Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Find 10 differences Leaflets with Egypt and Ukraine. Interesting similarity is not it?
U.S. agents did not even wasting time to change.
Similarity #1, comrade, Egypt and Ukraine are two impoverished countries ruled by astonishingly corrupt regimes having no allegiance to the people they ruled. Russia is the same way, comrade, don't fool yourself. Your country' stability is held together only by high oil prices. Think about the future of diminishing oil sales, because Maidan (or worse) is coming, and Russian people would definitely reprint those leaflets in Russian, because the rules of engagement are the same for Egypt, Ukraine or Russia.
Russians are the cultural descendants of the Moscovites and Golden Horde, two entities that destroyed all the rest of the authentic cultures of the Eastern European Slavs in the name of "collective" brand "Russian". Neither Russian government nor Russian "psyche" accept the right of Ukraine and Ukrainians to exist as something independent and self-sufficient. They think than Ukrainians are just spoiled (by the Western designs, naturally) Russians, nothing changed in the past 150 years. Except that Western Ukrainians are isolated by the Russian mind into a separate ethnic (or even racial) group, thus this animal like hatred of the "Banderovets". Restoring Russia to the former Imperial glory is an official policy of Putin, it has great support of the Russians who think that all their problems are result of the devilish Western plot to destroy mother Russia.
Ukraine was never self-sufficient; when it was not under the "moscovites" it was under Poland.
And while we are at that, care to tell us who "moscovites" are exactly?
Quote:
All these 23 years Ukraine was ruled by the Russian speaking Eastern Ukrainian "elites" who didn't/don't really associate themselves with Ukraine either. They just mined that country for personal wealth not unlike Europe mined its African colonies 150 years ago (and the regime of Yanukovich was absolutely barbarian as far as conversion of the power into personal wealth). No official leaders capable of leading the country appeared in the past 3 months, entire state apparatus is corrupt, rotten and saturated with Russian sympathizers, Army is the same way and it has very few resources. Very few people who run government and Army want to risk and die for their country, see shameful Crimean disaster where Ukrainian Army members either gave oath to Russia or refused to do anything that could endanger them personally, nobody had guts for an act of sabotage like damaging ships/armor Russians were about to take over, forget about shooting. Ukrainian state cannot resist Russian aggression, people are unlikely to resist (especially East), except Western Ukrainian "banderovets", thus this relentless propaganda attack at the only force capable of resisting the "rise" of Mother Russia.
I understand, you'd love Ukraine to be ruled by Western Ukrainian "elite" instead - the cultural descendents of Galitzia mixed with Polish dominance, but they have little to do with the rest of Ukraine, unfortunately for you.
Overall as I've already said before, Ukraine in its current borders was a state artificially created by three men - Lenin, Stalin and Khrushev. It's only natural that under the pressure the country starts falling apart along those seams; Crimea is only the beginning.
Similarity #1, comrade, Egypt and Ukraine are two impoverished countries ruled by astonishingly corrupt regimes having no allegiance to the people they ruled. Russia is the same way, comrade, don't fool yourself. Your country' stability is held together only by high oil prices. Think about the future of diminishing oil sales, because Maidan (or worse) is coming, and Russian people would definitely reprint those leaflets in Russian, because the rules of engagement are the same for Egypt, Ukraine or Russia.
Nope, wrong again. After the nineties Russians learned their lesson about the plans the "benevolent West" had for their country. Hence there will be no "Maidan" in Russia.
And Eastern Ukrainians are looking closely now at "reforms" that IMF is demanding to implement in Ukraine in order to bring the loans in. They don't like it a bit and for a good reason. Why should they suffer in the name of West Ukrainians who want to reunite with Poland yet again, and the likes of Timoshenko and Klichko who hope to become "Europeans at last" with their money stashed in Western banks legally and out in the open ?
Remember WW2 : Ukrainian fascists and their friends :
There were no Ukrainian fascists (see the definitions of the fascist movements. Modern Russia fits those definitions almost perfectly, btw.). Ukrainian nationalist underground collaborated with German occupying forces from time to time, sometimes they fought Germans, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, it's as old as the world. Comrade Stalin collaborated with fascist Germany quite a bit, but he's becoming a new Russian idol again, so please.
Russian comrades always fail to mention the crimes of the Soviet regime in the Western Ukraine, and that's hundreds of thousands of the dead and almost 1 millions of the expelled we are talking about here, hundreds of thousands of the dead civilians in less than 2 years (1939 - 1941). Nationalist underground had very good reasons for their hopeless fight with Soviets, 1940-1954.
