Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Wrong thread.
have you watched the videos though? I watched a bunch of his stuff a few weeks back and he didn't seem to be choosing sides or pushing a narrative but leaving viewers to make up their own minds.
I guess a lot of his viewers probably make up their minds before they watch the videos anyway though
Brand isn't proposing a solution, why are you judging it based on that? Not everyone who comments on things needs to have a solution. What his video is saying is that this is a multifaceted situation and that there is no good solution, a reasonable statement I think. This is contrary to the general mainstream narrative, yes.
I watched a couple of his COVID ones - felt like he was feeding off trying to sow division rather than portray that there are potentially different sides to a situation as he was making out.
Like Farage it is all about what he can gain from the situation.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,426
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Oh I think your a bit behind with the rules here
You have to ensure you put "we are not allowed to talk about this" or "the real truth behind xxx" in the video title so that the nutters know which videos to watch
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 May 2004
- Posts
- 7,257
- Location
- Derby
Yes I agree. Lets get back to talking about Nukes..
Thought this was an interesting (and concerning...) piece on Sky news, and what the knock effects of the war could be. £3 for a loaf of bread anyone...
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-...the-uk-and-what-can-be-done-about-it-12555130
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-...the-uk-and-what-can-be-done-about-it-12555130
I think it's just his style of trying to appeal to both sides and sit on the fence, he seemed exactly the same in the non covid videos too.
I guess you could consider if like an instigator though, trying to manipulate both sides.
maybe a cynical person would wonder if it's to get the comments section on fire trying to get noticed by whatever algorithm youtube uses
what do farmers mostly grow in our country? oh wait wasn't the government paying people to stop farming and go back to natural land? or did I dream that
Bingo. He says everyone else is wrong, implies that he's right, but never proposes an answer to the problem. Instead he comes out with vague noises like 'I'm opposed to any kind of conflict' (which sounds reasonable at first but collapses on closer inspection, as I've previously explained) to give the false impression that he has the moral and intellectual high ground.
But this is not a reasonable statement. There are good solutions, but because they are complex they don't lend themselves to cute little clickbait videos, so Brand has to pretend that none of those solutions are valid (without ever addressing them properly) and just says 'Well it's all too hard, such a shame', handwaves the situation with a bunch of platitudes, then pretends he's done something remarkably clever.
Meanwhile, his followers fall over themselves to say 'Wow, why aren't world leaders listening to this guy?' because they haven't realised that he's not offering anything of substance.
I've watched a few.
Stoking suspicion of science based pandemic measures while pretending you're just 'encouraging people to make up their minds' is a subtle way of pushing a narrative without appearing to do so. The best contrarians are very good at this.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,426
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
I'm getting "slightly annoyed" (for want of a better term) at the please close the air space thing some people keep going on about
From what I can see the Russian air force are doing very little.
I could see that this may change, but right now the logistics would be massive, I mean very very difficult to create and maintain air superiority over a country of that size with an actual border with the main combatant without actively deploying large amounts of assets directly within.
I wish the MSM would stop giving air time to people pleading for this as its IMO a distraction right now.
As I said yesterday I think its far more beneficial to carve off a chunk of Ukraine and say this is ours, joint EU/UK/NATO and is a safe zone. Fully demilitarised outside those forces. It would be far far less confrontational and yet far far more effective.
I know we wont but IMO its what we should do.
From what I can see the Russian air force are doing very little.
I could see that this may change, but right now the logistics would be massive, I mean very very difficult to create and maintain air superiority over a country of that size with an actual border with the main combatant without actively deploying large amounts of assets directly within.
I wish the MSM would stop giving air time to people pleading for this as its IMO a distraction right now.
As I said yesterday I think its far more beneficial to carve off a chunk of Ukraine and say this is ours, joint EU/UK/NATO and is a safe zone. Fully demilitarised outside those forces. It would be far far less confrontational and yet far far more effective.
I know we wont but IMO its what we should do.
This is going back a year+ ish now during the hesitancy phase of vaccines that many people had - He posted some videos (I only watched one) talking about vaccines and that he was dubious about it and instead he believed in other ways or some such - It was said in the manner of "here's my view, but here is some info I found, you form your view" - Which seems to be the running trend with a number of youtube talking heads. The reason it all sounded a bit CT was because of the tone and manner in which those views are said. It was a view, which is perfectly fine as everyone can form and express their own view, but if the science doesn't match up with that view, then the science has to be the correct one to go with surely.
I have no doubt his views have changed since then and he's more balanced and everything, but the tone and manner of videos remains similar even on the above videos.
If you've read it, the issue seems to be the cost of fertiliser going forward...
Well it's not really a multifaceted situation. Putin has invaded an innocent country, that is no threat to him or Russia and has done so illegally whilst committing war crimes along the way. The idea that Ukraine, NATO, 'The West' is somehow to blame isn't the case. We all understand Russia's argument that they are scared about the encroaching nature of NATO, but this is Russian propaganda and nothing more. The West, NATO, etc were not looking to encircle Russia and invade. NATO is a purely defensive body. You're suggesting, by claiming that this is a multifaceted situation and that the mainstream narrative is wrong sounds like you are buying into Russian propaganda.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,913
- Location
- Rutland
Although NATO is defensive it could still be considered a major threat to Russia. Its existence has eroded their influence and ability to control surrounding states in their chosen way (force), it had marginalised Russia and the power of combined sanctions/restrictions has proven very powerful.
NATO can cripple Russia without firing a bullet and if bullets do start to fly it would win that too. The East/West balance has tipped.
- Status