forget revolution, Japan-Russo War, WWII, the Cold War, the Yalta meeting) doesn't get to claim historical rights when masses of people threw that concept out the window. It's like this: the Maltese don't consider themselves mainland Italians, the Okinawans don't consider themselves main island Japanese. Same goes for a good portion of the Ukrainians.

Now we can debate the Ukranian machinations dealing with neo-nazi types going after pro-Russian folk while officials looked the other way, but as I said before NOTHING EARTH SHATTERING CAME OUT OF THE CARLSON INTERVIEW.

As they use to say in the Marvel comics bullpen, "Nuff said".

 

[Scott]

Phoenyx is a Russian operative trying to sound reasonable

As I've said before, no, I'm not, never even been to Russia. As I've also said before, I could go on and accuse you of working for the CIA or the Israeli government, but I'm not going to, because unlike you, I don't like jumping to conclusions.

 

[Scott]

More like just parroting the somewhat confused MAGA mindset.

Never been a fan of Trump, sorry. I -do- recognize that he was less antagonistic with Russia in some ways, though he was pressured to not be so friendly and start supplying weapons to Ukraine. Well known journalist Aaron Mate wrote a very good article on the subject a few months after Russia started its military operation in Ukraine that I think was quite illuminating:
Siding With Ukraine’s Far-Right, US Sabotaged Zelensky’s Peace Mandate | Scheerpost

The west, vis a vis Boris Johnson, also sabotaged initial peace initiatives between Ukraine and Russia after the war had started as well:
Boris Johnson Pressured Zelenskyy to Ditch Peace Talks With Russia: Ukrainian Paper | Common Dreams

 

[Scott]

I don't see how U.S. elections could be seen as done for the purpose of making money, but I certainly agree with you when it comes to wars.

Billions are spent every 2 or 4 years on electing politicians who have no say over policy.

Why do you think they have no say over policy? Furthermore, why do you think so much money is spent on elections?

Look what happened to the Squad.

What do you believe has happened to the Squad?

Schumer and McConnell are both paid by AIPAC to do what they are told.

That I can believe, but I think you're making my point- politicians must be managed by the elites, because they -do- have the power to overturn their wishes. I think there are good examples of elites hitting at politicians who weren't doing things the way they wanted them done, such as JFK and his brother RFK.

Trump and Biden are financed by 2 different billionaires, both with the same goal of protecting Israel.

Agreed on that. Perhaps we could agree that elites recognize the importance of investing in politicians in order to further their goals, and to also put money into darker things, from smearing politicians that aren't sticking to their plan and even assassinating them at times.

HUD has a $72 billion budget that half is stolen off the top by administrators and the other half is paid out to contractors. Little to none goes to finding the homeless a stable place to live.

My knowledge of HUD (which I assume stands for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) is not exactly great, but I wouldn't be surprised if what you say is true here.

NYC just gave $52 million in debit cards to the illegal immigrants shitting on the sidewalks.

I knew nothing of the subject of migrants getting debit cards in New York, so I did an internet search. Came up with this:
Migrants in New York City will receive prepaid debit cards, not credit cards, for designated goods | Associated Press

Politics is about making money, not solving problems.

Politics is about -many- things. Sure, elites invest in politicians to make money, but politicians can and have also gone against elite interests. Generally when that happens, the politicians don't last long, either because moneyed interests succeed in making sure they don't win any more elections or in extreme cases, due to things like assassination, but the point remains that there are politicians who can't be bought. I think that in times of crisis, these are the politicians that tend to rise, because people start to realize in those times which politicians really have their back vs. those who just tell them pleasant lies.

Talk to people who are recently here from Russia, Jordan, or Beijing, they will all tell you things are a lot more advanced back home. Why is that? We're the wealthiest nation in history.

I think it's more that the U.S. has the wealthiest elites in history. I think the following 1 minute video makes the problem pretty clear:

 

[Scott]

Phoenyx is a Russian operative trying to sound reasonable

You're a zionist justifying genocide.

