> One must also point out every single one of this account's comments is either Chinese or Russian apologism.

Why must one do that? Is it wrong to question the typical narratives we get out of Western-aligned sources?

> China is already busily building a quasi-empire by persuading poor nations to enter debt slavery over infrastructure projects.

Citation needed. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2021/02/ch...

> Why must one do that?

Because they're overwhelmingly less reliable.

Just look at how often Russian sources brag about destroying Western equipment sent to Ukraine before it's even been sent yet. Or the dogged insistence that Russia has no intention invading Ukraine and this is all silly Western propaganda mere days or weeks before yeah, they invaded Ukraine and acted like all those previous proclamations never even happened.

Reporting on Ukraine is pure wartime propaganda. Western and Russian sources both do it. Look at how often Western sources cite the Ukrainian ministry of defense and no one else in their reporting. You see western sources claiming russia is losing or that there's a six figure death toll on the Russian side and then documents get leaked and whoopsie it's actualy less than 20,000. It's hard to blame anyone for not knowing what the hell is really going on because it's intentionally obfuscated from basically everyone except the militaries involved.

However this type of thing happens at a larger scale than just the Ukraine war. I mean look at the "uigher files" that contain like actors from hong kong and shit lol. If you think just Russia and China exaggerate in their news you're not looking hard enough at our news.

Both sides do propaganda, it's just that Russia's is way more unbelievable, like how they've destroyed more than 100% of HIMARS sent so far, or how the Moskva died to an "accident" instead of a missile.

There's a reason "whoops dropped a cigarette" has become a running joke any time there's an explosion deep within Russian lines.

Having a free and independent press is extremely important and if a country doesn't have that I'm automatically skeptical of their claims. China and Russia only have state-backed reporting.

What makes you think our press is free or independent? Because they say so? Our press is owned by our local oligarchs. Our government, conveniently enough, is also owned by our local oligarchs.

> What makes you think our press is free or independent?

Compared to China? Is this a serious question?

US media has plenty of problems, but there's no shortage of publications trashing whoever the current president is, unlike China.

You can't even talk about Winnie the Pooh in China, their premier is so butthurt.

My comments are typically pro-American when the topic is international relations and highly critical of the US government when the topic is domestic policy. That is not the only content of my entire comment history as is the case with the referred-to account. Glancing over my comment history, less than ten percent of them are even peripherally related to politics.