what things does Russian really have?

[Balthazar]

[1714035063]

1714035063

[1714035063]

1714035063

[AJMax]

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Russia+former+planet+pluto+yep+the+worlds+largest+country_7afcac_4998027.jpg

Indeed, should russia resolve its birth rate problem and get back on track building a legitimate economy that is not solely dependent on resource export, they have almost infinite potential growth.

Siberia is a treasure trove of everything, assuming they can somehow resolve the issue of livability in those regions. The vastness of those regions can only be matched in the world if US merges with Canada in the future and opens up canada's northern regions to inhabitation and resource management.

Russia right now is getting back on its feet after decades of political instability nevermind national depression after USSR. As a western citizen, I do understand that Russians can be belligerent and not easy to get along with - but we must understand that russians in the end are fundamentally concerned with preservation of their people and their state. Many of its ills are not only social and cultural, but also in large part connected to the influx of foreign criminals with direct links to criminal groups in Caucasus, such as Azerbaijani and georgian as well as chechens. Local criminal groups are directly linked to the government, but these foreign groups are rampant and respect no russians.

I do know that there are many russian trolls in these forums, some paid off by the state. If their idea is to vilinize the west with trifling threads such as 'west is gearing up to attack russia', I can guarentee that no western leader is day dreaming about goose step marching down the red square. Western response to russian actions are largely reactive and defensive - why else would a 'imperialistic' power set up military bases around russian border nations and merely wait?

The fundamental idea behind western posture towards russia is one of wariness and mistrust, not out right aggression or violent militarism. We try to contain or other wise hinder russia when it seems they are becoming belligerent and invasive (annexaction of crimea), but the posture is a defensive one, not rape pillage and kill.

Given russian history, it is understandable that they are belligerent towards perceived threats. However, the ongoing rivalry between west and russia is counterproductive to both sides who will in the future increasingly find themselves arrayed against same enemies, on a cultural and racial level. Actually, they already are.

It's time to flip the chess board around and change west-russian relations for the better. No one looks at Russians and think 'oh I see an Asian/Middle Easterner/African/non-white'. Russia must understand that western mentality against russia is primarily defensive and reactive, and also realize (probably already do but foolishly thinks they can take advantage of the west for long) that their chief historical and real enemy lies to the south and east.

Russians have a long proud history of destroying invaders and defending itself against threats. I can respect their unique tenacity and will, but I do believe that it is being leveled in a very counter productive and wrong direction, one that will ultimately leave russia alone and isolated against increasingly violent non-western enemies.

I do hope that in the future we Americans and Russians can come to see eye to eye and sit on the same table, if not as friends or allies, then at least as associates with more common interests than not. Future demands that it be so, because the world will not hesitate to take advantage of west-russian tit for tat infantile wrangling to advance its own racial and cultural goals that are decidedly anti-western and anti-russian.

[bryant.coleman]

The proposed North American Union (United States + Canada + Mexico) will be having an area of 21,814,526 sq. kms (2.18 billion hectares), compared to 17,098,242 sq.kms for Russia. But still, the NAU will be smaller when compared to the former USSR, which had an area of 22,402,200 sq.kms (2.2 billion hectares).

[ObscureBean]

I've never been there but Russia has got to be one of the best countries to live in. For me Russia is synonymous with nature and I freaking love nature, I've seen so many awesome documentaries on different regions there    

[Okurkabinladin]

Indeed, should russia resolve its birth rate problem and get back on track building a legitimate economy that is not solely dependent on resource export, they have almost infinite potential growth.

Siberia is a treasure trove of everything, assuming they can somehow resolve the issue of livability in those regions. The vastness of those regions can only be matched in the world if US merges with Canada in the future and opens up canada's northern regions to inhabitation and resource management.

Russia right now is getting back on its feet after decades of political instability nevermind national depression after USSR. As a western citizen, I do understand that Russians can be belligerent and not easy to get along with - but we must understand that russians in the end are fundamentally concerned with preservation of their people and their state. Many of its ills are not only social and cultural, but also in large part connected to the influx of foreign criminals with direct links to criminal groups in Caucasus, such as Azerbaijani and georgian as well as chechens. Local criminal groups are directly linked to the government, but these foreign groups are rampant and respect no russians.

I do know that there are many russian trolls in these forums, some paid off by the state. If their idea is to vilinize the west with trifling threads such as 'west is gearing up to attack russia', I can guarentee that no western leader is day dreaming about goose step marching down the red square. Western response to russian actions are largely reactive and defensive - why else would a 'imperialistic' power set up military bases around russian border nations and merely wait?

