Yours is the nonesense, they are taking 0 kurds territory right now.
Are Russia preparing for WW3?
- Thread starter MoBeats
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
You mentioned the USSR killing millions of its own - that hasn't happened since t he second world war. Its an objective fact that US foreign policy has led to far more death and destruction than that of Russia's.
So does that make Russia right? Just because something isn't as bad doesn't mean it's not one of the worst.
http://news.sky.com/story/turkey-claims-it-has-killed-25-militants-in-syria-air-strikes-10555983
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-26/turkey-shells-kurdish-militia-in-northern-syria/7787176
http://www.france24.com/en/20160825-turkey-shells-kurdish-pyd-forces-northern-syria
The whole reason the Turks got involved in Rojava was because the Kurds were close to taking it from ISIS. You're deluded if you think the Turks are only in this to fight ISIS.
@GlastonSpur does realize that Putin has not been in power since USSR times. Yeltsin was the first president of the sovereign Russian Federation, then Putin. Being born in USSR, I do admit that Stalin was a true horror (despite being a key figure in the war against fascism), and I am never ashamed to recognize that, even though Stalin died 26 years before I was born.
I don't care for Russia, but without their involvement, Syria would have become a fascist Islamist state where minorities would live a macabre existence. Thankfully the US, Turkey and their Wahabist-sponsored Gulf Arab allies didn't get their way.
Here and again a few post below that you are accusing me of defending the Iraq war and/or Bush. I never did. Bush was probably the worst that happened to US foreign policy since 1920. The Iraq war, while Saddam certainly was a despicable human being, was not justified by anything.
Your depleted Uranium is just a dumb argument fueled by Russian state media, the millions dead are falsified even by the ones promoting it like @antihenry (although I doubt he does realise it).
Depleted Uranium is neither especially dangerous nor uncommon to be used, every single major army in the world (except Germany) uses it as a measure to improve their anti-tank shells and anti-Bunker bombs. Russia does as well. So before spouting nonsense, start doubting your own media like you are demanding us to do ours.
Last edited:
It's easily summed up in one post - The Russian economy is tanking because of the oil price and sanctions. Putin could have averted the oil price effect by diversifying the Russian economy away from petroleum and gas dependency 15 years ago instead of happily collecting the money to enrich himself and his mates. He could've also averted the sanctions by not invading Ukraine, stealing its land, shooting down a Malaysian Jet, and creating a frozen conflict in Donbass. He is little more than a corrupt ex KGB agent interested in power and money with zero interest in Russia's long term interests. Not only has he betrayed you, he has done it in a way where you are inspired to defend him.
Do we agree upon what happened in Fallujah? Radiation? Russians would lie, how about the link above from The Independent? Now please show me where Russia led by Putin bombed any city with that scale of damage? Where is the radiation that kills and mutates several generations? As you may believe that Russia will falsify docs and have biased media, I can think of quite similar things when it comes to falsifying docs by the US (and most governments in the world for that matter) and very biased US media.
I never said there intentions wasn't kurds motivated, I just said right now they are the only ones fighting isis.
Errr who have the Kurds been fighting then?
And what are the regime soldiers doing at Deir Ez Zour? Getting a tan?
I am not inspired to defend him, I think you missed my initial posts in this thread.
It is easy to say that he could have diversified the economy, but it is not easy, especially not after Yeltsin. Been in Russia in 90s and believe me, it was much much worse than it is now. The whole debate of the Ukraine is another thread, I guess. However, when I saw people being burnt live right in front of my eyes by neo-Nazis and not being able to help them, I can understand what Putin was trying to do in Donbass. Shooting down a Malaysian jet was wrong.
I will admit that, and I even never debated that.
Hope my opinion of Putin is clear now.
Now my opinion of the US-led wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria - they were also wrong. People killed, money spent, infrastructure thrown back to decades. I can not see any single government either native or foreign being able/willing to spend huge money to restore these countries. Not even the huge US economy will fund these. So were/are all these wars worth of thousands/millions of lives, billions of dollars? No.
See the gains of each of those on isis territory and you have your answer.
He had 12 years to do it, during which he could've easily overhauled the entire system from post Soviet rubbishness to respectable Democratic state with vibrant civil society, media freedoms, cooperation with his neighbors etc etc, but that was never his aim. His aim was to plunder state money for himself and his friends, who he tactically placed in top government positions to insulate his own power. This is not a respectable leader - it's an insecure thief who is holding his own country's progress hostage while he is in power. Russia will be infinitely better off without him, which I suspect will be very soon.
