Part 1: click
The good thing about Piers Morgan is, he is entirely void of any critical thought, so he always ends up acting as a sponge for any propaganda narrative that ever crept up out there - so this is a showpiece on how to become a star journalist - by working entirely off of US propaganda scripting.
Here are all the questions Morgan asks during his recent Mearsheimer interview:
“Explain to me the state of the world right now, how worried should we be?”
Answer: I think pretty worried. [Great way to start an interview on youtube, holds the viewers attention and everything!]
“I want to ask you about two of your positions, and correct me if they’re not your positions, but I think I’m right in saying that you draw a distinction between the merits of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and as opposed to China’s potential Invasion and takeover of Taiwan. In the case of one you think america should intervene, but in the case of Ukraine you don’t think America should be gettin involved, what is the ideological difference here, for those who are watching from the sidelines.”
Answer: There is no ideological difference, it is a difference in relative importance to challenging the US role as the worlds hegemon. China is a great power rivaling the US, Russia not so much.
“If you take your interpretation of Putins motivation [Nato enlargement], I mean I would take issue with that, because I think Is a former KGB guy who never thought the Soviet Union should be broken up, he would love to restore it as much as he could, he sees himself as a Kind of modern day Zar, I think he has an extraordinary disregard for human life, I think he’s become a sort of mafia boss, running a gangster country, and I think he just took his opportunity to illegally invade a sovereign democratic country whether he likes it or not, that’s what Ukraine is, and if the West allows him to get away with this, I would not be remotely confident that he would not want to then stomp his way through into other countries, so why are you confident he wouldnt want to do that.”
Answer: There has been no factual proof for your opinion whatsoever. Neither in what he said, nor in what he wrote. Ever. He never said that. He never indicated that. He never played with that image.
“With all respect professor, why would you believe Vladimir Putin if he told you what the weather was, I mean the guy is a serial liar [he is not, in the past, all war pretexts excluded, russia was always exceptionally transparent in their foreign policy directives - including why they went to war this time around, that they would go to war about this, just not “when”], I judge people by their actions. All I’m seeing is a russian dictator, illegally invading a sovereign democratic country and seizing large junks of it, causing absolute mayham and I see to my surprise a lot of american commentators, particular on the conservative side, who seem fairly relaxed about letting Putin keep the land he’s stolen, and that would never have happened in conservative circles 30 year ago, I’m kind of mystified, why you would allow Putin to win.”
Answer: There is no evidence to support your view, that Putin is out on an imperialistic endeavor.
[The actual answer here being, that Mr. Morgan might find it hard to deal with the fact, that 30 years ago Britain was an imperialistic power, rectifying its wars with bullshit like “public image” and honor, but in reality this is not why wars are fought. Because all of that is propaganda. Don’t tell Mr. Morgan though.]
“But he invaded Georgia [after Georgia attacked russia being egged on by the Us, that they would support them, which in the end they didnt, so sad, see: Georgia started war with Russia, EU backed report (Reuters)] he seized Crimea [after Ukraine had officially declared, and set into law, that they wanted all the russian warships in Sevastopol for free] and he now invaded Ukraine, how many more things does he have to do before the blinkers come off a bit, if you mind me being so impertinent.”
Answer: No Piers, the question is why did he invade Georgia and why is he at war with Ukraine? It all goes back to the 2008 Nato summit, where Nato membership was set as the target for those two countries.
“Well, you are putting a lot of good faith into Putin, taking him at his word [because, yes thats mostly how foreign relations work, countries usually dont lie for 16 years to then do exactly what they had warned their adversaries all those 16 years about to “become zars”], I would argue that what Putin has done in the last few years, illustrates exactly why it was the correct decision to try to move countries like Ukraine into Nato, because they were always going to get attacked and invaded by Putin, if he thought he could get away with it [this is not how and why wars are started (because someone personally thought they’d get away with it)] and what concerns me no is that I think he is going to get away with it, because I can see the american support so absolutely crucial to hold russia off, or even for them to prevail is disappearing, because of the conservative right is putting huge pressure to stop any funding going to ukraine which I again think is a real sea change in the conservative rights view of people like Vladimir Putin.”
Answer: Ukraine is losing and even the 60 billion would not make a difference in that. [Because its manpower, Artillery shells, and air superiority they are lacking and never getting back in a war of attrition, where those three elements are key].
