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.
If current events are an indication I am afraid that it will be dismal for the country itself as well for all of Europe.
Mr. Putin will be master of ceremonies for VE Day shortly with that incredible victory over the 'fascists'. Thing is the a West isn't so interested to hang out with him 'celebrating'. No doubt some other countries as well. This is a party that not everybody wants to go to. And for interesting reasons.
After Mr. Putin described the collapse of Russia the 'greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century' he seems to be a man hell bent on a mission....and quite a 'liberating' one. Perfect timing since with VE Day he'll be top man on stage broadcasting the achievements and sacrifices of Russia in tbat 'Great Patrootic War' where she 'liberated' Europe from notorious fascism.
Surely Russia was instrumental in defeating Hitler and his philosophy but in hindsight that 'liberating' cure became simply another manifestation of one dictatorship taking over from another with horrific consequences to the nationalities of Europe.
Travric, before we go any further, what's "horrific" consequences?
Were these nations starved to death, burned in crematories in millions, were their children thrown in flames alive, did they lose their national tongues, being forced to speak exclusively the language of brutal invader, what? What was so "horrific" about it, keeping in mind that practically all those "nations" were fighting on Hitler's side and helping an invasion, that had TRULY horrific consequences for many?
As I've said, let's stop using terminology loosely around here, because it mars the picture.
The New York Times does its government’s bidding: Here’s what you’re not being told about U.S. troops in Ukraine
U.S. troops are now operating openly in Ukraine. The "paper of record's" "coverage" is an embarrassment, per usual
The New York Times does its government’s bidding: Here’s what you’re not being told about U.S. troops in Ukraine
U.S. troops are now operating openly in Ukraine. The "paper of record's" "coverage" is an embarrassment, per usual
Parade in honor of the Victory Day in Donetsk. Althrough we heard many warnings about possible provocations during celebration and bad weather, there were many people. Even transport was overcrowded despite the fact that today is a day off and people do not need to go to work. People had great mood and it was very noticeable.
The New York Times does its government’s bidding: Here’s what you’re not being told about U.S. troops in Ukraine
U.S. troops are now operating openly in Ukraine. The "paper of record's" "coverage" is an embarrassment, per usual
"Counterintuitive though it may sound, the greater peacefulness of the world may make the attainment of higher rates of economic growth less urgent and thus less likely. This view does not claim that fighting wars improves economies, as of course the actual conflict brings death and destruction. The claim is also distinct from the Keynesian argument that preparing for war lifts government spending and puts people to work. Rather, the very possibility of war focuses the attention of governments on getting some basic decisions right — whether investing in science or simply liberalizing the economy. Such focus ends up improving a nation’s longer-run prospects.
It may seem repugnant to find a positive side to war in this regard, but a look at American history suggests we cannot dismiss the idea so easily. Fundamental innovations such as nuclear power, the computer and the modern aircraft were all pushed along by an American government eager to defeat the Axis powers or, later, to win the Cold War."
Not to mention all those lavish loans given to warring parties, giving great returns on "investment" and benefiting the US bankers. ( Of course this part is conveniently skipped in the article, right?)
But lol, at least someone is taking note that absence of major wars does hurt America.
The bright side of it of course is "no death and destruction," although these deaths and destruction were really taking place elsewhere for the most part.
Parade in honor of the Victory Day in Donetsk. Althrough we heard many warnings about possible provocations during celebration and bad weather, there were many people. Even transport was overcrowded despite the fact that today is a day off and people do not need to go to work. People had great mood and it was very noticeable.
Re: "Traffic, before we go any further, what's "horrific" consequences?
Were these nations starved to death, burned in crematories in millions, were their children thrown in flames alive, did they lose their national tongues, being forced to speak exclusively the language of brutal invader, what? What was so "horrific" about it, keeping in mind that practically all those "nations" were fighting on Hitler's side and helping an invasion, that had TRULY horrific consequences for many?
As I've said, let's stop using terminology loosely around here, because it mars the picture"
It is all documented in the history books. I tell no lies. The brutal devastation and deportations and executions and killings done by Stalin's troops to Poles , Ukrainians and those in the Baltics as well as with other sundry nationalities lying in the track of the Russian onslaught.
Let's add the killing and imprisonmentof Stalin's own troops simply for being in the lands occupied by Germany. To him they were 'suspect'. Further the degradation done by Stalin's soldier to those liberated by the German occupiers. Some soldiers acted like animals raping and killing the civilian populations. There are memories of that that are still raw. This occurred in Dresden when that city was 'freed'.
And last but not least which probably was the greatest affect on Europe in the post-war period and continues with us today was the subjugation and 'imprisonment' of various East European countries under the Russian boot. That was Russia's 'gift' to Europe.
The liberation of Europe indeed came with a price and Europe and the world is still paying for it today. Mr. Putin of course will not acknowledge the terrible wrongs his country did during the war and after thus showing how his grand statements of 'victory' ring so hollow with hypocrisy.
Yes, Russia came and freed Europe from an oppressor but they too became one and left a great desolation. One can only surmise what kind of a Europe we would have seen if Russia's now broken east European 'experiment' went West. A tragedy no doubt in the quest to keep democratic freedoms active in the world.
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.
