Putin is former KGB and knows how to use events and current reality to frame a narrative in order to turn people to his side, it's one of the best skillsets the KGB has as if a person believes a narrative based in reality that you're the only one on their side, they are more likely to go out of their way to assist you.
It's just the West makes it so goddamn easy with it's war on the freedoms and self determination of it's own people.
Don't get me wrong, it's nice to see a world leader call this stuff out.
But a former Soviet complaining about the state of the GAE is like a former Soviet complaining about the state of Pripyat. Or a former Soviet complaining about how fucked up Germany is now.
Not to say it's the only cause, but Soviets spending the entire wealth of their empire and the better part of a century to craft, detonate, and support the fallout of a cultural bomb in the US is a non-trivial piece of the puzzle.
This. People here are so hung up hating our own governments because of how awful they are they fall over themselves praising hostile governments who would destroy our freedoms as well. They can both be the bad guys people.
Unfortunately we are at the 'Tyranny is worse than tigers' phase in the West. Let me explain:
If a hostile force conquered Canada (I chose them as they seem the worst offenders of civil liberties in the West) but did it in a way that militarily they were annihilated and forced all leaders to flee but all civilian assets were untouched. If they took over and simply went 'just follow basic laws like don't steal, kill, rape etc and we'll leave you alone', there's a high chance that the people would side with their occupiers even if the original leaders attempted to 'free them'.
As an unknown occupying force is less frightening than a KNOWN tyrant.
Certainly, but nuance is important. We are more than capable of making judgements on which entity is more or less evil. Just lumping them both in the "bad guys" bin is lazy.
Praising someone (someone who used to work for a spy agency) for claiming to be less evil is pretty lazy. Oh so the foreign politician who used to be a spy is less evil because he says he is.
Would you mind pointing out where I said that this conclusion is reached merely by taking his word for it? Please don't erect an army of strawmen you're giving me reddit flashbacks.
Putin is former KGB and knows how to use events and current reality to frame a narrative in order to turn people to his side, it's one of the best skillsets the KGB has as if a person believes a narrative based in reality that you're the only one on their side, they are more likely to go out of their way to assist you.
It's just the West makes it so goddamn easy with it's war on the freedoms and self determination of it's own people.
I don't know how much I should trust job titles in an entity explicitly about espionage, but I'm pretty sure it's not 100%
Taxi Driver came out in 76, maybe the KGB loved it so much that they started using "taxi driver" as code for hitters.
Don't get me wrong, it's nice to see a world leader call this stuff out.
But a former Soviet complaining about the state of the GAE is like a former Soviet complaining about the state of Pripyat. Or a former Soviet complaining about how fucked up Germany is now.
Not to say it's the only cause, but Soviets spending the entire wealth of their empire and the better part of a century to craft, detonate, and support the fallout of a cultural bomb in the US is a non-trivial piece of the puzzle.
This. People here are so hung up hating our own governments because of how awful they are they fall over themselves praising hostile governments who would destroy our freedoms as well. They can both be the bad guys people.
Unfortunately we are at the 'Tyranny is worse than tigers' phase in the West. Let me explain:
If a hostile force conquered Canada (I chose them as they seem the worst offenders of civil liberties in the West) but did it in a way that militarily they were annihilated and forced all leaders to flee but all civilian assets were untouched. If they took over and simply went 'just follow basic laws like don't steal, kill, rape etc and we'll leave you alone', there's a high chance that the people would side with their occupiers even if the original leaders attempted to 'free them'.
As an unknown occupying force is less frightening than a KNOWN tyrant.
Certainly, but nuance is important. We are more than capable of making judgements on which entity is more or less evil. Just lumping them both in the "bad guys" bin is lazy.
Praising someone (someone who used to work for a spy agency) for claiming to be less evil is pretty lazy. Oh so the foreign politician who used to be a spy is less evil because he says he is.
Would you mind pointing out where I said that this conclusion is reached merely by taking his word for it? Please don't erect an army of strawmen you're giving me reddit flashbacks.