And where have I denied any of that? I claimed that the majority of people who were opposed to the war were not opposed because they disbelieved the claims of WMDS.
Here's a good article on the subject, worth a read, it also talks about how most of the blame was pinned on Bush as if he masterminded this whole invasion for his own gains. Bush was a complete moron he was little more than a puppet having his strings pulled by the people behind the scenes.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/iraq-war-media-fail-matt-taibbi-812230/amp/
Yeah stop living in the past when it comes to 2014 and annexing pieces of land! Now let's all get back to present day and the Iraq situation 😀
You are the one who has constantly been tweaking the history on the Iraq war here so you can do a "sure they're all the same, sure isn't it all propaganda and bias and lies and we can't ever know what to believe" poison the well effort on media in democratic countries. Really Iraq shouldn't be under discussion anyway (and unfortunately I've now contributed to that too, by posting instead of just reading 🙁).
You know little about Ireland, likely not much about a few of the other European countries where the governments and people of the time both opposed the Iraq invasion either. "The West" this, "the US" that, and then "the UK" the other. Sure I suppose we're all the same, all Westerners too from a certain pov located somewhere east of Poland. Your source says 54 % polled in the UK were pro the war at the time it started, hardly a ringing public endorsement of that policy in my book despite the UKs involvement and all the efforts to sell the war (that got exposed fully shortly afterwards with resulting further falls in support as also discussed in your link).
So even though the majority of people in the UK supported the Iraq war, most people disbelieved the main reasons for starting the war in the first place? This is clearly delusional revisionism by yourself, which is pretty actually pretty common if you look at the article below.
You also are acting on the belief that the people who opposed the war did so because they disbelieved CIA/government claims, which is completely false.
Has the word 'imminent' lost all meaning?
Is it the new 'literally'?
FAIR is a US non profit that are based in NYC. They scrutinize US media for distortions since that is where they based. Does that make them "anti US"? Criticizing New York Times, Washington Post and others is anti-US ?
Putin has a habit of putting FSB agents into the Duma after they perform dirty/murderous deeds overseas, he can reward them financially, he can portray them as heroes of the Motherland but most of all no deputy of the Duma can be extradited and Putin can say, that's the law.
it should also be noted the majority of people who were opposed to the war were not opposed because they disbelieved the WMD claims, next to no one believed that
Speak for yourself. That's blatantly false revisionism. It was clearly obvious at the time, that the WMD stuff was nonsense and simply the flimsiest of pretexts for Bush to do what he was going to do anyway. This was proven when the UN sent Hans Blix into Iraq and he came back and said there was no evidence of any WMD. All they found were empty canisters. They simply ignored him and invaded anyway.
The fact that people knew that the whole thing was built on a lie made it all the more infuriating. That is why millions of people took to the streets in protest. They were incensed that they were being taken for fools. In contrast millions of people didn't take to the streets when they invaded Afghanistan because the reasoning behind that invasion was clear.
Oh good god, "it's being flipped in the media by Russian propaganda". Does the president himself clear this up for us in the video? Or who exactly clears this up for us?
The president himself seems to have made himself pretty clear in the interview, no matter what spin western media tries to throw on it about Russian propaganda.
Look I get it, you all look up to the Americans and British, you identify strongly with them, you trust them completely and can't believe a word from the Russians, the Chinese, even the Ukrainians. Even when the Ukrainian president clearly states his beliefs on what's going on you then go to Western media who then tell you it's just Russia propaganda don't listen to it.
There's a common cycle and belief system on this thread, that anything the Russians, Chinese or even Ukrainians say we cannot believe a word of it, it's all propaganda, the only ones we can trust are the Americans and British as they don't partake in any of that behaviour.
Jesus Christ. Iraq again.
This is absolute rubbish and a rewriting of history, yes I can show you that all of the polls at the time show that the vast majority of people in the West believed the claims if you want? I would have thought this was common knowledge at this stage, not surprising since the media went along with it so much
It shows the majority of people in the UK supported the Iraq war but ten years later only half of that number say they supported the war at the time, it should also be noted the majority of people who were opposed to the war were not opposed because they disbelieved the WMD claims, next to no one believed that although most people today would probably say they did.
it's actually addressed here in the video as to why he asked western media to reduce the talk about invasion.... because it's being flipped by Russian media and broadcast as internal propaganda
Cannot agree that no one was questioning the WMD claims at the time. Do you have evidence that 90% of people believed it. At the time, i met no one who believe any of Blairs claims. the narrative was that Thatcher had induced Bush (Senior) to start the first engagement in Iraq and this was now pay back time, Bush was going into Iraq and needed UK support . The BBC , as i remember, ran a regular narrative questioning the claims. Agree that the Tory opposition were happy to go along with supporting the US - whether they believed in WMD or not.
Out of curiosity, what do the people on here think about the Ukrainian presidents claims on the American and British narrative of events?
The president said on Friday, "The interpretation in the West and specifically the media campaign, the scare about an imminent Russian invasion, should be viewed carefully, This narrative is fed by nameless, anonymous officials to the media, while it’s far from clear that this is an accurate description of Russian plans".
Is the president a crazy conspiracy theorist who has been brainwashed by Russian propaganda like the rest of us on here questioning the American narrative?
Here's the undeniable facts.
Russia is the aggressor.
They are currently posturing and gearing up for an imminent invasion 130000 troops ready to go and being strategically placed on the boarder confirms this.
