Leo Gura

@hello1234 You know, right, that psychiatric evaluations are not be done of people remotely who you haven't even met in person? You are doing a psychiatric evaluation of a person from a different part of the world with a very unique job via the lens of Western media and your personal survival agenda.

I know I could buy my salt at the store, but I prefer to it get naturally from the tears of baby animals. It's more spiritual this way because it's more natural and done with their consent

If Putin has a therapy session, the therapist will leave crying.

Another good video:

@Bow24 Of course China is going strong, but fundamentally it has huge problems with its political system and it is still much lower in overall Spiral development than the West. They have a lot of corruption and other problems. The West will remain more powerful for a long time to come.

@Cykaaaa If WW3 happens there won't be anyone left to look back.

I agree Ironically Putin's invasion will create a whole bunch of hard right Ukrainian nationalists and extremists. Putin created more nationalists in a week than were created since the fall of the USSR.

Don't be so sure about that. Russia and China are building an alliance to rival the West. Of course it won't be as powerful as the West, but it can still survive for a long time.

Thank God no one gave you any power. You sound more insane than Putin.

Again, this is relative. This is how it looks from the Western perspective. They fail in the long-term. But until then there's the matter of starting WW3. A catastrophic failure of Russia is not in the interest of the West.

Well, we call MAGA folk Neo-Nazis here sometimes. I generally agree with you there. The problem with Putin's justification is that pretty much every country has crazy hard right nationalists in it if you go looking for them. That does not justify an overthrown of their government. Hell, even Russia has hard right nationalists. Does that give NATO valid reason to depose Putin? Obviously not. Trump was supported by Neo-Nazis. Does that mean Russia can now invade the US? This logic is silly. Yes, that is Destiny's basic critique. He refuses to acknowledge that NATO is legit threat to Russia. I think this is too much of a Western perspective though. It's easy to not see NATO as a threat when you are deep within NATO and benefit from it. Economic security and military security are deeply linked. The threat to Russia is not merely a direct invasion of Moscow via Ukraine. The threat is more about who gets to control the world order and sets its rules in his own favor. Russia wants a significant role in the world order. You can't just boil down geo-political positioning to nukes. If that were true, why does the US have 100s of military bases around the world? Why does the US care about the Middle East or Taiwan?

Well, don't come crying when the autocrat you poked decides to give you a taste of your own medicine.

How can you trust nature if nature made man? Checkmate.

@AdeptusPsychonautica Good luck with your work. My work stands on its own. I am happy to have people compare my work with your work and discover for themselves which gives them a deeper understanding of consciousness.

What claims need verifying? He's presenting a perspective. Have you verified whether NATO is actually a thread to Russia? How about you start there.

I have not, but I have listened to Vaush's and Destiny's critiques, and I was not impressed.

Here is an alternative, pro-Western perspective:

You really need me to prove to you that the US uses its global hegemony to benefit itself first and foremost? The entire point of becoming a global hegemon is that you get to set the rules to favor you country's economic development and security. This is what all international politics is basically about. It's about posturing to become the top dog with the leverage to overpower all other countries in negotiations. The more power you have the better negotiating terms you get.

Taking Crimea was not self-defeating. Russia gained important strategic access to military ports in the Black Sea.

But I live in the West. I don't benefit from Russia overturning the US-led world order. I benefit from US hegemony. If anything you should be accusing me of a pro-US bias since that's where my bread is buttered. It's that since I was born in Russia it's easier for me to see how biased Western media is when it comes to world perspectives. It's very hard for Western media to see their own biases and to see the world from a non-Western POV.

Perhaps you are right. We'll have to see what is gained and lost. The biggest question will be: Will Putin gain preventing Ukraine from joining NATO? It's not merely my opinion. The US has tried to depose Putin, probably more than once. Hilary Clinton's position was basically to overthrow Putin. Which is why he hated her so much. And I'm sure it wasn't just Hilary Clinton. There are probably plans right now in the CIA for how to depose Putin.

That depends on how you choose to look at it. You see Ukraine as aggression. Putin sees it as a necessary defensive positioning. I'm not saying one is right or wrong. I'm saying it's relative to your survival agenda. What you might want to see is that the Russian perspective is not represented almost AT ALL within Western media. This should make you suspicious. I don't really care much about Russia or Putin. My bias is in understanding the situation as deeply as possible. I don't really care about the morality of it. I care about understanding it. I think Western media has also misunderstood what Putin means by Neo-Nazi's. I don't think he means anti-Semites. I think he means Ukrainian nationalists. Maybe I'm wrong about this. I don't know exactly what Putin means. Is he overblowing his justification? Probably. That's what most countries do when they start a war. The threat is usually over-exaggerated and the other side demonized.

You are asking Putin to give up Ukraine to the West for that. I don't think you understand how important Ukraine is for Putin geo-politically. You are asking Putin to trade an oil pipeline for nukes and missiles pointed as him from Ukraine. I don't think he likes that deal. Putin is the richest guy in the world (by many accounts). I highly doubt that what motivates him is a few billion more dollars. He's beyond needing money. Something deeper motivates him.

Well, this is exactly where you and Putin differ. You have accepted that Russia is to forever remain less powerful whereas Putin believes that Russia should be a great world power and will rise again. You have to really understand Putin's perspective here: He truly believes that Russia deserves to be very powerful and he's willing to do whatever it takes to make that happen. This is no different than what the US or China believes about itself. Also, Russia is not less powerful in the sense that it has enough nukes to destroy any country or the whole world. It's less powerful in specific ways such as economically or in conventional warfare.

It's not less hostile, but it's a matter of principle. Is someone punches you, you punch back on principle. Not because it will make things less hostile but because you need to show that you will not allow yourself to be bullied. Who in the West will want to fuck with Putin after this war in Ukraine? Now when he negotiates he's taken more seriously. Yes, it's not a good situation because it's an arms race. So both sides are stuck in a losing situation. NATO feels more justified in expanding now, which makes Putin feel more justified in being aggressive. This is a classic arms race.