The Kurds have gained very handsomely from ISIS actually - pretty much all their gained territory has been taken from them. As have the government in Deir ez Zour and Palmyra. So yes I have my answer.
As you wish, tough to argue with a deluded man.
Excuse me? Care to elaborate?
Russians crave for a "strong leader", and Putin feeds on that. There's no secret about that. Apologies if that offended you.
So what? What difference does it make when and where Putin or anyone else were born and where they started their careers? Angela Merkel, for example, grew up in East Germany and was a member of FDJ, an organization for young German communists. And no, Russian republic, you're referring to which was a part of the USSR, ideologically, politically and economically isn't the same as modern Russia, an independent state, just like the other fourteen republics, that are now sovereign countries. You really should stick with what you know.
Where do you get the idea that Russians dream of living in the USA? I have lived in both countries for many years and I can tell you that this isn't true for most Russians. Would they like to make more money and live better lives? Sure they would, but most don't even consider leaving the country.
Compelling response as always. Let's not let those pesky facts get in the way after all.
I agree with this. The history of Russia is an ironic one. The Soviets try to implement socialism (with communism being the dream) at a stage when the economy wasn't ready to adapt -- following Marx's prediction that such reform would only work in post-industrialized countries. Then, after the collapse of the USSR, Yeltsin tries to implement US style neoliberal economics and the same problem occurs -- the economy simply isn't ready for such a sharp upheaval. Yeltsin's tenure was abominably bad. Putin, for all of his shortcomings (and he has many), has at least stabilized a country that was in complete and utter free-fall. Is he crooked? Yes. Is he Russia's best option? I think, at this moment in time, he probably is. The last thing Russia needs to do is repeat the mistakes of its past and try to adapt too quickly to some Western notion of governance. It needs to take its time and pick what's right for it.
I haven't lived there for long but my parents were born in the USSR. I still got relatives who live there. Also friends here at the states who were born in the USSR.
I'm getting the idea that Russians dream of living in the states from the mass amounts that immigrate or try to immigrate to the states.
Bombing citizens to death to precipitate a pretext for an invasion that created a chance for him to arise and killing anyone that tried to investigate it.
What's Putin's endgame with oil? What does he want to happen?
No I haven't been to Russia and I don't speak Russian. But that doesn't change the truth of what I said earlier about the reality of Russia being a gangster-state, with no real democracy, no independent judiciary and the murder and jailing of opposition politicians.
I think that Putin enjoys a lot of support in Russia - but that's hardly surprising since the media is virtually all state-controlled and so the Russian people are fed a steady diet of pro-Putin propaganda. Moreover, the Russian Orthodox Church has become virtually an arm of Russian state-glorification.
Yes, I agree with you that many Russians hate America and the West - again not surprising given the state-controlled propaganda.
You need to take the blinkers off. Russian has annexed Crimea and in effect also annexed eastern Ukraine ... all because his puppet ruler there was overthrown and the majority of Ukrainians want closer ties with the EU and NATO, whilst Putin believes he has the right to control their destiny as tied to Russia. Moreover, they are in the process of turning the Black Sea into a Russian lake, engaging in a huge upsurge in military spending, have moved nuclear missiles into Kaliningrad (their Baltic enclave), are continually probing European air defences ... the list goes on.
Russia today under Putin has one ideology: a maschismo glorification of Russian power, Russian nationalism and old-fashioned imperialism. Hence Russian ministers praising the violent actions of their football hooligans in Europe this summer, hence the oppression of homosexuality in Russia and its characterisation as effete, decadent, not the character of "real men", hence Putin endlessly photographed bare-chested riding in tanks or practising martial arts.
Russia is not interested in co-operation. They aim for the restoration of the Soviet Empire. Everything points to that. You need to wake up.
What do you consider 'mass amounts'? Give me some numbers.
If I'm not mistaken, Russians (among few other countries) were disqualified from participating in the DV lottery program somewhere between 2005-2010 due to high volume of immigrants, both legal and illegal. There's plenty of numbers on government websites.
Cheers. And where did this WWIII story come from anyway?!
One other point I failed to mention - many foreigners (including me) tend to overlook the fact that Russians tend to judge Putin and his reign by reference to what they see as the likely realistic alternatives rather than a more idealised view of what could have happened. I wouldn't agree that he is the best Russia could hope for but, in light of Russian history and, in particular, the traumas of the 20th century, I can understand why Russians might be less judgemental and look favourably on his light repression/(overall) rising prosperity record.
