Is the West gearing up to invade Russia once again?

[keymone2]

more likely the West just considers russia a monkey with grenade and tries to isolate it so that it can't do much damage when it blows up. and it will blow up sooner or later.

[deisik]

more likely the West just considers russia a monkey with grenade and tries to isolate it so that it can't do much damage when it blows up. and it will blow up sooner or later.

For how long have you been frozen?

Such talks (about Russia "blowing up sooner or later") were on the agenda in the 90s. But as time passes, it becomes more interesting if the USA is not gonna blow up any time soon...

[keymone2]

For how long have you been frozen?

Such talks (about Russia "blowing up sooner or later") were on the agenda in the 90s. But as time passes, it becomes more interesting if the USA is not gonna blow up any time soon...

yes, since end of 90s when Putin started his climb to power and restoration of empire. every tyranny blows up at some point.

USA might blow up too but there is smaller chance of that happening. people in USA are actually enjoying a better country by most standards, economy of USA is huge and military power is unmatched by combined power of next couple countries on the list. those are not signs of "this country will fail any time soon". yes people can hate how USA is getting involved in all kinds of conflicts but do you see USA annexing territories or setting up puppet governments anywhere? difference between USA intervention and Russia intervention is that USA eventually leaves.

Russia on the other hand has practically destroyed it's economy by dutch disease making 70% of budget come from selling oil and gas. Things Russia is producing cannot compete on any market outside of Russia. It is increasingly becoming a police state where you can't even gather to protest against anything. Any opposition is being squashed and opposing media being taken over or closed or banned. And now you have russia fueling terrorism war in eastern part of ukraine, russian weapons are being found in possession of HAMAS and open support of tyrannical regimes like Assad's. I urge you to just go through american billionaires and russian billionaires and compare how did they amassed their fortunes - this is the real difference between USA politics and Russia politics.

[Nemo1024]

yes, since end of 90s when Putin started his climb to power and restoration of empire. every tyranny blows up at some point.

I find you choice of wording very telling.

Historically, over the course of the last 600 years, every Russian ruler that could challenge the West, that could unite Russia and make it stronger was painted as tyrant by the Western propaganda machine. Conversely when Russia was on a brink of collapse and turmoil, when its ruler was weak, it was praised by the West.

There mere fact that the West goes out of its way to demonise Putin and paint him as tyrant shows that Russia is on the right track of revival.

[keymone2]

There mere fact that the West goes out of its way to demonise Putin and paint him as tyrant shows that Russia is on the right track of revival.

i love how West is always demonized even though people in general live better lives, have less worries about their future and social security. meanwhile in countries where West is demonized like Russia people are shit that must serve their masters in kremlin, large percentage lives in poverty, education system, healthcare system, municipal system, quality of services and life in general is shit are most importantly nobody is allowed to protest against that.

well, if you call that "track of revival" then have a good journey.

P.S. it's also funny how you aggregate european world into "the West" across last 6 centuries. like it was always one big evil force. learn history mate.

[niothor]

Peace loving russia:

http://www.thenews.pl/1/10/Artykul/178716,Poland-demands-Zhirinovsky-comments-explanation

“The Baltic States and Poland are doomed. They will be wiped out. Nothing will remain there,” Zhirinovsky, leader of the nationalist Liberal Democratic Party of Russia told Russian state television on Monday, adding, in the wake of the escalating conflict in Ukraine, that “they will be wiped out. Nothing will remain there. The heads of these dwarf states should think who they are.”

[deisik]

For how long have you been frozen?

Such talks (about Russia "blowing up sooner or later") were on the agenda in the 90s. But as time passes, it becomes more interesting if the USA is not gonna blow up any time soon...

yes, since end of 90s when Putin started his climb to power and restoration of empire. every tyranny blows up at some point.

USA might blow up too but there is smaller chance of that happening. people in USA are actually enjoying a better country by most standards, economy of USA is huge and military power is unmatched by combined power of next couple countries on the list. those are not signs of "this country will fail any time soon". yes people can hate how USA is getting involved in all kinds of conflicts but do you see USA annexing territories or setting up puppet governments anywhere? difference between USA intervention and Russia intervention is that USA eventually leaves.

Who could have thought in the mid-80s that the USSR will perish in just a few years?

but do you see USA annexing territories or setting up puppet governments anywhere? difference between USA intervention and Russia intervention is that USA eventually leaves.

I don't see the USA annexing territories, but I do see them setting up puppet governments (Afghanistan, Iraq, just to name a few)...

[Balthazar]

Peace loving russia:

http://www.thenews.pl/1/10/Artykul/178716,Poland-demands-Zhirinovsky-comments-explanation

“The Baltic States and Poland are doomed. They will be wiped out. Nothing will remain there,” Zhirinovsky, leader of the nationalist Liberal Democratic Party of Russia told Russian state television on Monday, adding, in the wake of the escalating conflict in Ukraine, that “they will be wiped out. Nothing will remain there. The heads of these dwarf states should think who they are.”

