Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1997, CNN sends Peter Arnett to interview Osama Bin Laden who had declared jihad against America.
Tucker is no Peter Arnett.
Should there be a list of journalists favored by the government to do these interviews? I'm trying to understand the logistics of this double standard.
Tucker, in his own legal arguments, is not a journalist. In his own legal arguments, he is an entertainer.
Should we ban entertainers from doing interviews with American adversaries? I'm trying to understand if you are opposed to this on aesthetic or political grounds.
Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from the parts I've seen so far was that Putin showed both outright and subtle contempt for Tucker and used this platform to try to show the superiority of Russia with a boring, rambling history lesson that went back into antiquity. Most Americans (including myself, honestly) operate on a much shorter timeline.
Basically, it seems like Putin's invasion of Ukraine has a lot of historical context that mostly was inflamed by post-cold war NATO expansion decisions. I've been reading some interesting George Kennon arguments against NATO expansion back in the late 1990s. It's depressing to realize decisions made decades ago impact whether my children and my neighbors children will fight in wars. I feel like our political system is so broken it is impossible that there is cohesive long-term effective diplomacy or strategy to keep us out of wars.
As someone who can't tell you my ethnicity beyond some sort of Irish, German, Italian, Greek, English blend, I struggle to understand other people's deep connection and feelings of entitlement to certain swathes of land occupied by long ago ancestors. That goes for Russia/Ukraine and also for Israel/Gaza.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1997, CNN sends Peter Arnett to interview Osama Bin Laden who had declared jihad against America.
Tucker is no Peter Arnett.
Should there be a list of journalists favored by the government to do these interviews? I'm trying to understand the logistics of this double standard.
Tucker, in his own legal arguments, is not a journalist. In his own legal arguments, he is an entertainer.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1997, CNN sends Peter Arnett to interview Osama Bin Laden who had declared jihad against America.
Tucker is no Peter Arnett.
Should there be a list of journalists favored by the government to do these interviews? I'm trying to understand the logistics of this double standard.
Tucker, in his own legal arguments, is not a journalist. In his own legal arguments, he is an entertainer.
Anonymous wrote:Very interesting interview does Putin really believe all the historical information he gave out about Poland and Ukraine belongings to Russia etc how accurate is it
Anonymous wrote:Very interesting interview does Putin really believe all the historical information he gave out about Poland and Ukraine belongings to Russia etc how accurate is it
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1997, CNN sends Peter Arnett to interview Osama Bin Laden who had declared jihad against America.
Tucker is no Peter Arnett.
Should there be a list of journalists favored by the government to do these interviews? I'm trying to understand the logistics of this double standard.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1997, CNN sends Peter Arnett to interview Osama Bin Laden who had declared jihad against America.
Tucker is no Peter Arnett.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm about halfway through through interview. So far, I have mostly learned that surprisingly, the media has accurately reported Putin's motivations. He feels that NATO's eastward expansion is a problem. And he also believes that Russia has a legitimate historical claim to Ukraine.
Oh he thinks they can just claim it right back with an invasion? That’s pretty fked up.
Anonymous wrote:1997, CNN sends Peter Arnett to interview Osama Bin Laden who had declared jihad against America.