“But the truth is, if Ukraine would have kept their nuclear weapons, I dont think Putin would have done this, and secondly if Ukraine had been fast-tracked into Nato I dont think Putin would have done this. He would not have attacked another Nato country, knowing that there is THAT AGREEMENT, THAT IF YOU ATTACK ONE OF THEM THEY ALL WILL ATTACK YOU BACK, so in a way you could say it is a chicken and the egg problem.”
Answer: Yes I agree with you that Putin wouldnt have attacked, but this isnt how it turned out is it?
[Actual answer: This is hardly a chicken and the egg problem, if both sides openly told each other and the public what would happen, and Nato chose to expand anyhow, against Macrons and Merkels wishes, because we absolutely need a war in europe, and its so very fucking convenient to blame that on “principles of open door policies that need to be uphold” WHEN YOU ARE EXPANDING NATO FOR THE FIFTH (edit: sorry, I factchecked myself, turns out - tenth) TIME. Also that Putin was worried because of rapid economic developent in Ukraine, because of the EU membership is something you cant even try to prove in any fucking way. Its made up conjecture, not backed up by any economical figures beforehand - so unless you know that for sure, because you have an insight into what caused that decision to be made internally its fucking Propaganda. But stupid public likes narrative! Also there is the tight integration of the EU into Nato, that also comes into play, when joining the EU is on the table, because there are bilateral defense agreements that trigger, that always include Nato forces, which then - for “readiness” start to deploy troops in your country -- you know the stuff, that never gets picked up in public debate for a reason…]
“Ann Applebaum called you a usefull idiot though!”
Answer: Her predictions never come true, mine do. She has to attack ad hominem.
“I watched Putin’s interview with Tucker Carlson the other day and he talked about this [the Ukraine having rejected a peace offer at the pre war lines of contact with neutrality as the only demand from the russian side (as well as an agreement about the number of arms that can be stationed in the Ukraine)] and blamed Boris Johnson for sqandering the peace deal telling Selenskyj not to do any deal with Putin, but I watched Putin and I saw somebody who’s for for example - his half hour rambling answer to to Carson’s first question giving his version of the history uh was so completely skewed to one way of thinking, to Russia’s way of thinking and the rest of his his general demeanor in that interview suggested to me a narcissist a quite delusional guy uh a pretty nasty piece of work certainly not somebody that I would instinctively want to trust, did you watch the interview and did you feel comfortable about absolutely trusting what Putin says”
Answer: Are you an idiot, Morgan? Are you asking me what I feel? Well not really - but I the blogger, am ending this here, simply because of concerns about my blood pressure.
Later on Mearsheimer explains that Stoltenberg now has publicly declared for the third time, this week, that he (who will be gone (replaced) in about half a year) thinks russia attacked, because it wanted to prevent Ukraine becoming a member of Nato. But Piers still wants to ask if you feel that you’d trust Putin, trust Putin.
Which coincidently was the ukrainian propaganda line on March 20th, when the Selenskyj government had to signal to the US, that they were not becoming a neutral country:
But you’d never know, from watching Bumblefuck Idiotfaces videos. I mean its just Piers Morgan, but when you get shown how FUCKING IDIOTIC the western “why we need this war” narrative is condensed in a one hour time period, it just underlines how the Propaganda works so well.
Putin is just another Hitler hellbent on getting his Poland as “Lebensraum” for his shrinking population, in a country with an even faster shrinking population, and it was such a pitty, that we didnt expand Nato faster, because he would always have done that, and we could have prevented it.
Then why didn’t Putin annex the Donbas, when the leaders of the separation movement asked for it and instead went with Minsk 2 first, which he believed in as a compromise, preventing a war?
Well --- you know, he violated Minsk 2 you know…
The same Misk 2 ukrainian propagandists on Al Jazeera will now tell you was “null and void, because it was forced upon the people of Ukraine by its ouside partners!”
Lies, god damn lies and “journalism”.
Why cant we deindustrialize Europe for longer says the independent conservative commentator from the UK, bringing one “pax britannia” argument, well “pax americana” argument after the other. 30 years ago, we would have shown him, this would never have been even a question! Because how dare Putin, and we have a face to keep!
Ok. War ends in 6 years as planned by Wasley Clark?
So first off fuck you, second off fuck you and third, fuck you
Of a war of attrition mind you, which currently the Ukraine is losing.
The best arguments these days always end with Pu’in.
Other more rational ones are nowhere to be found in english or german speaking news media.
Wonderful to live during wartime.
edit: In related news:
Are you kidding me? When was the first one? Last year, after Ukraine was attacked?
