Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@Dave-rm2fw says : 18:29 John is in the middle of making a very reasonable, strong point and then gets CENK’D. For 6 minutes Cenk throws a temper tantrum. There were probably a few good points mixed in, but he needs to SCREAM the whole time so i skip it. I Don’t want to skip it but unfortunately I gotta. Love John and Jayar💙>> << says : Oh, no. Back to begging for couch change AGAIN. Or did it never end. Did they at least quit claiming that all political internet channels are in the same boat? Total lie. I am an ex-TYT devotee, but thankfully found The Meidas Network when Cenk went through his political middle-age crisis, and ran for president, which he was not even elgible to become, if by some miracle he won (LOL!!). I left him then, checked back a few times AFTER he quit his "con-paign" and immediately decided to never come back as a regular or even a free subscriber again. Looks like I wasn't alone. Cenk, the sites I now use on a regular basis do not beg for cash! So quit saying they are, when it is obviously just TYT. But look at all the minorities that you got rid of, and then I watched them nail you on other shows afterwards. You are your own worst enemy.>> << says : Well, I see Cenk is back to mad dog mode, spitting, snarling, growling, snorting, foaming at the mouth and attacking Joe Biden again. Must be the time for his Rabies vaccine. And vets, while you are vaccinating this rabid dog, kindly neuter him before he reproduces again. Maybe even find him a new forever home. Possibly on Fox, or perhaps NewsMax. And with all this will come the inevitability of myself getting a 24 hour sentence in YouTube jail for not kissing the rabid turkey's ass once again. HAVE AT IT, HOSS!>> <<@ehiggins360 says : Okay….stop this ride - I want to get off.>> <<@LionDog-b5b says : 😆😆😆>> <<@TheJonHolstein says : Why is the reason why Ukraine wants to be able to use long range missiles never mentioned? They want/need to be able to target military installations and fuel depots, inside Russia, so that Russia has to launch longer range attack, thus giving Ukraine more of a warning before the attack reaches Ukraine. Will some missiles miss their target and kill civilians probably. But more civilians will be saved. It will also improve Ukraine's chances of taking back land. And no, you can't let Russia annex areas of Ukraine, because all that means is that in about 10 years, Russia will launch new attacks against the remaining Ukraine from their new position in annexed territory. Unfortunately, Putin is not alone in the ideas of a new Greater Russia. So hoping Putin dies before time comes for a new attack, will likely not help, as there is not going to be a democratic revolution in Russia. The issue is that US and Europe did not do enough for Ukraine. They needed boots on the ground, and massive amounts for weapons and vehicles, to force Russia out, before they were able to set up trenches. And doing this in 2014, would have required much less boots on the ground, much less weapons and vehicles. There was not a rebel uprising, there were Russian forces that entered Ukraine. Sure there were probably some number of brainwashed civilians that joined that fight. There are some amounts of Russian in many former Soviet states, living close to the Russian borders, only knowing Russian, and watching Russian TV with a lot of propaganda. And Russia was pleased as long as that population would serve to create a political situation where the nation had to accept Russian aligned governments. But Russia had already lost the Baltic states, and they were losing Ukraine as well, so this time they sent in military and staged a rebel uprising (with Russian troops, Russian weapons, un-marked Russian vehicles). The only positive with Putin deciding to attack Ukraine, is that before the revolution in Ukraine, he had his eyes set on the Baltic states, in an attempt to undermine Natos Article 5. He was extremely upset with especially the Estonian economy. Russia should have never been allowed to have the Kaliningrad exclave. Between Kaliningrad and Belarus, there is just a small land strip border between Poland and the Baltic states. In collaboration with Belarus, that land border can easily be blocked by Russia. Thus Russia controlling all land borders to the Baltic states. It is very likely that Russia could have quickly gained control or mostly control of the Baltic states, and then it would be really hard for Nato to fight back. And in Putins calculation, Nato, would probably not do their best, as a Naval battlefield would have been too complex. Thus making the Article 5 moot. And thus Nato would have fallen. So Biden is letting Ukrainians die, because he refused the boots on the ground needed to push Russia back. And Obama before him, enabled Putins invasion, by not helping Ukraine in its defense. And for those that Ukraine is filled with nazis, that comes down to the support of the Azov battalion. And the reason Ukrainians liked them, was that at the time, they were the only ones fighting back against Russia (with their faked Rebellion) in east Ukraine. In war, unfortunately, the enemy of you enemy is your friend. The US has too much power within Nato, and over other allied countries. So it isn't possible to argue that other countries should have sent their troops. If the US is not invested, they would not support those troops from other nations. That is the role the US has taken. And regarding the lest objecting to Nato, and military. Unfortunately, throughout human history, there has always been wars/battles, where the more powerful have attempted to take control from the less powerful. There are even traces of genocides dating many thousands of years back. For a short time in history, there has been this idea that countries could be allied, in such a way that they did not all have to be the most powerful country in the region (constant escalation). Yes US has too much power and has abused Nato. But there would not have been the Baltic states or Ukraine at all, if there had not been military alliances on paper, or expected. It could have probably been possible with a more balanced dynamic, with more than one country in so much control. But US after world war 2, the only countries that could have formed that balance with the US, was France and the UK, and they were not big enough. If there is no country, or reliable alliance that supposedly has the interest of defending weaker countries, we will fall back to a time of constant wars. China has expansion plans, and they stretch beyond Taiwan. And Russia has clear expansion plans, they want to control larger parts of Europe than during the Soviet union. And there are lots of countries in Africa that we don't pay attention to, with expansionistic ideas, sure some of them come from the west drawing borders straight through populations. There are countries in south America. And there are more countries in the middle east than just Israel. The left needs to recognize the realities. Yes, US