Soviet regime is responsible for the millions of the dead in Central and Eastern Ukraine, as well as millions of the dead ethnic Ukrainians in Russia in 1930s. Russian comrades made a sport of denying/embellishing barbarous Soviet crimes, but they are so vigilant, so indignant and so vociferous about alleged crimes of the obscure nationalist guerrillas. It doesn't make any rational sense, but who says that Russians are rational on this issue?
It's especially amazing considering the fact that archives of NKVD (a name for the soviet secret service that fought Ukrainian guerillas) are SECRET 70 years later. We don't really know whose crimes are those. Dressing in nationalist uniform and wiping out entire villages from the face of the Earth was important anti-guerrilla tool in the NKVD arsenal. Russians have no moral right to accuse Ukrainian nationalists in anything until those NKVD archives are 100% public.
BTW #2, Russian comrades don't emphasize, is the fact that 1 million of the ethic Russians served in Hitler's armed forces. WWII was also a civil war, for many people Stalin' Russia was a greater evil than Hitler himself. I strongly suggest (pro) Russian comrades to stop swinging this "fascist" label they want to stick to Ukrainians, it's just emotional propaganda label, it means little, its use doesn't add anything productive to this discussion.
Ukraine was never self-sufficient; when it was not under the "moscovites" it was under Poland.
And while we are at that, care to tell us who "moscovites" are exactly?
Ukraine was a part of many countries. Short lived independence was betrayed by the Russian czars in 17th century. Moscovite was a self-identification for the people we call "Russian" before Peter the Great got an idea to privatize the brand "Rus" and to build Russian Empire around that steal.
Quote:
I understand, you'd love Ukraine to be ruled by Western Ukrainian "elite" instead - the cultural descendents of Galitzia mixed with Polish dominance, but they have little to do with the rest of Ukraine, unfortunately for you.
Overall as I've already said before, Ukraine in its current borders was a state artificially created by three men - Lenin, Stalin and Khrushev. It's only natural that under the pressure the country starts falling apart along those seams; Crimea is only the beginning.
I want Ukraine to be ruled by the people who love that land more than their wallets. Everybody in Ukraine has very mixed blood, do you want me to "deconstruct" % of the Asiatic blood in the Russian veins? Define "Artificial" in reference to the borders? It never occurred to you that Ukrainians preserved their identity despite being split between so many nations, there is nothing artificial about that. It's quite amazing, comrade, but just 100 years ago in 1914 chauvinistic Russian crowds, ecstatic about WWI, LOVED Galitsia. What have happened? Do Russians love only Slavs they can assimilate easily into the compound Russian culture?
Last edited by RememberMee; 03-22-2014 at 05:24 PM..
Nope, wrong again. After the nineties Russians learned their lesson about the plans the "benevolent West" had for their country. Hence there will be no "Maidan" in Russia.
And Eastern Ukrainians are looking closely now at "reforms" that IMF is demanding to implement in Ukraine in order to bring the loans in. They don't like it a bit and for a good reason. Why should they suffer in the name of West Ukrainians who want to reunite with Poland yet again, and the likes of Timoshenko and Klichko who hope to become "Europeans at last" with their money stashed in Western banks legally and out in the open ?
And what are those plans, comrade? Don't blame the West because Russian (and Ukrainian) people wanted stuff West has to offer and they (Russian people) were willing to trash Mother Russia in order to get the largest private chunk, all for themselves. IMF is a far lesser evil than Yanukovich. IMF cannot help to the countries without decent people in power, you cannot get those if people are like passive cattle chewing cud.
It's not IMF fault that Eastern Ukrainians prefer thugs who privatized all their industries and did nothing to modernize those. Of course, those industries are non-competitive. Does it mean that Russian capitalists would keep those plants going because of the kindness of their hearts? No freaking way, Ukrainian plants are direct competitions to the Russian ones. Why should the rest of Ukraine suffer subsidizing inferior, overpriced products that Eastern Ukrainian plants manage to produce (mysteriously, since modernization is modest to none)? Yes, changes are always scary but the alternative of the semi-criminal capitalistic feudalism Eastern Ukrainian (and Russian) "elites" have to offer is by far scarier.
There were no Ukrainian fascists (see the definitions of the fascist movements.