The much maligned Bernard Lewis wrote this in 1999:
"For the moment Russia, crippled by its internal problems, is out of the game. . . . But there can be no doubt that at some time in the near or distant future this will change. A country with the resources and numbers and the scientific and technological sophistication of Russia will not indefinitely remain on the sidelines. Sooner or later Russia will be back, and we do not know what kind of Russia it will be. It may fall subject to some form of totalitarian tyranny, fascist or Communist; it may resume its earlier role as the leader of pan-Slavism or of Orthodox Christianity; it may succeed, after so many failed efforts, in establishing a Russian liberal democracy. It may resume or reject its former imperial ambitions. But this much can be said with certainty: whatever kind of regime rules in a resurgent Russia, it will be vitally concerned with the Middle East—a region not far from its southern frontier, wherever that may ultimately lie, and linked by ties of history, religion, and culture with important elements of the Russian population, including both Jews and Muslims as well as Christians."
Something to think about for those focused on 'Putin' as the root of this.
"For the moment Russia, crippled by its internal problems, is out of the game. . . . But there can be no doubt that at some time in the near or distant future this will change. A country with the resources and numbers and the scientific and technological sophistication of Russia will not indefinitely remain on the sidelines. Sooner or later Russia will be back, and we do not know what kind of Russia it will be. It may fall subject to some form of totalitarian tyranny, fascist or Communist; it may resume its earlier role as the leader of pan-Slavism or of Orthodox Christianity; it may succeed, after so many failed efforts, in establishing a Russian liberal democracy. It may resume or reject its former imperial ambitions. But this much can be said with certainty: whatever kind of regime rules in a resurgent Russia, it will be vitally concerned with the Middle East—a region not far from its southern frontier, wherever that may ultimately lie, and linked by ties of history, religion, and culture with important elements of the Russian population, including both Jews and Muslims as well as Christians."
Something to think about for those focused on 'Putin' as the root of this.
Show me a people who crave a weak leader and I'll consider forgiving your brutish generalization of some 140 million people.
If you need me to point out the obvious..."it's embedded in the mentality" is the part that stands out as particularly discriminatory.
http://www.workpermit.com/news/increasing-numbers-russians-applying-us-green-card-lottery-20151019
"In 2015, approximately 4,000 Russians obtained green cards through the DV lottery." That's hardly 'mass amounts' for the country of 143 million people.
If you look up numbers down the years, since the USSR opened it's gates around 1990, you'll see how many people immigrated to the US. And how many people immigrate from the states to Russia?
My point in all of that is if the US is so evil, and Russia is so good, how come people want to come and live here and not in Russia?
To clarify, I don't mean by this that every single Russian thinks that way. I'm pointing the trend as a whole.
I'll show that when the OP I was replying to will show that every Russian hates the US, as he claimed.
Regarding the mentality, it is far from being discriminatory. I was pointing trends that were discussed in sociological and political researches. How can you take that as something discriminatory is beyond me. It is the same as saying that it is discriminatory to say that American mentality values individual freedom.
Last edited:
This whole discussion is just awkward. You're essentially defending global superpowers who will actively try to remain being a global power, even if that comes at the cost of civilian deaths (collateral damage anyone?).
If I had to choose between either the US and Russia I'd choose the US though. The Russian government is just one big swamp of ex-KGB guys.
If I had to choose between either the US and Russia I'd choose the US though. The Russian government is just one big swamp of ex-KGB guys.
Huh?
And not sure how real this is
Compare that to the increase in oil prices and you've got your answer to how valid this is. Outside of this sector, there has been very little progress. GDP per person is a foul number in that context. As for the increase in income: this fails to mention inflation remained high for a good amount of time, so the actual increase (purchase power parity) has been far, far lower. It's just that the ruble isn't nearly worth as much as it was in 1999. That's probably the reason they started to use rubles as measure for the latter part of the graphic, while starting in dollars.
ALso, the increase meant the formation of a small but vibrant middle class in the big cities, while the rest of the country remains to be poor.
Huh?
And not sure how real this is
Completely misleading. A head of cabbage could've been President of Russia following the Yeltsin years and the GDP would've risen.
Also, you may want to get back to Google as your chart conveniently stops in 2013 when the Russian economy was at its peak. It is currently at about 1.268 Trillion - smaller than Italy, Canada, and South Korea. To put things into perspective - if Russia were a US state, it would be the 2nd largest economy in the US behind California, which is double the size of Russia's current economy. That's pretty pathetic for a state sitting atop one of the world's biggest energy reserves. If Putin didn't exist and Russia was a full on Democratic state with a diversified economy, it would be the 4th biggest economy in the world and its citizens would have an exponentially better quality of life.
Fair enough, am not an expert on Russia at all - interesting points
I quite enjoy reading the comments, but my thoughts exactly.
Boom