The Tucker Interviews
-
NRO has a story on how Tucker's questioning of Pence was not only unfair, but dishonest about religious liberty in Ukraine.
And @Doctor-Phibes , I don't think Tucker "supports" Putin, either tacitly or overtly. I think he questions the US involvement in Ukraine. That doesn't translate to support of Putin, does it?
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
And @Doctor-Phibes , I don't think Tucker "supports" Putin, either tacitly or overtly. I think he questions the US involvement in Ukraine. That doesn't translate to support of Putin, does it?
I seem to recall he made comments that Putin was championing traditional Christian values, which is just unbelievable
-
NRO has a story on how Tucker's questioning of Pence was not only unfair, but dishonest about religious liberty in Ukraine.
And @Doctor-Phibes , I don't think Tucker "supports" Putin, either tacitly or overtly. I think he questions the US involvement in Ukraine. That doesn't translate to support of Putin, does it?
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
I don't think Tucker "supports" Putin, either tacitly or overtly. I think he questions the US involvement in Ukraine. That doesn't translate to support of Putin, does it?
No more or less than Fr. Charles Coughlin in his day might have tacitly or overtly supported the policies of Hitler and Mussolini.
-
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
NRO has a story on how Tucker's questioning of Pence was not only unfair, but dishonest about religious liberty in Ukraine.
I’d like to better understand his motivation for talking about Ukraine the way he (Carlson not Pence) does. I genuinely suspect there’s something rotten at the heart of it.
@Doctor-Phibes said in The Tucker Interviews:
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
NRO has a story on how Tucker's questioning of Pence was not only unfair, but dishonest about religious liberty in Ukraine.
I’d like to better understand his motivation for talking about Ukraine the way he (Carlson not Pence) does. I genuinely suspect there’s something rotten at the heart of it.
Almost half of the American public questions some or all of our policy in Ukraine. There wasn't that many Nazis in the world in 1940.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in The Tucker Interviews:
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
NRO has a story on how Tucker's questioning of Pence was not only unfair, but dishonest about religious liberty in Ukraine.
I’d like to better understand his motivation for talking about Ukraine the way he (Carlson not Pence) does. I genuinely suspect there’s something rotten at the heart of it.
Almost half of the American public questions some or all of our policy in Ukraine. There wasn't that many Nazis in the world in 1940.
@Jolly said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The Tucker Interviews:
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
NRO has a story on how Tucker's questioning of Pence was not only unfair, but dishonest about religious liberty in Ukraine.
I’d like to better understand his motivation for talking about Ukraine the way he (Carlson not Pence) does. I genuinely suspect there’s something rotten at the heart of it.
Almost half of the American public questions some or all of our policy in Ukraine. There wasn't that many Nazis in the world in 1940.
I’m old enough to remember when “existential threats” were to be avoided at all costs. But here we are happily poking a nuclear power, because the western world is captured by yet another virtue narrative. Actually a virtue narrative is how Putin whips up his populace too. Maybe humans in groups, captured by virtue narratives, should think harder every once in a while.
-
Virtue narrative or not, Putin’s quest to reclaim a Russian empire in Europe at the expense the national sovereignty of its smaller neighbours is wholly unacceptable.
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
Putin’s quest to reclaim a Russian empire in Europe at the expense the national sovereignty of its smaller neighbours is wholly unacceptable.
Agreed.
What Carlson is asking, rather disingenuously, is whether preventing this is in the interest of the United States.
Gotta wonder how the Poles, Baltic and other countries that suffered under Soviet oppression feel about that.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@Renauda @George-K I agree. Isolationism is a bad thing for a country to have, especially in modern times when the world is smaller than ever.
Preventing President Putin from taking Ukraine IS in the interest of the US for sure.
Maybe he is somehow related to Neville Chamberlain - "Peace in our times" and all that. That worked out pretty well, didn't it?
-
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
Putin’s quest to reclaim a Russian empire in Europe at the expense the national sovereignty of its smaller neighbours is wholly unacceptable.
Agreed.
What Carlson is asking, rather disingenuously, is whether preventing this is in the interest of the United States.