"The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) (Ukrainian: Організація Українських Націоналістів, Orhanizatsiya Ukrayins'kykh Natsionalistiv or ОУН) is a Ukrainian political organization which as a movement originally was created in 1929 in Western Ukraine (at the time interwar Poland)"
( See? 1929, even before the Russians showed up on the horizon)
"In 1940, the OUN split into two parts, with the older more moderate members supporting Andriy Melnyk (OUN-M) while the younger and more radical members supporting Stepan Bandera (OUN-B). Both groups were enthusiastically committed to a new fascist Europe."
Modern Russia fits those definitions almost perfectly, btw.)
No it doesn't because although being an authoritarian state it lacks the racial agenda.
Quote:
Comrade Stalin collaborated with fascist Germany quite a bit, but he's becoming a new Russian idol again, so please.
Please, he collaborated with fascist Germany after the allies refused to sign the deal with him. So he signed the deal with Hitler, took over as much territory as he could under the circumstances as a buffer zone and watching that Munich agreement, started slowly preparing for the upcoming war, still hoping that he could have avoided being attacked.
Quote:
Russian comrades always fail to mention the crimes of the Soviet regime in the Western Ukraine, and that's hundreds of thousands of the dead and almost 1 millions of the expelled we are talking about here, hundreds of thousands of the dead civilians in less than 2 years (1939 - 1941). Nationalist underground had very good reasons for their hopeless fight with Soviets, 1940-1954.
And obviously Soviets facing a deadly threat from Germany didn't want any nationalists who were "enthusiastically committed to a new Fascist Europe" in their vicinity. Can you blame them?
Quote:
Soviet regime is responsible for the millions of the dead in Central and Eastern Ukraine, as well as millions of the dead ethnic Ukrainians in Russia in 1930s.
Any proofs for your "millions dead ethnic Ukrainians in Russia?" Or are you saying it only because it supports the false claims of "genocide of Ukrainians" by Russians that became very popular lately in the US?
Quote:
"millions Russian comrades made a sport of denying/embellishing barbarous Soviet crimes, but they are so vigilant, so indignant and so vociferous about alleged crimes of the obscure nationalist guerrillas. It doesn't make any rational sense, but who says that Russians are rational on this issue?
Russians have much more deeply-engraved memories about Hitler's invasion than about Stalin's rulership. While Stalin proved to be a controversial figure in Russian history, Hitler was pure evil in their eyes, so obviously they'd have long memory about those "obscure nationalists" in Ukraine that sided with him, and same goes to Eastern Ukraine that carried the brunt of Hitler's invasion as well.
Not that Russia didn't have its own Vlasov, who supposedly "fought for Russia's freedom" while joining Hitler, but Russians do not regard him as "liberator." He is forever labeled as "traitor" and for a good reason.
Hence it was never "independent" as I've already said.
Quote:
Short lived independence was betrayed by the Russian czars in 17th century.
Again - there was no "independence." There was Polish domination over Ukraine, and that's when Ukrainians asked for protection of Russia. And they've asked for it why? That's right, because CULTURALLY AND RELIGIOUSLY it belonged to Russia, not Poland to begin with. So there was no "betrayal" by Russian czars you are talking about, there was ( quite logical) move of Russian czars to acquire the territory that asked for their protection and to be done with it. In the same manner Georgia was compalining about "Russia's betrayal" when it was asking for Russian protection from Islamic neighbors, yet found itself being Russian vassal after it received this protection. I guess everyone wants to be "protected" but on their own terms and Russian soldiers have to go and fight for those countries interests whenever they call. Yeah, right. That's not how it works in real life. You want to be protected - you make your choices when you are less significant power/nation.
Moscovite was a self-identification for the people we call "Russian" before Peter the Great got an idea to privatize the brand "Rus" and to build Russian Empire around that steal.
Nope, that's again your own fantasy, yet another attempt to re-write the history.
See, even in Treaty of Pereyaslav they state it in very simple terms;
"In the long run, the consequences for Ukraine were pivotal. Polish colonization and Polonization of the upper class became replaced by a systematic process of Russification, culminating in the Ems Ukaz of 1876, which restricted printing of books in the Ukrainian language. Further consequences included the disbandment of the Zaporizhian Host and reinstatement of serfdom in Ukraine.
For Russia, the treaty eventually led to the acquisition of Ukraine, providing a justification for the ambitious title of Russian tsars and emperors, The Ruler of All Rus’. Russia, being at that time the only part of the former Kievan Rus' which was not dominated by a foreign power, considered itself the successor of Kievan Rus' and the reunificator of all Rus' lands."
Principality of Moscow (already back in times when it had nothing to do with "Peter the Great") was a direct continuation of Kievan Rus; it has been ruled by Kiev's princes and later - their descendents up until the early 1600ies.
