Quote (Djunior @ Feb 17 2024 11:06am)
So he's still a US state actor because he worked for the US govt in the past. That he no longer works for the US govt and in fact highly critical doesn't count. Got it
He's now also paid by the Kremlin so perhaps a Russian state actor as well, right?
Double state actor :rofl:
Nobody has said he is a state actor. I used the word "was" which is past tense. Maybe you just need to read what i wrote again so you can actually understand it?
Do you agree that Scott Ritter, the same person you claim is not a shill, was in fact quite literally employed by the US government?
Yes, Ritter is a Russian state actor and was a US state actor. It's pretty common that grifters do this type of thing. Ritter had a career in the US until they found out that he was a kiddyfiddler, when he realized he was completely blackballed he instead went to Russia to shill for them. Such is life. This is the person you trust?
Quote (ferdia @ Feb 17 2024 11:07am)
lol you just did it again. where did i disagree that Scott Ritter is a convicted pedo? I am saying it is not relevant to the debate at hand. you argue the position, not the person. I already answered your question above but i will copy paste it for you again:
Quote (Hobbiks @ Feb 17 2024 09:04am)
On topic: Putin wants to take land, he was explicit about it in his latest interview.
which is a vague statement anyone and everyone can agree on, but is not as precise as Scott Ritter's assessment.
Im asking you if you disagee, it wasn't a statement. I also think its a little funny that you left out the part where i say "who got fired from his job in the US because of it", because it's pretty important to this context.
So you dont think that it is an important to the context that the same person who is now doing speeches for cash for the Russian state only started doing that after he lost his career in the US? You don't seem how that can be relevant to understanding Scott Ritters agency or motives when he makes his videos?
"which is a vague statement anyone and everyone can agree on, but is not as precise as Scott Ritter's assessment." - So i'll ask you again: Can you explain how Scott Ritters assessment is different from Putins explicit justifications?