Comments by "Stephen Jenkins" (@stephenjenkins7971) on "The Baltics and Russia: A Long Divorce" video.

@impervas5801 I actually agree, but let's not act like Russia gives a flying fuck about freedom of speech. Russophiles cry about freedom of speech and then cheer when its being shut down in Russia -so unless you're about it in Russia too and condemn Putin for cutting it off, you're just being a hypocrite.
6
@locknvme In what world does Europe praise the US unconditionally? So many in Europe shit on issues of the US, but then ignore those issues when US troops come to their aid. Anti-US feelings are on the rise, but unlike the USSR -the US isn't going to be bringing tanks to crush dissent. They just ignore it and complain about it sometimes. Idk how you can act like the US is dominating Europe when the US is treated that way. It's definitely an unequal partnership in the favor of the US, but its hardly anything resembling the outright imperialist control the USSR had over their vassal states.
3
Noob228master69 I'm sorry, at what point did US invasions in the 21st century lead to annexation of land?
3
Noob228master69 Yes, it isn't. The US isn't claiming any land or trying to govern it as US territory. And the US bases almost uniformly have the permission of the native country. Is Russia and China annexing Dijbouti because they have bases there? To be a democracy you need to have free and fair elections, that doesn't mean you treat foreign nations kindly. You can be a "beacon of democracy" and fight wars. Athens and Rome were similar in that respect. Point is, no matter how you argue it, the US is not expansionist by any stretch of the imagination.
3
Noob228master69 European nations by choice join NATO, and one of the stipulations of NATO is to spend 2% of their GDP on military. The US is literally just forcing countries to honor their agreement that they agreed to; it's not forcing them to do something they never agreed to. The US isn't a perfect democracy, but it's still one; there are plenty of studies on US democracy to prove that. Actually, the Iraqi's were pretty enthusiastic of US intervention initially. The issue is that they expected to become wealthy and powerful while ignoring all of their issues and then kicked the US out in 2010/2011 and were not ready for it; leading to ISIS to come in and fuck Iraq up. So Iraqi's blame the US for their current ills despite them kicking the US out before it was ready. And the SDF also requested US aid and petitioned for months before the US did. The US really doesn't care for the opinions of dictators, though it tolerates some since obviously the US can't fuck every dictatorship up on the planet. As hilarious as that would be. That being said, yes, the US isn't fair. The world isn't fair. And Russia is in no position to be crying about that; it started this mess by being paranoid and then attacking Ukraine -the US didn't even have 1k troops in the Baltics before that point -now the US has way more than that specifically in response to the 2014 invasion. All current US action is in reaction to that moment. All Russia had to do to regain influence over Eastern Europe was to show that it changed from the USSR; but it chose differently and reinvigorated NATO support.
3
@impervas5801 There are degrees freedom of speech. Russia has virtually zero. Baltics have some. US has the maximum. "Russophobes" are not hypocrites in shutting down government-sponsored propaganda news outlets as long as they overall respect the freedom of speech of Russophile news networks. Meanwhile, said Russophiles that argue for freedom of speech and then ignore Russia having ZERO freedom of speech ARE hypocrites. So are you a hypocrite? Do you condemn Putin for his shitty freedom of speech practices?
3
@horseshit1503 US can't destroy Russia without being destroyed in turn due to nukes. Nor should it. Russia holds way too much territory for such a country to end well if it collapses. It's true that the US outclasses Russia in almost every possible fashion, but still; it isn't a good idea to destroy Russia at all.
2
Noob228master69 Yep. That doesn't mean that Russia shouldn't be stopped, and that the US has the right to help Eastern Europe in this, of course.
2
@impervas5801 That's not a "whole world" POV. That's a far-right/RT perspective. The media generally supported BLM the movement, but did not talk so positively while they rioted; though it should be noted that that was an extreme minority of cases too -still, no one questions why state and federal governments post so many cops near BLM rallies anymore. BLM's reputation took a severe hit. Yeah, the media in general has a left-wing bias, what else is new? That's their freedom to be so, just as it's Fox New's freedom to have a right-wing bias. And to be frank; attacking a symbol of the US' democracy in the midst of an election comes pretty damn close to domestic terrorism -far more than simply damaging a city. But even then, while the movement is shamed thanks to media bias, they're still not illegal and still not restricted in freedom. And that makes the US among the most free nations by default in allowing a group that struck at US democracy still go unmolested -in Russia they'd just all be considered terrorists if they went against the Kremlin -and you'd support them no doubt. Twitter is not "the media", and "the media" doesn't give a shit about any stupid Hunter scandal because the entire thing is faulty to begin with. It's like pizzagate; it's a lot of patchwork guesswork mixed with coincident to make a narrative that could legitimately lead to a lawsuit of defamation if posted by the media. The "media", that is to say; private organizations are not beholden to post anything YOU want. Uh, people aren't blaming Russia for everything, you loon. They're blaming Russia for intervening in the US election, stoking American division, and for actions abroad -all of which is factual. The Democrats went too far with trying to link Trump with Russia, just as Republicans are now going too far with their "election was stolen" schtick, but most of it is hardly unfounded. You have no right demanding that others NOT make you a social outcast. That's THEIR freedom to treat you as they will. And Trump's ban on Twitter is THEIR freedom as well; they're a company, not a federal agency. Political correctness is an issue, but it's hardly