Noam Chomsky is retarded

[Scholar]

https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines#:~:text=According to Chomsky%2C Russia is,'t happened in Ukraine”

Quote

“I’m not implying it, it’s obvious.” Delegations of UN inspectors had to be withdrawn once the invasion of Iraq began, he says, “because the attack was so severe and extreme… That’s the US and British style of war.” Chomsky adds: “Take a look at casualties. All I know is the official numbers… the official UN numbers are about 8,000 civilian casualties [in Ukraine]. How many civilian casualties were there when the US and Britain attacked Iraq?”

 

 

 

Can't believe I once thought this buffoon was respectable. He doesn't even know that the UN does not count the majority of estimated civilian casualities in Ukraine due to not counting any deaths on occupied territory (which would include Mariupol).

 

Edited January 17 by Scholar

[Leo Gura]

The biggest casualities in that conflict is Russia boys, at 300,000+.

[Scholar]

22 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The biggest casualities in that conflict is Russia boys, at 300,000+.

As the wise Stalin once said:

У меня много людей!

[Raze]

Where was it said the UN doesn’t include casualties from occupied territories like Mariupol?

[BlueOak]

Chomsky is pure stage green. Rather than present the facts alongside his bias, he gets a conclusion and then tries to shape facts to fit it. I understand why an Anti NATO stage green would put this argument together, they look for one accepted truth (NATO expansion) and ignore every other facet or reason, while at the same time trying to argue for the moral highground - in two pointless wars no less. Because its simple, makes them feel they are correct morally, and can be easily communicated.

Last September, almost 4 months ago - Quote: 27,449 civilian casualties in the country: 9,701 killed and 17,748 injured. He knows what the word casualty means and if he doesn't he should, because people like to twist it to mean what they want it to mean.

https://ukraine.un.org/en/247232-ukraine-civilian-casualties-24-september-2023

He's also conveniently ignoring the war started in 2014, which at other times people will use to their advantage in discussions. Where the UN listed 3,404 civilian casualties. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War

Though in Mariupol alone that would be a fraction of the dead. Putin has been bombing the country's civilians for almost two years and entire cities have been leveled to nothing, not just Mariupol. Sievierodonetsk for example was rubble, ditto Lysychansk. Chernihiv was badly hit. Sumy saw a lot of fighting. There are so many towns or villages that no longer exist, and the people in them don't either.

Go type in any of these names and rubble, or look for pictures of the city at the time of fighting. There were people in all of them as it was going on, especially early on. He can't look at all this, and seriously conclude what he's just said about casualty numbers.

Putin has pardoned all crimes committed in Ukraine. You can do anything you like there as a Russian, and they often do as any military would with barely any functioning discipline. Meanwhile, they send ex-convicts and conscript Ukrainians in occupied territory to fight Ukrainians, while sending them into a meat grinder, with barely any ammunition, just to find artillery pieces to hit. Humane? Putin's been shooting missiles at civilian buildings for near two years. What the hell is he talking about? Arguing morality by anyone with all this violence (in both wars) is absurd.

So I dug around further as I can't read the article directly:

I was and still am strongly against the 2nd war in Iraq, it was a dumb futile act, with a pointless aim. A bit like the Russian war, though I understand many of the reasons why both occurred.

Did any foreign leaders visit Baghdad? This is backward logic. Nobody went to Moscow either. Because neither of those governments were being supported, they went to those they were supporting. When Iraq had been overcome in the meaningless war, then they went to Baghdad

Neither side is backing the Minsc Agreement, they didn't then, and they don't now. This is a fantasy in his mind alone. As Russians themselves often tell me, Russia is not giving up territory they've bled for, and that Putin has staked his reputation (and probably his life) on. Could it be possible, sure, if Russia was struggling to hold what they have.

Again someone who doesn't understand why NATO expands, I swear there is a mental block in people. There was fear in Finland of an attack. This is either willful blindness or he just hasn't watched any interviews or done any reasearch. At the time people in Europe were panicked, rightly so, we didn't know what Russia's plans were, or understand Russia much at all, to be blunt. It's also was not inconceivable that Russia could have launched further attacks. Their state TV threatened it five times a week, and Putin or his cronies did every so often. Now, after a wearying war, it's hard to believe that Russia could. After rebuilding though, they can certainly take bite-sized chunks out of Europe bit by bit, which is all they need to do over time. Unless their population crisis catches up to them and neuters their ability to do so, or they have a change in leadership and view towards Europe.

So holding Russia here and draining their ability to push their aggression further is a logical choice.
Deterring China by making the prospect of war too great, is the strategy, and it's a better one than a war.

Will anyone with an anti-NATO position, ever in their entire lives, be capable of understanding that countries join NATO out of fear of Russia? Probably not. I can understand a Russian's fear of seeing what they perceive as the enemy getting closer, it's just infuriating they can't see the same from the opposite position. But then nobody ever really looks at the smaller countries' wishes or what they feel about it all, certainly not this guy.

Edited January 18 by BlueOak

[Karmadhi]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The biggest casualities in that conflict is Russia boys, at 300,000+.

And what about Ukraine? I hear their losses are also very heavy and unlike Russia they cannot as easily replace them.

Also where did you get the 300.000 from? I did not see anything on that except some shady US reports which are not credible.

To be honest Ukraine youth is suffering far more than Russia from this war.

Do not forget about the millions  that also fled.

Edited January 18 by Karmadhi

[Karmadhi]

4 hours ago, Scholar said:

Can't believe I once thought this buffoon was respectable. He doesn't even know that the UN does not count the majority of estimated civilian casualities in Ukraine due to not counting any deaths on occupied territory (which would include Mariupol)

They do count, it is around 1700 for Mauripol and they say "probably thousands higher". 

So probably above 1700 and below 10.000. Which would make sense given that there were around 100.000 in the city at the time.

 

[How to be wise]

Remember the days when we used to think he was Yellow.

[Leo Gura]

8 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

Also where did you get the 300.000 from? I did not see anything on that except some shady US reports which are not credible.

It was a recently floated number.

We don't have scientific numbers on this matter. The margin of error is wide. But it seems pretty obvious that the number is huge.

Edited January 18 by Leo Gura

[Karmadhi]

16 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

t was a recently floated number.

We don't have scientific numbers on this matter. The margin of error is wide. But it seems pretty obvious that the number is huge.

Even if it is true, Ukranian looses are also reported to be huge. So it goes both ways.

Also Ukraine has 4x less people, millions have fled the country and many deported into Russia.

Also at least 10.000 civilians dead, probably more while Russia has like 25 so far.

So demographically they have suffered far more than Russia has.

[StarStruck]

Chomsky is a grade A pretentious idiot. His whole spiel is that he is Jewish and pretentious. 

Edited January 18 by StarStruck