They have already Invaded Ukraine to take the Crimea.
That's absolute nonsense nobody was questioning the WMDs at the time, people were questioning the legitimacy of the war as they didn't see WMDs as an issue worthy enough.
Nearly every poll at the time showed about 90% of people believed the WMDs, only a tiny minority of conspiracy theorists questioned the claims and they did so based no evidence and simply their mistrust from the intelligence agencies who told some of the biggest lies in recent history to make the public form the opinion they wanted us to have, I honestly find it funny after all the lies in the past people are still so trust worthy of these people.
The Ukrainian president takes a far more sobering look at the situation, he said on Friday "The interpretation in the West and specifically the media campaign, the scare about an imminent Russian invasion, should be viewed carefully, This narrative is fed by nameless, anonymous officials to the media, while it’s far from clear that this is an accurate description of Russian plans".
This boards thread is mainly posted on by the same few brainwashed Russophobes, people on other irish sites which have a wider range of users talking about the subject, like the journal for example have a very different view of things than the posters on here
I mean, a distinctly anti US website is going to have an abundance of anti US articles...
But hey, lets entertain this for a second.... say for example what you referenced is all above board..
Then why are Russian state media altering western news reports to be shown to the Russian population with a different spin on what was actually said? What is there need to, if they are already "in the know"?
https://youtu.be/TdH9oMVL1Tc
The fact the article leaves out the Budapest agreement from 1994 is quite telling.
Again with the snide remarks....just cannot resist it can you FPM? And for sure I can and will react to any post that I deem offensive to me. As I'm sure other posters are reacting to your reply's / comments on their posts.
Changed his opinion? There either is 100k troops there or there isnt. And all info point to there is. Just remember before the Iraq war the US and Uk may have been lying but the general public, analysts and experts and European governments werent convinced. Thats not the case this time. You're tunnel visioning in on one specific quote and building everything else around it. It like someone putting their hand in your pocket to steal your wallet, whilst at the same time hes telling you "nothing to see here, youre not being robbed ".
I'm not sure Russia will go for all Ukraine, or Kyiv or just east Ukraine. But the last time I checked a Russian incursion into the Donbas, Crimea or any other region to annex it is an invasion. You called it as such there. So there's nothing farcical or hysterical or incorrect about the claims of an invasion then.
You are certainly well guided questioning the narrative and seeking out coverage from multiple angles and not just our own western media. No doubt the msm is flawed and not always fully reliable with it's agendas and political affiliations but just remember, despite this the likes of Russian and Chinese media is completely state owned and as such extremely unreliable.
just have a look through your previous posts... bait and switch specialist
Do you forget your posts instantly after you make them? go back and read it as you so like to tell everyone else to do, its no a coincidence that everyone is saying the same thing to you, the scary thing is you genuinely believe the waffle your spewing while the rest of us are laughing at it cause its so far from the truth its hilarious.
Perhaps you should take your own advice?
Of course I'm not suggesting that and there is nothing in my post to indicate that. However you've taken it upon yourself to admonish me for posting certain contextually accurate words and phrases. I'm simply pointing out that I find it interesting that you're selectively issuing your admonishment...indeed you've actually attempted to justify attitudes expressed by some posters in your response. A large dollop of hypxxxxxx there one might suggest...I won't use the word in case it offends your sensitivities!
Exhibit 2 in the space of a morning...we may not agree on issues here but please do me the courtesy of responding to what I've said and not trotting out spin to suit a narrative.
Do indicate where I've done that. What on earth am I trying to get 'my own way' at?????
Are you suggesting for one minute that I'm responsible for what others post??? Have you ever asked yourself just why other posters are treating you like this??? Could it be that they find your posts offensive too?? I'm going to quote one of your favorite's , back at you ! If the cap fits....wear it !!!! "
Say what......
Spinning narrative only certain people are spinning a narrative ,
And that's Russia is good , it's all Americas fault
you've done the same thing countless times at this stage.... unhappy you're not getting your way?
What is it with you lot - why don't you respond to what is posted instead of spinning it to suit your own narrative.
If anybody is interested in a little reading, here is Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting's article https://fair.org/home/what-you-should-really-know-about-ukraine/
It lays out the backdrop of US goals in Ukraine regarding NATO expansion.
US interference toward regime change to overthrow the Yanukovych government.
US involvement in selecting his replacements.
US involvement with the far right in Ukraine
"Few of the recent wave of Ukraine pieces recount the crucial history given above. Including the truth about US foreign policy goals in the post-Cold War era makes the current picture look a lot less one-sided. Imagine for one second how the US would behave if Putin began trying to add a US neighbor to a hostile military alliance after helping to overthrow its government.
The economic imperative for "opening foreign markets", the NATO drive to push up against Russia, US support for the 2014 coup and the direct hand in shaping the new government all need to be pushed down the memory hole if the official line is to have any credibility. Absent all of that, it is easy to accept the fiction that Ukraine is a battleground between a “rules-based order” and Russian autocracy."
@MFPM Putin had no and has no intention of invading....the only way that changes if Biden does something.
So he's literally surrounded ukraine with over 120,000 men ,missles, armour , heavy artillery ,anti aircraft , amphibious assault forces ,
Not America , not Biden but putin and Russia ,but according to you Biden is at fault "somehow"
Too many wind up merchants Posting
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/a605da6df673e065ac5a7e976411f425.svg)
