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.
Thanks and appreciation for the exhaustive reply. I can't give you any more rep right now on the automated system, so I'll do it publicly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
I agree, but what I do expect is for those in charge not to pursue foreign policy and their own position to advance their owns self interest over that of the country, this is what is happening now, this is what has been happening for a long time.
Yes, I perceive the same thing, since at least the mid-1990s. With no, or at least very weakened, global competition, the US ruling class has become arrogant, and that has not boded well for domestic freedoms. It is sad and disturbing. But, still, the least dirty shirt, as I heard someone put it a couple of years ago.
Anyway, I hope the powers that be can solve this with some semblance of balance and stability and with a minimum of violence and long-term acrimony, but I won't hold my breath either: in my adolescent romantic fantasies, I was hoping that Russia and the West could cooperate and integrate slowly, very slowly, as mature beings, and without pushing and shoving over a toy like two-year olds on a playground. Alas.
Indeed, as erasure mentioned, the timing of this is very suspect, and the real reasons are probably very petty.
That's not "blah-blah," because that's precisely what it was all about -
American corporate interests above anything, when their "advisers" moved in
Moscow in the nineties, taking advantage of Yeltsin and the whole situation
Russia was in, and now - it's about their corporate interests in Ukraine yet
again.
Ok I'll just point out something in history. We know what happened to the USSR back in those times. Its 'center' could not and did not hold and we got Putin's famous quote on it: 'the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century'. But let's take a look at that more closely.
The collapse didn't result in bloodshed or civil war in Russia. Kind of like one o those 'velvet' revolutions which usually are few and far between. Considering the size of the USSR that worked out pretty good. But more importantly if there was a time to take advantage of the collapsed Soviet state that was the time for the US and Europe to do it militarily and geographically if and only if NATO was an 'offensive' machine bent on grabbing a couple of acres in former USSR territories. All in all I would wonder how ,if the shoe was on the other foot, how that scernario would play itself out. Still an unknown for history but if past and current behavior is any indication Russia arguably might put some 'pedal to the metal' there.
And about Hungarian autonomy. Shrewd move by Orban Hungary I think to plant the idea in the Ukrainian parliament of affording Magyars there autonomy. If democracy is to flourish there it's a way of backing up the talk. And it also adds a population which I don't think has too much love for Russia that could help in buttressing opinion against destabilizing pro-Russian behavior in the country.
hmm..maybe the tide turning in the East? Miners in Mariupol fearing loss of markets and work have taken the offensive against separitists. As I've personally thought, social order is what's wanted by the populace when they are faced with wanton destruction, chaotic violence and potential civil war. We no doubt it see it now there in Mariupol. Maybe media and journalists will now report 'Widespread Rationality Now Engages in Ukraine?'
This is common about everywhere, even in the US. The political parties go through and vote for members of their party who are not present. The term for this is "ghost voting".
This not common in the US. If a member of a government group is not present for a vote, they do not have a vote on that particular issue. No one is allowed to submit both their own vote and a vote attributed to someone else or a friend who might not be present.
Even down to the small town level, if there is a politician who does not show up for a vote on something, his or her voting record is always open to the public and sometimes their absence is used against them at re-election time.
This not common in the US. If a member of a government group is not present for a vote, they do not have a vote on that particular issue. No one is allowed to submit both their own vote and a vote attributed to someone else or a friend who might not be present.
Even down to the small town level, if there is a politician who does not show up for a vote on something, his or her voting record is always open to the public and sometimes their absence is used against them at re-election time.
You are right, "common" was too strong of a word; I should have said it is not unheard of that this is done in the US, Youtube is full of videos showing this, let alone the numerous non-videoed cases of doing this.
Point is this is not a "Russian" thing, even politicians in the US engage in this.
Ok I'll just point out something in history. We know what happened to the USSR back in those times. Its 'center' could not and did not hold and we got Putin's famous quote on it: 'the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century'. But let's take a look at that more closely.
Yes, let's look at that more closely.
Putin did state that, but you need to see the entire context of the speech, as well as the context of what "catastrophe" means in this context.
"Прежде всего следует признать, что крушение Советского Союза было крупнейшей геополитической катастрофой века. Для российского же народа оно стало настоящей драмой. Десятки миллионов наших сограждан и соотечественников оказались за пределами российской территории. Эпидемия распада к тому же перекинулась на саму Россию."