That does actually sound about right. However, I strongly suspect that -he- doesn't believe that what Israel is doing in genocide. From what I've seen of his writing, he tends to shy away from the terrible things that Israel is doing and instead likes to focus on what Hamas is claimed to have done. It reminds me of certain stories, the jist of which was that people have a hard time looking at the darknesses they think are justified. Now, I can certainly understand that being jewish, he would be averse to criticizing fellow jews, but it can certainly be done. Bernie Sanders is a good example. Perhaps he might deign to look at what Bernie Sanders has said recently on the subject:

“I Will Be Damned if I’m Going to Give Another Nickel to the Netanyahu Government”| The Nation

 

[Scott]

I agree on the first point- Tucker didn't have the patience for many of Putin's long answers and seems to have assumed that this meant that Putin wasn't explaining himself well. He was explaining himself just fine, the problem is that Tucker couldn't grasp that many of his questions required answers far longer than he was capable of immediately absorbing. As to your second point, I agree that Tucker's knowledge of Russia and China is somewhat lacking, but I don't think it's as big a problem as you seem to think. First of all, though Tucker is certainly a fairly well known journalist, in this case, the main source of information is clearly Putin, not Tucker. Tucker may well have been quite brave to go to Moscow and conduct this interview, but the golden nugget here is Putin's answers to Tucker's questions. It is my genuine hope that Americans and anyone else listening to Putin's responses will learn at least a little more of Russia's reasons for entering the Ukraine conflict militarily and that this may perhaps help form the basis for an end to this war.

Its my hope that Americans will generlly decide to learn, and to generally attempt to become better people.

My first 62 years have been almost non stop disappointment.

I personally think that Tucker Carlson's initiative to have an interview with Putin is a hopeful sign for the U.S. Switching gears a bit, I've recently come to see a documentary on some Americans doing some really good work in regards to growing things. I think you might like the trailer:

 

[goat]

That does actually sound about right. However, I strongly suspect that -he- doesn't believe that what Israel is doing in genocide. From what I've seen of his writing, he tends to shy away from the terrible things that Israel is doing and instead likes to focus on what Hamas is claimed to have done. It reminds me of certain stories, the jist of which was that people have a hard time looking at the darknesses they think are justified. Now, I can certainly understand that being jewish, he would be averse to criticizing fellow jews, but it can certainly be done. Bernie Sanders is a good example. Perhaps he might deign to look at what Bernie Sanders has said recently on the subject:

“I Will Be Damned if I’m Going to Give Another Nickel to the Netanyahu Government”| The Nation

Carlson/Putin interview has over 1 billion worldwide views.

 

[QP!]

Agreed. The problem is that you don't have to be truthful to be succinct. QP made a lot of claims above, but he didn't back up any of them.

Backing them up is not what makes the statements truthful or not. It is that they are fact that makes them truthful.

When a person starts a thread sharing his opinions based on vast ignorance and then admits to me, he is not even aware of the most commonly known things about Tucker, such as his statements of disdain for Trump and his supporters, or his statements that no one but idiots would take him and his show seriously and as being truthful... and that person is not willing to educate themself with the easiest of google searches, that is not on me.

I have to believe citing facts would matter to the person and change their view, if i am going to do the work for them they refuse to.

Be smarter. Do the work you want others to do for you. Or keep your uniformed, ignorant opinion, to yourself.

 

[QP!]

I've never heard Putin claim that he wants to absorb all of Ukraine into Russia. He -has- said that he wants Ukraine to be de nazified, and he said so in his interview with Tucker. Quoting him:
**
No, we haven't achieved our aims yet, because one of them is denazification. This means the prohibition of all kinds of neo-Nazi movements.
**

Source:
Vladimir Putin Interview with Tucker Carlson | American Rhetoric

^^^More ignorance you could easily educate yourself on.

That you buy the "denazification" is all that needs to be said about and your selective (deliberately) consuming of misinformation. If Putin wanted to denazify an area he would start within Russia, which has every bit the 'nazi' sympathizing population that Ukraine does.

I don't know about people being "voluntarily stupid". I think it's more that people choose what information they take in. I think the problem lies in the fact that some people choose to take in information from sources with highly innacurate information. I also definitely don't believe that the U.S. has been reduced to irrelevancy, but I'm not sure if that's what you actually meant to say?

I think it is both. People like you choose what information to take in (Magat sources) so you can remain voluntarily stupid and uninformed.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I personally think that Tucker Carlson's initiative to have an interview with Putin is a hopeful sign for the U.S. Switching gears a bit, I've recently come to see a documentary on some Americans doing some really good work in regards to growing things. I think you might like the trailer:

Well the big change is that people are beginning to understand that corporate media constantly lies to us and have gravitated to the internet to listen to people such as Tucker....which is why the Regime is getting ready to obliterate free speech on the internet and in apps. Pay close attention to what they are doing to Musk for the crime of X.

 

[QP!]

Well the big change is that people are beginning to understand that corporate media constantly lies to us and have gravitated to the internet to listen to people such as Tucker....which is why the Regime is getting ready to obliterate free speech on the internet and in apps. Pay close attention to what they are doing to Musk for the crime of X.

When will those same people realize that not only does Tucker lie to them, but he admits he does?