center stage and it hardly damages freedom of speech to any extent like Russia literally murdering political opponents. Julian Assange is a Russian agent. He released any secret information about the US to its detriment, and conveniently never released any information about Russia despite it being given to him. I couldn't give a shit less what happened to a foreign asset. The US has no obligation to treat enemies of the state with Constitutional protection. "MAYBE MORE THAN RUSSIA" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_freedom_in_Russia#:~:text=The%20Russian%20constitution%20provides%20for,issues%2C%20resulting%20in%20infringements%20of https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/07/18/online-and-all-fronts/russias-assault-freedom-expression# Russia's freedom of speech is a sick joke. It literally makes people disappear and shuts people up with claims of terrorism that can make them arrested. If a Julian Assange for Russia appeared, he'd just be executed, but at least it'd be understandable since they'd spill top secret information of Russia's government -but I'm talking about any oppositional leaders to Putin that have no links to foreign government "disappearing" or "getting murdered mysteriously". People like you screech about "Epstein didn't kill himself" and then ignore literally every big opposer to Putin "killing themselves" across his entire tenure. Because being honest, you don't give a shit about freedom of speech, do you? So shut the hell up about it. There is a bias against Russia since, no shit, Russia is perceived as an aggressor from left-wing European media sources; but it's not a concentrated Anti-Russian thing, or at least it's not born out of government sources that want to defame it. They don't have their own RT's that praise their governments and shit on the Russian menace. Like, assuming the Mongols just invaded Russia like in the past and they recently left but still exist as a possible enemy in the future; do you expect the Russian news to treat such a Mongol state with anything but suspicion and "Anti-Mongol perspectives"? Hell, no one is bitching about the rampant Anti-Americanism in Russia's media, are they??? I've seen Russian media, and Russian news leaders unironically proclaiming that they can destroy the US with nukes! There is NOTHING like that in the US, so you have the gall to act like Russia is in any place to bitch about freedom of speech???
2
@klm2639 China bans everything that isn't CCP propaganda, actually. That includes non-Western sources. xD
1
@Khalstroso The US is annoyed at how Europe views it and is getting a dimmer view of Europe as a whole, but yes, we don't particularly want Europe to be subjugated again even if you annoy the hell out of us.
1
@locknvme And we have media that is Anti-US and Pro-Russia. There's all kinds of media out there, why are you acting like its all uniformly Pro-US anyway? Most aren't.
1
@locknvme Well, duh. Czechia is ruled by a Pro-Russia leader, and he's not very popular; leading to the explosion of anti-Russia coverage since he aligns with them. Cry about influence if you want, but the US has zero control over Czechia outside of influence via foreign policy. US can't do anything about any European countries' domestic policy unless it has the backing of other European states. Think Nordstream 2 which is battering German credibility and is leading to condemnations from other European states and an invitation for the US to join in the condemnation and sanctions fun.
1
@alexrogov7186 I can't blame Russia for that, if it pertained to exposing secret classified information. NOT IF IT PERTAINS TO OPPOSING PUTIN'S LEADERSHIP. One is somewhat understandable in protecting state secrets, the other is a despicably totalitarian action which should be condemned. Oh yeah, the US securing IMF grants for Russia is totally the same as enacting a misinformation campaign on Russian social media which stokes division and fear. The US didn't actively step into Russia's media network to influence anything, but Russia did; so cut the crap. Russia has "favored" certain US candidates all the damn time publicly, and the US has not complained about any interference seriously. And the US has a Russian PAC which represents Russian interests in Congress and the US has not bitched about it. So no, this isn't a 2-way street, Russia has blatantly gone far further than the US ever has in Russia's "elections" and God knows you'd be screeching to the high Heavens if the US did what Russia has done. You realize that the US also said nothing in regards to Putin's increasing power in Russia UNTIL it started to become a literal dictatorship, right? The US can tolerate human rights violations until they get out of hand or unless the state in question is so important to the US' position that it can't. Yeltsin indeed BTFO'd rebels with a fucking tank, which is crazy, but is hardly the most anti-democratic thing ever. One thing if they were protestors, then you'd have a point, but they were armed rebels. And FYI; the US DID criticize Yeltsin's human rights issues, specifically in Chechnya where Russia DID literally just kill civilians haphazardly. http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9911/18/osce.summit/ West does give a shit, but they have to balance geopolitical concerns. Some Western countries care more, like Canada. And sometimes, even when allied, they criticize human rights records like in Myanmar in criticizing Suu Kyi. And guess what? A certain other populist idiot is blaming the West for tearing her down and leading to the coup -so standing up for human rights even in an ally is a bad thing now, apparently. So even if the West was 100% consistent, you'd likely still find fault with it. I don't have that expectations for Russia.
1
@DreamWalkerVl Eh, I think this is pretty universally accepted. Europeans often complaint that the US' concept of freedom of speech is too broad, justifying hate speech laws and the like. How about you not be an ass and engage instead of making baseless assumptions, yeah?
1
@Muradlek Uh, no one is really gonna complain about suppression of foreign state media which unironically talks about conquering other nations and compare it to the dismal state of Russian freedom of speech. If this was the Kremlin's plan, then it was a shitty one that only Kremlin boot lickers would believe.
1