Putin/Russia - good guy or bad?

[DodgyAgent]

It is not about starting a war. it is about manoeuvring various agendas and interests in the world of politics

[Jog On]

The BBC toeing the party line (or not) is entirely irrelevant to the trustworthyness of RT. Even if the BBC do follow the instructions of their political masters, they're still more trustworthy than RT. I have noticed over the past thirty years that the BBC is accused of bias... by all sides of most arguments. That in itself is a good indicator that they're not doing to badly at impartiality.

I'm not sure I agree entirely. I do see a lot of biased language but on the whole the reason I read RT is to see what facts the western MSM are omitting.

For me I had to get facts from RT to understand the motives behind the US campaign in the middle east and why Russia stands in the way of that (support for Syria and Iran) to get a bigger understanding of the 'why'.

Stuff like an agreement for a pipeline to run from Iran through Syria:

Russia, at the moment, is the primary energy supplier to the EU - the world's largest market. Iran, a Russian client, wanted to build a pipeline via Syria with President Assad's approval, to exploit this vast market. However, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the USA apparently have other plans involving a pipeline from Qatar via Syria to Europe.

Hence the urgent need to overthrow Assad and put a Sunni puppet government in place, more palatable to those pulling the strings. Qatar's preferred candidate of choice would be more moderate, such as the Muslim Brotherhood. Saudi, on the other hand, would have no compunction about installing a hard-line fundamentalist regime in place - up to and including ISIS. And thus the murder, mayhem and human suffering erupting across the region now.

Anyone threatening US petrodollar is public enemy No.1 ? RT Op-Edge

Is any of the above factually inaccurate?

If not then you will never see any this in the western MSM - and also this whole Iraq/Syria/ISIS/Ukraine/WW3 thing starts to make perfect sense...

Or is that all just Russian propaganda and the US are in the middle east to actually fight terrorists and NATO (US/EU) is continually expanding eastward (which it promised it wouldn't do) and conducting military exercises on the Russian border for our own good?

[Paddy]

This is the best bit from that page:

RussiaDatingOnline.com

No its not. It do not do man on man or girl on girl.

[Paddy]

I'm not sure I agree entirely. I do see a lot of biased language but on the whole the reason I read RT is to see what facts the western MSM are omitting.

For me I had to get facts from RT to understand the motives behind the US campaign in the middle east and why Russia stands in the way of that (support for Syria and Iran) to get a bigger understanding of the 'why'.

Stuff like an agreement for a pipeline to run from Iran through Syria:



Anyone threatening US petrodollar is public enemy No.1 ? RT Op-Edge

Is any of the above factually inaccurate?

If not then you will never see any this in the western MSM - and also this whole Iraq/Syria/ISIS/Ukraine/WW3 thing starts to make perfect sense...

Or is that all just Russian propaganda and the US are in the middle east to actually fight terrorists and NATO (US/EU) is continually expanding eastward (which it promised it wouldn't do) and conducting military exercises on the Russian border for our own good?

It goes deeper than that. Kerry visited Austria and he told the Austrians to scrap plans for their part of the South Stream pipeline (new pipeline from Russia). The Austrian PM told him not to interfere.

Kerry visited Hungary and he told the PM to scrap their part of the South Stream pipeline. The Hungarian PM told him not to F off. Now Kerry is calling for regime change in Hungary.

Kerry visited Bulgaria and he told the PM to scrap the South Stream pipeline project otherwise he will ask the EU to stop regional funding to Bulgaria. The EU then stopped regional funding to Bulgaria. Meanwhile Bulgaria has to buy expensive electricity ( 3 x over the odds) from a US company.

[FatLazyContractor]

For me I had to get facts from RT to understand the motives behind the US campaign in the middle east and why Russia stands in the way of that (support for Syria and Iran) to get a bigger understanding of the 'why'.

One possible explanation could be that he is upholding the International Law (a concept alien to the USA).

[DodgyAgent]

One possible explanation could be that he is upholding the International Law (a concept alien to the USA).

What planet are you from?

[FatLazyContractor]

What planet are you from?

Yorkshire ?!

[DodgyAgent]

Yorkshire ?!

In other words the planet stupid

[FatLazyContractor]

In other words the planet stupid

I didn't say London

[NickyBoy]

America and Russia both have a treaty with Ukraine guaranteeing they would respect its existing borders, in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nukes. Only one country has violated that agreement and pushed us closer to WW3 then we have been in decades. Only one country has aggressively annexed territory in violation of this treaty. Only one country is actively engaged in a war in violation of this treaty. Russia is defacto the badguy in this.

Everything else is just window dressing with Western internal media trying to work up their civilian population to accept the current/planned response to this invasion and Russian funded external media/coordinated internet response teams trying to muddy the waters and hide the nasty tulip they have done as part of this invasion.


The answer to "which sides media is biased" is obviously both. The answer to "which side is in the wrong" is obviously Russia.

Unless anyone thinks we should just let Russia roll over Ukraine in exchange for "Peace for Our Time"