Yes the rule was reports had to be backed with a credible source. Discussion is different.
Discussion should be free speech and opinions etc. In his case he is a local over there. And probably has a better idea.
Your correct with claims he makes, eg. education system. This should be accessible for proof. As far as freinds and neighbours go. He could ask if they can prove it and send info.
But still this section should remain more open in so many ways. Restrictions shouldn't really be necessary in Discussion. Those that don't like or doubt may ask more for their reasons , or keep scrolling. Other sections need more info more sources etc totally understand that. However if Discussion is limited to what suits Americans and sole west supporters then you limit yourselves to suit your own narrative. Not a good look. You have an international community which is extremely beneficial. Don't lose sight of this because someone has different information, experiences, feelings, beliefs, thoughts-opinions. Otherwise you might aswell shut down access .That may well shut down your abilities to learn , receive info quickly etc etc.
Authority and power can be a dangerous thing as this is what this subject matter and site is also about. Don't become your own enemy.
I do understand what your saying and yes a person might have personal experience that is valid.
So we are left with two issues.
The presentation of what is known and accepted fact. It can be readily sourced from multiple open source locations. Statements that make claims of historic fact should infact be historically accurate at least to some degree.
Statements of personal or national mood or Interpretation don’t have to be supported by facts because they are reaction to whatever the situation might be. They are opinions
Let’s say Ukrainians are nazis, undoubtably some are. The same claim or accusation can be made and is as verifiable for Some Russians and Americans and Australians.
Thus when I here Russian accusation that Ukraine of being nazis are horrible people and kill innocents. But I have seen SS uniform patches on Ukrainian separatist commanders. Or even the founder and leader of Russia’s Wagner group having SS tattoos on his chest.
I’m left with the question who’s more naziish? Russian accuse Ukrainians of being nazis but it is open source knowledge that Russian have their own fascist tendencies and they too have been involved in some pretty nasty war time abuses.
With that in mind when I hear claims of such and such are nazis from either side it’s dust bin information.
It’s of no quality or value.
Just like the counter accusation levied against america having been engaged in wars of aggression and consequently Americans have no business passing judgment of interceding in any way.
You’ve been here long enough there is virtually no one here that would deny that Americans have maxed some pretty serious mistakes regarding our foreign policy.
But it is a historic fact that Russia to has had its own colonizing period and wars of aggression and been involved in some pretty horrendous war time crimes. Ask a pole or German how Russian soldiers treated them as Germany retreated. Lot of personal experiences their painting Russia in some ugly light. So had Russia forfeited it’s right to imprint its will or opinion in geopolitics, no.
No one has made that charge.
The only issue is was it acceptable for Russia to invade and try to conquer Ukraine.
I have not read any rational argument from the Russia perspective that justifies invading a sovereign Nation. I’ve seen Ukrainians are nazis and Russia has a right to a secure boarder.
Well we’ve pretty much answered the issue that you will likely find some fascist son of a bitches in most of the countries involved in the standoff. So that charge is void.
Regarding feeling secure in their boarders.
Russia’s military is supposedly in the top 3of4 biggest militaries in the world and have one of the largest nuclear weapons arsenal in the world.
What does it say about a people that have that kind of military power at their disposal and yet still claim to need to have buffer states to protect them.
It really doesn’t follow that their claims of insecurity are real or valid.
People are free to discuss their opinions within reason. But that also should be willing to defend them, or at the very least agree to disagree without invading a independent nation.