Gotta wonder how the Poles, Baltic and other countries that suffered under Soviet oppression feel about that.
The "Russia will not win this war, period" attitude is huge in the grand scheme of possibilities it leads to. I think ultimately backing that attitude among non-Ukrainians without actual skin in the game, is the faith that those more severe possibilities won't come to pass. Faith that we won't have to put anything other than tax money, where our mouths are. I have always found this full stop support of Ukraine, to be a heck of a lot of cheap talk.
Education is extremely important.
-
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
Putin’s quest to reclaim a Russian empire in Europe at the expense the national sovereignty of its smaller neighbours is wholly unacceptable.
Agreed.
What Carlson is asking, rather disingenuously, is whether preventing this is in the interest of the United States.
Gotta wonder how the Poles, Baltic and other countries that suffered under Soviet oppression feel about that.
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
Putin’s quest to reclaim a Russian empire in Europe at the expense the national sovereignty of its smaller neighbours is wholly unacceptable.
Agreed.
What Carlson is asking, rather disingenuously, is whether preventing this is in the interest of the United States.
Gotta wonder how the Poles, Baltic and other countries that suffered under Soviet oppression feel about that.
The US itself determined that European security was in its vital interests when it became a founding member of NATO in 1949. The foundations of NATO grew out the 1941 Atlantic Charter with Britain and the Truman Doctrine in 1947 that stated the US would check communist aggression globally. Moreover, in the wake of WWII, the US was also the sole continental power other than the heavily militarised USSR in Europe. The role of the US in guaranteeing European security is very much of its own desire and choosing.
So when the likes of Carlson start spouting off like a modern day Fr. Coughlin, all it demonstrates is their total ignorance of the centre stage role the US continues to take at its own choosing regardless of who sits in the White House or which party holds the majority in either house in Congress, for over eighty years in Europe.
Carlson is a media jackass, not unlike like his clerical collared predecessor, Coughlin.
Elbows up!
-
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
Putin’s quest to reclaim a Russian empire in Europe at the expense the national sovereignty of its smaller neighbours is wholly unacceptable.
Agreed.
What Carlson is asking, rather disingenuously, is whether preventing this is in the interest of the United States.
Gotta wonder how the Poles, Baltic and other countries that suffered under Soviet oppression feel about that.
The US itself determined that European security was in its vital interests when it became a founding member of NATO in 1949. The foundations of NATO grew out the 1941 Atlantic Charter with Britain and the Truman Doctrine in 1947 that stated the US would check communist aggression globally. Moreover, in the wake of WWII, the US was also the sole continental power other than the heavily militarised USSR in Europe. The role of the US in guaranteeing European security is very much of its own desire and choosing.
So when the likes of Carlson start spouting off like a modern day Fr. Coughlin, all it demonstrates is their total ignorance of the centre stage role the US continues to take at its own choosing regardless of who sits in the White House or which party holds the majority in either house in Congress, for over eighty years in Europe.
Carlson is a media jackass, not unlike like his clerical collared predecessor, Coughlin.
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
The US itself determined that European security was in its vital interests when it became a founding member of NATO in 1949. The foundations of NATO itself grew out the 1941 Atlantic Charter with Britain and the Truman Doctrine in 1947 that stated the US would check communist aggression globally. Moreover, in the wake of WWII, the US was also the sole continental power other than the heavily militarised USSR in Europe. The role of the US in guaranteeing European security is very much of its own desire and choosing.
Well put.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
The "Russia will not win this war, period" attitude is huge in the grand scheme of possibilities it leads to. I think ultimately backing that attitude among non-Ukrainians without actual skin in the game, is the faith that those more severe possibilities won't come to pass. Faith that we won't have to put anything other than tax money, where our mouths are. I have always found this full stop support of Ukraine, to be a heck of a lot of cheap talk.
-
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
The US itself determined that European security was in its vital interests when it became a founding member of NATO in 1949. The foundations of NATO itself grew out the 1941 Atlantic Charter with Britain and the Truman Doctrine in 1947 that stated the US would check communist aggression globally. Moreover, in the wake of WWII, the US was also the sole continental power other than the heavily militarised USSR in Europe. The role of the US in guaranteeing European security is very much of its own desire and choosing.
