Printable View
You mean this guy "In recent years, Awlaki's overt endorsement of violence as a religious duty in his sermons and on the internet is believed to have inspired new recruits to Islamist militancy." Quote from BBC. Quote where any UK PM has said that, your arguements are very poor.Quote:
Originally Posted by andy6025
Quote:
Originally Posted by bule1
Interesting! So you advocate that Americans do away with (or just ignore) their 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th constitutional amendments that provide right to due process of law, so that a president can order the assassination of any American citizen as they choose? Maybe with the caveat that targeted citizen has to have (at least in the view of president) endorsed violence on the internet?
Is that your position?
That may well be a valid position to hold.
But then you cannot, in the next sentence, claim that America is a system of law and order, democracy, etc., or that it is any better than a dirty little dictator like Putin, who we are fond of claiming kills people without due process.
You can?t have your cake and eat it too.
And Starmer shaking hands with MBS is the same as Putin bombing Assad's civilians for him, totally!
Nail on the head, drillerpie. Andy does literally nothing on this forum but spew Putin's propaganda for him, includes all of the usual false equivalence nonsense.
You think Saudi Arabia had its own own independent airforce and ran its own centcom operations for their air strikes in Yemen?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jampie
Pot, meet kettle.
False equivalence and whataboutism. Got literally anything else?
It's hilarious to me that you started this thread. Nobody on this forum was talking about Putin's colossal strategic failure in Syria until you brought it up. Talk about an own-goal... I guess you take after your hero.
Great! Since you are likewise amused then you can enjoy explaining how you figure that it is a false equivalence. Otherwise just stating that does not make it so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jampie
And of course this discussion is a whataboutism. When you claim that Putin is worse than western leaders then we have to compare them to see if it is true or not.
Last, you indicated previously that it is very easy for you to come up with one or six instances where Putin has, in his speeches, indicated principles that he has then gone on to violate. So, show them.
There comes a time when you need to stop digging, no one believes your Putin propoganda.
I find it fascinating that westerners somehow think their own governments don?t subject them to propaganda, and yet at the same time commonly believe that their offices are naturally filled by crooks and liars. Absolutely fascinating.Quote:
Originally Posted by i961pie
First, show me evidence the Saudis aren't operating their own military like you allege.Quote:
Originally Posted by andy6025
So, show me where Starmer or any other current western leader has invaded a neighbour?Quote:
Originally Posted by andy6025
You indicated that if I did that you would ignore the results. If you actually cared you would have done it yourself a long time ago. You aren't remotely interested in any of the abundant evidence that Putin is a bad guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by andy6025
This whole thread is null and void until someone clearly points out the meaning of "subsantial".