Lol, so "exact" translation... Yep, removal of few words is able to turn any statement into propaganda

It seems that you need to see the source:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGA9HpjX1kM

I think that your russian is well enough to understand that.

[keymone2]

I don't see the USA annexing territories, but I do see them setting up puppet governments (Afghanistan, Iraq, just to name a few)...

do tell me about puppet governments in Afghanistan and Iraq and how they compare to puppet governments of Russia in Abkhazia, Osetia and Crimea. i'm sure you will find many surprising discoveries learning something on the topic.

It seems that you need to see the source:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGA9HpjX1kM

which few words do you think are missing? maybe you mean "in summer we will have to do cluster bombings of baltic countries and show them 1945 yet again" or do you mean "they should only blame themselves for what we will do to them because russia can't allow NATO close to it's borders" or do you mean "third world war has already started and the result will be decided not by Obama but by Putin and heads of those dwarf states should think what they are doing"?

[Balthazar]

Well, maybe there are some words about NATO bases? About fighter jets, bombers and some other things?

Actually I seen this picture many times:



Have a nice day.

[niothor]

Peace loving russia:

http://www.thenews.pl/1/10/Artykul/178716,Poland-demands-Zhirinovsky-comments-explanation

“The Baltic States and Poland are doomed. They will be wiped out. Nothing will remain there,” Zhirinovsky, leader of the nationalist Liberal Democratic Party of Russia told Russian state television on Monday, adding, in the wake of the escalating conflict in Ukraine, that “they will be wiped out. Nothing will remain there. The heads of these dwarf states should think who they are.”

Lol, so "exact" translation... Yep, removal of few words is able to turn any statement into propaganda

It seems that you need to see the source:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGA9HpjX1kM

I think that your russian is well enough to understand that.

Actually the interview is worse than that fragment..
Fortunately bot Zhirinovsky and Rogozin are just some sad clowns.

[niothor]

Well, maybe there are some words about NATO bases? About fighter jets, bombers and some other things?

Actually I seen this picture many times:



Have a nice day.

I see no cuba on that map

[keymone2]

Well, maybe there are some words about NATO bases? About fighter jets, bombers and some other things?

as long as those bases are within NATO territory - why do you care? it is Russia that actively fuels conflicts around it's borders to create buffer zones of instability as a way to prevent countries to join NATO. and countries want to join NATO to defend against Russia exactly because of such actions. a great preventive tactic - so that NATO can't come closer lets start killing thousands of civilians in terrorist/rebel wars all around our borders. think of who you're defending.

[deisik]

I don't see the USA annexing territories, but I do see them setting up puppet governments (Afghanistan, Iraq, just to name a few)...

do tell me about puppet governments in Afghanistan and Iraq and how they compare to puppet governments of Russia in Abkhazia, Osetia and Crimea. i'm sure you will find many surprising discoveries learning something on the topic.

You made a statement, i.e. you don't see the USA setting up puppet governments, and now you try to make me abandon that point and switch to another. How come?

Crimea is now part of Russia, so it is beyond question for obvious reasons (I hope), Abkhazia and South Ossetia are different in this respect, and I wouldn't call Abkhazian government and president Russian puppets. You just lack the knowledge about the people living there, this (i.e. puppetry) just wouldn't work out the way you want it to appear...

[keymone2]

You made a statement, i.e. you don't see the USA setting up puppet governments, and now you try to make me abandon that point and switch to another. How come?

Crimea is now part of Russia, so it is beyond question for obvious reasons (I hope), Abkhazia and South Ossetia are different in this respect, and I wouldn't call Abkhazian government and president Russian puppets. You just lack the knowledge about the people living there, this (i.e. puppetry) just wouldn't work out the way you want it to appear...

i try to make you analyze your own words. i made statement and i still stand by it. the fact that you *can* call any government USA puppet because you don't like the way it came to power or you don't like it's policies - does not actually make it USA puppet. there are very specific properties of puppet governments and while you can still claim that USA is good in covering it's tracks this borderlines on conspiracy that is so popular with bitcoin-related communities.

so instead of adopting this binary yes/no categorization let's analyze to which extent would you call this or that government a puppet.

let's see: crimean parliament gets captured by what obviously is a special forces operation and new premier minister is elected, effectively a head of state in crimea. and who is that head of state? it's extremely pro-russian politician that had only 4% support of population during last elections. that head of state organizes referendum to join russia without even trying to pretend to want independence.

and you are comparing that to "puppet" governments in iraq and afghanistan? those that have no american heritage and actually organize proper elections? did iraq or afghanistan become USA territory? when did that happen?

as for Abkhazia and Osetia - governments that are mostly russian ex-military created during russian war against georgia. you can google the rest yourself, i bet you're not stupid.

[Nemo1024]

Well, maybe there are some words about NATO bases? About fighter jets, bombers and some other things?

as long as those bases are within NATO territory - why do you care? it is Russia that actively fuels conflicts around it's borders to create buffer zones of instability as a way to prevent countries to join NATO. and countries want to join NATO to defend against Russia exactly because of such actions. a great preventive tactic - so that NATO can't come closer lets start killing thousands of civilians in terrorist/rebel wars all around our borders. think of who you're defending.