Well put.
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
The US itself determined that European security was in its vital interests when it became a founding member of NATO in 1949. The foundations of NATO itself grew out the 1941 Atlantic Charter with Britain and the Truman Doctrine in 1947 that stated the US would check communist aggression globally. Moreover, in the wake of WWII, the US was also the sole continental power other than the heavily militarised USSR in Europe. The role of the US in guaranteeing European security is very much of its own desire and choosing.
Well put.
It's a justification for the west preferring that Russia doesn't annex Ukraine. Which nobody is arguing against. It's not a justification for initiating WW3 to prevent it. Russia attacking Ukraine was not an initiation of WW3. America putting its foot down that Russia will not win, no matter what, could possibly turn into that. We're trusting that Russia is too incompetent or scared to take it that far. It's perfectly clear that the tough guy nonsense from random westerners, is faith-based that they won't have to back that talk up with anything more than tax money.
-
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
The US itself determined that European security was in its vital interests when it became a founding member of NATO in 1949. The foundations of NATO itself grew out the 1941 Atlantic Charter with Britain and the Truman Doctrine in 1947 that stated the US would check communist aggression globally. Moreover, in the wake of WWII, the US was also the sole continental power other than the heavily militarised USSR in Europe. The role of the US in guaranteeing European security is very much of its own desire and choosing.
Well put.
It's a justification for the west preferring that Russia doesn't annex Ukraine. Which nobody is arguing against. It's not a justification for initiating WW3 to prevent it. Russia attacking Ukraine was not an initiation of WW3. America putting its foot down that Russia will not win, no matter what, could possibly turn into that. We're trusting that Russia is too incompetent or scared to take it that far. It's perfectly clear that the tough guy nonsense from random westerners, is faith-based that they won't have to back that talk up with anything more than tax money.
@Horace said in The Tucker Interviews:
Russia attacking Ukraine was not an initiation of WW3.
What a 1930s thing to say.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
Putin’s quest to reclaim a Russian empire in Europe at the expense the national sovereignty of its smaller neighbours is wholly unacceptable.
Agreed.
What Carlson is asking, rather disingenuously, is whether preventing this is in the interest of the United States.
Gotta wonder how the Poles, Baltic and other countries that suffered under Soviet oppression feel about that.
The US itself determined that European security was in its vital interests when it became a founding member of NATO in 1949. The foundations of NATO grew out the 1941 Atlantic Charter with Britain and the Truman Doctrine in 1947 that stated the US would check communist aggression globally. Moreover, in the wake of WWII, the US was also the sole continental power other than the heavily militarised USSR in Europe. The role of the US in guaranteeing European security is very much of its own desire and choosing.
So when the likes of Carlson start spouting off like a modern day Fr. Coughlin, all it demonstrates is their total ignorance of the centre stage role the US continues to take at its own choosing regardless of who sits in the White House or which party holds the majority in either house in Congress, for over eighty years in Europe.
Carlson is a media jackass, not unlike like his clerical collared predecessor, Coughlin.
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
Putin’s quest to reclaim a Russian empire in Europe at the expense the national sovereignty of its smaller neighbours is wholly unacceptable.
Agreed.
What Carlson is asking, rather disingenuously, is whether preventing this is in the interest of the United States.
Gotta wonder how the Poles, Baltic and other countries that suffered under Soviet oppression feel about that.
The US itself determined that European security was in its vital interests when it became a founding member of NATO in 1949. The foundations of NATO grew out the 1941 Atlantic Charter with Britain and the Truman Doctrine in 1947 that stated the US would check communist aggression globally. Moreover, in the wake of WWII, the US was also the sole continental power other than the heavily militarised USSR in Europe. The role of the US in guaranteeing European security is very much of its own desire and choosing.
So when the likes of Carlson start spouting off like a modern day Fr. Coughlin, all it demonstrates is their total ignorance of the centre stage role the US continues to take at its own choosing regardless of who sits in the White House or which party holds the majority in either house in Congress, for over eighty years in Europe.
Carlson is a media jackass, not unlike like his clerical collared predecessor, Coughlin.