Translates to:
"above all we should acknowledge, that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century. As for the Russian nation it became a genuine drama. Tens of millions of our co-citizens and compatriots found themselves outside Russian territory. Epidemic of disintegration spread to Russia itself."
The full version is available in English, but it is translated incorrectly in some places.
Putin has no intention of rebuilding the USSR. During the USSR, the Russian SSR was heavily subsidizing other SSR's (hence why most of central Asia wanted to form a new USSR with Russia, but Russia declined). Putin has no intention of dragging down Russia to support unproductive states.
Ok I'll just point out something in history. We know what happened to the USSR back in those times. Its 'center' could not and did not hold and we got Putin's famous quote on it: 'the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century'. But let's take a look at that more closely.
The collapse didn't result in bloodshed or civil war in Russia. Kind of like one o those 'velvet' revolutions which usually are few and far between. Considering the size of the USSR that worked out pretty good. But more importantly if there was a time to take advantage of the collapsed Soviet state that was the time for the US and Europe to do it militarily and geographically if and only if NATO was an 'offensive' machine bent on grabbing a couple of acres in former USSR territories.
No, it was NOT a good time for the US and Europe to do anything "militarily," because Russia was still a nuclear power and the "hardliners" still could have taken over the power with that little red button they could reach. So the US ( and Europe to a lesser degree) were treading carefully and were working on destruction of Russia from within - by the means of "economic advisers" and IMF. who were insisting on the disintegration of the Soviet Union ( against the will of the majority of its inhabitants as the vote showed by the way) so Yeltsin obliged, IN SPITE of the fact that from economic point of view it would spell a disaster for Russians ans non-Russians alike. Your constant mistake is that you keep on thinking about Russia/Europe in terms of 1930ies, but it were already the nineties.
Quote:
All in all I would wonder how ,if the shoe was on the other foot, how that scernario would play itself out.
The "other scenario" was quite possible, back in 1945, with the Soviet Army being biggest in the world and in good spirit after the victory. But even then ( as in 1812 before) Russians came only to a certain point in Europe and then went home, without taking over. You need to know that although Russians can be quite contemptuous towards Eastern Europeans, seeing no particular value in their "achievements,"/culture, it's a different story when it comes to Western Europe.
Quote:
Still an unknown for history but if past and current behavior is any indication Russia arguably might put some 'pedal to the metal' there.
No, its' already known in history what Russians are interested in and what's not. There is no sense to speak about "Russian behaviour" as it's some *mischieveous* child that needs supervision of some "Uncle Sam." These are the false premises.
"Uncle Sam" should be controlled by Russia in the same way as Russia should be controlled by the US.
Quote:
And about Hungarian autonomy. Shrewd move by Orban Hungary I think to plant the idea in the Ukrainian parliament of affording Magyars there autonomy. If democracy is to flourish there it's a way of backing up the talk. And it also adds a population which I don't think has too much love for Russia that could help in buttressing opinion against destabilizing pro-Russian behavior in the country.
Oh I see - it's "democracy" when YOUR OWN are demanding "autonomy," from "democratic Ukrainian government" in Kiev - it's not democracy when Eastern Ukrainians are demanding mentioned above "democracy." How predictable, lol.
Quote:
hmm..maybe the tide turning in the East? Miners in Mariupol fearing loss of markets and work have taken the offensive against separitists. As I've personally thought, social order is what's wanted by the populace when they are faced with wanton destruction, chaotic violence and potential civil war. We no doubt it see it now there in Mariupol. Maybe media and journalists will now report 'Widespread Rationality Now Engages in Ukraine?'
Don't forget that these kind of protests in Ukraine ( as much as in Russia) are often organized under a threat from "superiors." "He who pays for the music orders what's going to be played" ( as the Russian proverb goes.)
Oh I see - it's "democracy" when YOUR OWN are demanding "autonomy," from
"democratic Ukrainian government" in Kiev - it's not democracy when Eastern
Ukrainians are demanding mentioned above "democracy."
How predictable, lol.
I'm sorry but I'm not following you there. Can u elaborate? Thx ahead.
Its funny. Why people think, that democracy best of all? Why you think, that people an another countrys want to leave on USA principals?
Its not serious, American people just can't understand, that Russians and Ukraines, it's another people, in our head, in our things. With Democracy become only war, only criminal, and corruption. For our country democracy its evil. Its not our way.
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.
How predictable, lol. 
Medal from Nuland