has done a lot of things that are not in line with keeping peace. But having bases, and stationed ships all over the world, has had a deterrence capacity. And Nato, as such is not well constructed. But you can either reform Nato or start by getting Nato members in to a new, better balanced alliance. But you can't believe that if every one lays down their weapons, there will be peace, because that will never be the case, long term. Accepting the realities vastly improves the left's ability to built a strategy, that could eventually lead to better control over US military over-reaches. And the Russians could never be trusted as a neighbor, the Chechen wars prove that. And unlike countries in south america, it wasn't the US or Europe that Ruined the Russian economy, it was corrupt Russians.... The Soviet state was filled with corruption, and that just continued, when the economy collapsed after the fall of the soviet union. And while there were western companies establishing during that time, it was the oligarchs that were in control. Sure those companies may have made corrupt arrangements to be able to enter Russia, but it wasn't them that created the corrupt oligarchy. And no, Russia was never communist. They had their own elite, on top, that did not have to go hungry, and that had access to goods from the west, if they wanted to. And there wasn't just the elite on top, there was a multi tier hierarchy. + the revolution was instigated by the middle class looking to de-throne the tsars, just like the french revolution, against the monarchy. It just happened that in Russia the ones that managed to grab power was another group, that used the false moniker of communism as a way to ensure their power and their security... the poor people did still not get a meaningful improvement to their life. it is even possible that the false communism made it even worse, because during some parts of the 20th century, there was a small trickle down effect, even in monarchies, whereas the false communism of Soviet union diverted even more resources, to the arms race, the space race, the technology race. I don't believe in communism. But I do believe in a society with much more public ownership in resources. So I am far left. But I am not interested in token politics. Anti-war, is not the same as anti-military, and anti defense. I don't believe in abolishing the police, but I agree with the parts of abolish the police/defund the police movement, that did not actually wanted to abolish policing, but wanting to reform the police in such a massiv way that reform as a word does not sound good enough, but as I don't care about the tokens but the policies, I don't think those slogans were efficient. I do think the BLM movement made a mistake. They should have been the BLAM movement, or something similar, where it was clear that Black Lives ALSO Matters. That way it would be clear from the slogan that it was about justice, and not a movement that the right could paint as supremacist. I think a lot of people on the left has clear blind spots when it comes to the feminist movement. It has always been hierarchical, so not in line with leftist views on economics. I don't think that the left in the US should use the term liberal. Because the liberals were people that believed in a hierarchical society, but where the "smartest" should form an elite. What was considered smart, was also up to the elite. The liberals had a couple of positiv impacts. But they were not aligned with the left on economics. They broke their own glass ceiling, in a time when only the noble class were allowed to have political power. They instituted public education. And they started the free press. But because they always believed in an elite, they corrupted the systems they themselves built, either directly, or by the way the children of the elite always will have an advantage. Feminism is just liberal elitism for women. Some benefits, depending on the starting point. But since it is elitistic, never actually being for the greater good in the end. I do believe in equality. And I do think suppressed people need additional support, but any such support has to come through a non elitistic/non hierarchical movement. And they always has to be open for different perspective, even if they come from people within the group they se as the ones suppressing them. If you want to change someones mind, you first have to understand them. In many cases you will find that you are both partly wrong.>> <<@psyopswitch says : you took the words out of my mouth!!!>> <<@GeeLove says : Cenk, Jews, Brown and Black Jews, Muslims, and Christians lived there in peace until the Zionists arrived there and terrorized the Palestinian people. They invented the car bombing in Palestine. They blew up a building full of the Brits and a few Americans. They terrorized them until then first Nakba. I think that is what it is called. People, the Jews in Israel, are not the only Hebrews. There are millions of Hebrews in Africa and all around the world. They don’t represent us. Many of the slaves brought to the Americas were Hebrews. Many were prisoners of war. They were sent to the Island of San Tome right across the Gulf of Guinea amd a place that was called the land of Juda. Many of the Hebrews made slaves by Portugal and Spain. They had to become conversos or leave Portugal and Spain. They were Africans sent everywhere in the world. Some of them made it to Tuekiye. They don’t mention that in history books. I hope she isn’t eight years of bullsnit.>> <<@jcriverside says : i had to stop when the "good vibes" part came with Harris - who has the same views as Biden. Both Harris & Trump will be horrible - for the entire world. There ARE alternatives, if only those with a conscience would vote for them.>> <<@GeeLove says : They are seeing reality.>> <<@suzannewman979 says : A U.S. President or a European Prime Minister that had balls of steel would have closed the sky over Ukraine to prevent the war, but we have what we have. Secondly, if Ukraiine had been give the weapons it needed in sufficient numbers early on, in 2022, the war would be over or at least in a very different stage. The U.S. and Europe let Ukraine down by not delivering the tanks and planes prior to Russia having enough time to mine the battlefields and get troops mobilized to create this huge front line. Generals like Ben Hodges and General Breedlove both having supported NATO troops overseas, agree that Ukraine should have been able to fire back at Russia from the get go. Allowing Russia to fire into Russia and preventing Ukraine from firing back for two years plus has caused devastation and death in Ukraine. Ukraine would have eliminated the air fields where those Russian bombers take off and destroyed all of logistics if they had had the chance with the weapons to hit Russian military targets. There is no advantage for Putin to fire off a nuclear weapon. He would be ending his reign on terror because the West would respond and has relayed to Putin the consequences.>>