While reading about this dynasty, you'll hopefully understand why part of today's Russian cities were still part of Kievan Rus, and why Ukraine gradually turns into Russia, with no particular ethnic borders. This might explain to you as well why Eastern Ukraine is a transitional land between Ukraine and Russia - not more and not less.
So stick with historical facts and enough already please with your fantasies and constant desire to re-write history.
Quote:
I want Ukraine to be ruled by the people who love that land more than their wallets.
That's impossible ( as much as I'd probably wish it myself) under the circumstances, when the whole world is basically divided into certain zones, that are run by someone's wallet and in Ukraine's case it's particularly obviously so.
Quote:
Everybody in Ukraine has very mixed blood, do you want me to "deconstruct" % of the Asiatic blood in the Russian veins?
Go right ahead.
Quote:
Define "Artificial" in reference to the borders? It never occurred to you that Ukrainians preserved their identity despite being split between so many nations, there is nothing artificial about that. It's quite amazing, comrade, but just 100 years ago in 1914 chauvinistic Russian crowds, ecstatic about WWI, LOVED Galitsia. What have happened? Do Russians love only Slavs they can assimilate easily into the compound Russian culture?
Russians love everything that reinforces their culture/power; Russian nationalists - always, while Russian intelligentsia has to accept this way of things, when they sense that their country is in danger.
And what are those plans, comrade? Don't blame the West because Russian (and Ukrainian) people wanted stuff West has to offer and they (Russian people) were willing to trash Mother Russia in order to get the largest private chunk, all for themselves. IMF is a far lesser evil than Yanukovich. IMF cannot help to the countries without decent people in power, you cannot get those if people are like passive cattle chewing cud.
IMF is not there "to help" to begin with. IMF is there to make profits on investments for those who owe the money, because that's what loans are - investments, with money basically going to multinational corporations;
"7. What is structural adjustment?
Structural adjustment is a policy package in line with what is often called "neoliberalism," a far-reaching version of the "free trade" agenda. In many ways, it is a harsh version of Newt Gingrich's Contract with America.
Key structural adjustment measures include: privatizing government-owned enterprises and government-provided services, slashing government spending, orienting economies to promote exports, trade and investment liberalization, higher interest rates, eliminating subsidies on consumer items such as foods, fuel and medicines and tax increases.
The basic idea of these policies is to shrink the size and role of government, rely on market forces to distribute resources and services and integrate poor countries into the global economy.
8. How do multinational corporations benefit from IMF policies?
Structural adjustment policies open up developing countries to foreign investors on terms most favorable to multinational corporations. They require countries to remove barriers to foreign investment, and push countries to orient their economies to producing exports-typically produced by or sold to multinationals. State-owned enterprises privatized under structural adjustment are frequently sold to multinationals-often at bargain-basement prices.
IMF-orchestrated bailouts of countries-assistance to countries whose exchanges rates are plummeting-provide money primarily so that developing countries can pay off their foreign creditors (including private banks). Many critics view these bailouts effectively as bailouts of the creditors who don't absorb the cost of risky loans gone bad."
It's not IMF fault that Eastern Ukrainians prefer thugs who privatized all their industries and did nothing to modernize those.
I didn't look at the role of the IMF in post-Soviet Ukraine, but I am very much aware of the role of IMF ( as much as the US and its major bankers) in Russia back in the nineties and I don't have any other word to describe it but "thuggery." I don't believe it could be any different in post-Soviet Ukraine.
Quote:
Of course, those industries are non-competitive. Does it mean that Russian capitalists would keep those plants going because of the kindness of their hearts? No freaking way, Ukrainian plants are direct competitions to the Russian ones.
Don't forget that both countries were under the same central management for quite some time, and this management was not about creating "competition" between different parts of the country and their industries. That's why Russian capitalists would keep those non-competitive plants going for quite some time - they'd find the use for their production, since they were still placing orders until now.
Quote:
Why should the rest of Ukraine suffer subsidizing inferior, overpriced products that Eastern Ukrainian plants manage to produce (mysteriously, since modernization is modest to none)?
If "the rest of Ukraine" is not happy with "inferior, overpriced products" from Eastern Ukraine, they can go their separate way and join the EU paradise, what seems to be the problem? People who live in Crimea, however, saw it the other way.
Yes, changes are always scary but the alternative of the semi-criminal capitalistic feudalism Eastern Ukrainian (and Russian) "elites" have to offer is by far scarier.
Says who?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
