3 ms·

What do you mean? His speech [1] is really clear. I’m extremely disappointed in the reporting by the news here. [1]: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news

What do you mean? His speech [1] is really clear. I’m extremely disappointed in the reporting by the news here. [1]: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67843 http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67843

jen20 4y ago
Clear is not the same as making sense. I can say the words "Dog Cat Microwave Book" and they would be clear, and make about as much sense as the idea of "denazifying" Ukraine.
notahacker 4y ago
He's also been really clear on considering Ukraine to be a mistaken creation of the Soviet Union whose sovereignty is only possible if shared with Russia, and on formally integrating partially conquered regions into Russia, so I think we can probably disregard him being really clear about not wanting to occupy the country his armies are currently occupying large parts of and only acting in self defence...
dmitriid 4y ago
His speech is not worth the paper it was written on. Calling out one obvious lie: "It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force." In September Russia "held" a "referendum" in occupied territories and immediately adjusted the Constitution to include the occupied territories.
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  > His speech is not worth the paper it was written on. Isn't that true for any politician? > Calling out one obvious lie: "It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force." Obvious lie? That's fortunate for your opinion. >In September Russia "held" a "referendum" in occupied territories and immediately adjusted the Constitution to include the occupied territories. Yes, not Ukraine, only the occupied territories. The fact that my original comment was flagged shows just how deep the U.S. has fallen for its own propaganda.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Yes, not Ukraine, only the occupied territories. The “occupied territories” are, more fully, Russian-occupied Ukrainian territories. Which clearly shows that, under the usual meanings of words, Putin’s claim of no intent to occupy “Ukrainian territory” was a lie. Now, obviously, under a definition where any territory Russia occupies is, ipso facto, not “Ukrainian”, Putin’s claim is tautologically true, but also devoid of all meaning. Putin’s statements, therefore, provide no actual guidance on his intentions, since his actual actions demonstrate that, to the extent that they have any meaning at all rather than being stated just for emotional impact at the time they are uttered, it has nothing to do with the usual meanings of the actual words used and can only be reconstructed retrospectively after observing the actions he actually takes and trying to fit what meaning the words could have around that. Which, it should go without saying, is the polar opposite of being “clear”.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Calling out one obvious lie: “It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force.” I mean, it is not a “lie” once you accept Putin’s…rather, shall we say, slippery…concept of “Ukrainian territory”. IF it was part of the DPR/LPR (like Crimea, earlier) Russia didn’t consider it “Ukrainian territory”…or vaguely claimed by them despite never having been controlled by them, or just somewhere Russia felt like occupying, for that matter.

jen20 4y ago

Clear is not the same as making sense. I can say the words "Dog Cat Microwave Book" and they would be clear, and make about as much sense as the idea of "denazifying" Ukraine.

notahacker 4y ago

He's also been really clear on considering Ukraine to be a mistaken creation of the Soviet Union whose sovereignty is only possible if shared with Russia, and on formally integrating partially conquered regions into Russia, so I think we can probably disregard him being really clear about not wanting to occupy the country his armies are currently occupying large parts of and only acting in self defence...

dmitriid 4y ago

His speech is not worth the paper it was written on. Calling out one obvious lie: "It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force." In September Russia "held" a "referendum" in occupied territories and immediately adjusted the Constitution to include the occupied territories.

FollowingTheDao 4y ago
> His speech is not worth the paper it was written on. Isn't that true for any politician? > Calling out one obvious lie: "It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force." Obvious lie? That's fortunate for your opinion. >In September Russia "held" a "referendum" in occupied territories and immediately adjusted the Constitution to include the occupied territories. Yes, not Ukraine, only the occupied territories. The fact that my original comment was flagged shows just how deep the U.S. has fallen for its own propaganda.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Yes, not Ukraine, only the occupied territories. The “occupied territories” are, more fully, Russian-occupied Ukrainian territories. Which clearly shows that, under the usual meanings of words, Putin’s claim of no intent to occupy “Ukrainian territory” was a lie. Now, obviously, under a definition where any territory Russia occupies is, ipso facto, not “Ukrainian”, Putin’s claim is tautologically true, but also devoid of all meaning. Putin’s statements, therefore, provide no actual guidance on his intentions, since his actual actions demonstrate that, to the extent that they have any meaning at all rather than being stated just for emotional impact at the time they are uttered, it has nothing to do with the usual meanings of the actual words used and can only be reconstructed retrospectively after observing the actions he actually takes and trying to fit what meaning the words could have around that. Which, it should go without saying, is the polar opposite of being “clear”.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> Calling out one obvious lie: “It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force.” I mean, it is not a “lie” once you accept Putin’s…rather, shall we say, slippery…concept of “Ukrainian territory”. IF it was part of the DPR/LPR (like Crimea, earlier) Russia didn’t consider it “Ukrainian territory”…or vaguely claimed by them despite never having been controlled by them, or just somewhere Russia felt like occupying, for that matter.