If European security is that vital to NATO nations - especially those on the West side of the Atlantic - you might wish to tell Mr. Trudeau to pony up his 2%.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/584088/defense-expenditures-of-nato-countries/
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
@Horace said in The Tucker Interviews:
Russia attacking Ukraine was not an initiation of WW3.
What a 1930s thing to say.
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Horace said in The Tucker Interviews:
Russia attacking Ukraine was not an initiation of WW3.
What a 1930s thing to say.
Carlson and his supporters are repeating the kind of nonsense that actually led to WW2.
You want to be a superpower? You need to fucking act like one
It might be worth asking the question ‘Who the heck is Tucker Carlson and why should we care what he thinks?’
I mean, really. He’s a pudgy little twat in tweeds. Who gives a shit what he thinks?
I was only joking
-
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Renauda said in The Tucker Interviews:
Putin’s quest to reclaim a Russian empire in Europe at the expense the national sovereignty of its smaller neighbours is wholly unacceptable.
Agreed.
What Carlson is asking, rather disingenuously, is whether preventing this is in the interest of the United States.
Gotta wonder how the Poles, Baltic and other countries that suffered under Soviet oppression feel about that.
The US itself determined that European security was in its vital interests when it became a founding member of NATO in 1949. The foundations of NATO grew out the 1941 Atlantic Charter with Britain and the Truman Doctrine in 1947 that stated the US would check communist aggression globally. Moreover, in the wake of WWII, the US was also the sole continental power other than the heavily militarised USSR in Europe. The role of the US in guaranteeing European security is very much of its own desire and choosing.
So when the likes of Carlson start spouting off like a modern day Fr. Coughlin, all it demonstrates is their total ignorance of the centre stage role the US continues to take at its own choosing regardless of who sits in the White House or which party holds the majority in either house in Congress, for over eighty years in Europe.
Carlson is a media jackass, not unlike like his clerical collared predecessor, Coughlin.
If European security is that vital to NATO nations - especially those on the West side of the Atlantic - you might wish to tell Mr. Trudeau to pony up his 2%.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/584088/defense-expenditures-of-nato-countries/
If European security is that vital to NATO nations - especially those on the West side of the Atlantic - you might wish to tell Mr. Trudeau to pony up his 2%.
With all due respect let me inform you that I have written a letter or two or three or more to that effect to the PMO snd MinDef since the Chrétien era and signed numerous petitions demanding Canada at the very least meet its NATO commitments. Likewise, for the last twenty years or so, I have badgered every single federal politician who dared knock on my door begging for my vote to meet our defence commitments and spending. Conservative governments in Ottawa have been every bit as derelict as any Liberal government not just this current travesty of political irresponsibility.
So don’t include me among the complacent.
Elbows up!
-
@Horace said in The Tucker Interviews:
Russia attacking Ukraine was not an initiation of WW3.
What a 1930s thing to say.
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Horace said in The Tucker Interviews:
Russia attacking Ukraine was not an initiation of WW3.
What a 1930s thing to say.
Not only that but it ignores the fact that Putin himself stated that in addition to Ukraine having no right to sovereignty, the US and its NATO allies were directly threatening Russia via their Ukrainian proxy. In other words, the US attacked Russia first.
-
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Horace said in The Tucker Interviews:
Russia attacking Ukraine was not an initiation of WW3.
What a 1930s thing to say.
Carlson and his supporters are repeating the kind of nonsense that actually led to WW2.
You want to be a superpower? You need to fucking act like one
It might be worth asking the question ‘Who the heck is Tucker Carlson and why should we care what he thinks?’
I mean, really. He’s a pudgy little twat in tweeds. Who gives a shit what he thinks?
@Doctor-Phibes said in The Tucker Interviews:
@George-K said in The Tucker Interviews:
@Horace said in The Tucker Interviews:
Russia attacking Ukraine was not an initiation of WW3.
What a 1930s thing to say.
Carlson and his supporters are repeating the kind of nonsense that actually led to WW2.
You want to be a superpower? You need to fucking act like one
Boots on the ground, then? Please describe what it is to 'act like a superpower' in this case.