You do understand that you write a complete nonsense? Russia is interested in stable states at its borders. The only one benefiting from the zones of instability, is NATO (read US, UK), as instability would threaten to overflow into Russia itself. This coupled with a strong 5th column movement within Russia, would make it more susceptible to a colour revolution. I am defending a rather peaceful nation that takes to arms to defend itself and only when a conflict is brought onto its doorstep. Did you forget all the lengths and all the diplomatic effort that Russia went and is still going to to prevent the conflict, to work out a peaceful mutually-beneficial solution?

[deisik]

You made a statement, i.e. you don't see the USA setting up puppet governments, and now you try to make me abandon that point and switch to another. How come?

Crimea is now part of Russia, so it is beyond question for obvious reasons (I hope), Abkhazia and South Ossetia are different in this respect, and I wouldn't call Abkhazian government and president Russian puppets. You just lack the knowledge about the people living there, this (i.e. puppetry) just wouldn't work out the way you want it to appear...

i try to make you analyze your own words. i made statement and i still stand by it. the fact that you *can* call any government USA puppet because you don't like the way it came to power or you don't like it's policies - does not actually make it USA puppet. there are very specific properties of puppet governments and while you can still claim that USA is good in covering it's tracks this borderlines on conspiracy that is so popular with bitcoin-related communities.

At first you tried to quickly switch the conversation to another topic, and now you are trying to implicitly impute to me what I wouldn't say. "The fact that..." is not a fact but just your pretense. The true fact is I wouldn't call any government the US puppet just on the grounds that I don't like "the way it came to power" or "its policies". So let's try again dude!

[keymone2]

At first you tried to quickly switch the conversation to another topic, and now you are trying to implicitly impute to me what I wouldn't say. "The fact that..." is not a fact but just your pretense. The true fact is I wouldn't call any government the US puppet just on the grounds that I don't like "the way it came to power" or "its policies". So let's try again dude!

oh so you're crying because i hurt your little feelings? well go on and read my message again replacing word "you" with word "one". i still mean you because you did exactly what i've described but of course since the butthurt doesn't allow you to read past that sentence you are free to assume i wasn't talking about you. so yes, let's try again - this time try to read until the end.

You do understand that you write a complete nonsense? Russia is interested in stable states at its borders. The only one benefiting from the zones of instability, is NATO (read US, UK), as instability would threaten to overflow into Russia itself. This coupled with a strong 5th column movement within Russia, would make it more susceptible to a colour revolution. I am defending a rather peaceful nation that takes to arms to defend itself and only when a conflict is brought onto its doorstep. Did you forget all the lengths and all the diplomatic effort that Russia went and is still going to to prevent the conflict, to work out a peaceful mutually-beneficial solution?

"Russia is interested in stable states at its borders." doesn't seem like it considering the endless armenia/azerbaijan conflict, georgia/abkhazia/osetia conflict and now ukraine conflict - all of those russia has at least some guilt of escalation.

"instability would threaten to overflow into Russia" instability exported from russia can't flow back to russia because all operations are being executed by russian GRU/FSB/ex-KGB operatives

and russia does benefit from instability because NATO cannot extend into countries with ongoing conflicts. or do you think it is a coincidence when georgia started considering to join NATO - russia immediately escalated and went to war with georgia?

"all the diplomatic effort that Russia went and is still going to to prevent the conflict" you mean endless blabbering of churkin about fascists in ukraine and ignoring all the evidence of conflict being started and escalated by russian ex-military/ex-kgb? or do you mean giving asylum to yanukovich - the obviously corrupt and criminal previous president? or do you mean allowing terrorist organizations LNR and DNR to have recruiting offices in moscow and other cities of russia?

you know what would be peaceful and mutually benefitting scenario? if russia did anything to ensure safety of it's borders and allowed international organizations to monitor that terrorists aren't getting any weapons from russia. if russia at least condemned terrorists taking up weapons and killing civilians and proclaimed that it is not a good way to influence political situation.

no, what matters to russia is to destroy economy of ukraine and keep it on a short leash, to establish a puppet government and not allow people of ukraine to ever make a choice about their country.

[bryant.coleman]

as for Abkhazia and Osetia - governments that are mostly russian ex-military created during russian war against georgia. you can google the rest yourself, i bet you're not stupid.

Have you forgot that the War in Abkhazia happened at a time (1992-93) when Russia was ruled by an American puppet (Boris Yeltsin, the drunkard)? The War in South Ossetia (1991-92) also happened at that time. There no Russian government intervention there, although plenty of Russian mercenaries fought (on both sides) for economic considerations.

[tee-rex]

no, what matters to russia is to destroy economy of ukraine and keep it on a short leash, to establish a puppet government and not allow people of ukraine to ever make a choice about their country.

Russian and Ukrainian economies are closely intertwined, so it hurts Russia if Ukrainian economy is not well off since Russia is the largest trade partner of Ukraine. As of 2012, Russia's share was about 30% of all Ukrainian foreign trade (28% for exports and 31% for imports).