The fundamental idea behind western posture towards russia is one of wariness and mistrust, not out right aggression or violent militarism. We try to contain or other wise hinder russia when it seems they are becoming belligerent and invasive (annexaction of crimea), but the posture is a defensive one, not rape pillage and kill.

Given russian history, it is understandable that they are belligerent towards perceived threats. However, the ongoing rivalry between west and russia is counterproductive to both sides who will in the future increasingly find themselves arrayed against same enemies, on a cultural and racial level. Actually, they already are.

It's time to flip the chess board around and change west-russian relations for the better. No one looks at Russians and think 'oh I see an Asian/Middle Easterner/African/non-white'. Russia must understand that western mentality against russia is primarily defensive and reactive, and also realize (probably already do but foolishly thinks they can take advantage of the west for long) that their chief historical and real enemy lies to the south and east.

Russians have a long proud history of destroying invaders and defending itself against threats. I can respect their unique tenacity and will, but I do believe that it is being leveled in a very counter productive and wrong direction, one that will ultimately leave russia alone and isolated against increasingly violent non-western enemies.

I do hope that in the future we Americans and Russians can come to see eye to eye and sit on the same table, if not as friends or allies, then at least as associates with more common interests than not. Future demands that it be so, because the world will not hesitate to take advantage of west-russian tit for tat infantile wrangling to advance its own racial and cultural goals that are decidedly anti-western and anti-russian.

You make some good point, but also got power dynamics upside down   Repeatedly, russian nations aspired to be accepted by the west, due to shared culture, religion and yes, even race. How have that ended up for Russians?

In 13th century western Crusaders and Poles backstabbed and occupied modern day western Ukraine and Belarus, while the rest of the nation faced genocide from Mongolic Empire.

In 17th century just after finally subduing eastern Nomads, the ruling dynasty in Russia died out, again Westerners attacked from west and north. Poles burned down Moscow.

In 18th century resurgent Russia saw itself as Third Rome (after collapse of Byzantines at the hand of Turks) and protectors of all Christians, educated Russians considered it norm to speak and write in French (as natural successor of latin). Shortly thereafter Moscow was burned down by Napoleon.

In early 20th century basically the same story repeated again, when Germans (whose culture was again adored as opposed to plebean "muzhik" nature of rural Russians) exported Jew-Kalmyk Lenin into war torn country, raping it internally for generations to come.

And I am not even getting into cold war or attempts at dissecting Russia in the nineties from Anglosaxons. As Madeleine Albright (Czech-jewish American), then Secretary of State under Bill Clinton have said: "Russia is way too large to by ruled by single nation." Thats how Westerners treat their partners 

You already saw open, extended hand of Russia and every time you ended up pissing all over it.

Even, as non-Russian I see clearly, that from their viewpoint Chinese are more reliable and honest partners.

[AJMax]

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Russia+former+planet+pluto+yep+the+worlds+largest+country_7afcac_4998027.jpg

Indeed, should russia resolve its birth rate problem and get back on track building a legitimate economy that is not solely dependent on resource export, they have almost infinite potential growth.

Siberia is a treasure trove of everything, assuming they can somehow resolve the issue of livability in those regions. The vastness of those regions can only be matched in the world if US merges with Canada in the future and opens up canada's northern regions to inhabitation and resource management.

Russia right now is getting back on its feet after decades of political instability nevermind national depression after USSR. As a western citizen, I do understand that Russians can be belligerent and not easy to get along with - but we must understand that russians in the end are fundamentally concerned with preservation of their people and their state. Many of its ills are not only social and cultural, but also in large part connected to the influx of foreign criminals with direct links to criminal groups in Caucasus, such as Azerbaijani and georgian as well as chechens. Local criminal groups are directly linked to the government, but these foreign groups are rampant and respect no russians.

I do know that there are many russian trolls in these forums, some paid off by the state. If their idea is to vilinize the west with trifling threads such as 'west is gearing up to attack russia', I can guarentee that no western leader is day dreaming about goose step marching down the red square. Western response to russian actions are largely reactive and defensive - why else would a 'imperialistic' power set up military bases around russian border nations and merely wait?

The fundamental idea behind western posture towards russia is one of wariness and mistrust, not out right aggression or violent militarism. We try to contain or other wise hinder russia when it seems they are becoming belligerent and invasive (annexaction of crimea), but the posture is a defensive one, not rape pillage and kill.

Given russian history, it is understandable that they are belligerent towards perceived threats. However, the ongoing rivalry between west and russia is counterproductive to both sides who will in the future increasingly find themselves arrayed against same enemies, on a cultural and racial level. Actually, they already are.

It's time to flip the chess board around and change west-russian relations for the better. No one looks at Russians and think 'oh I see an Asian/Middle Easterner/African/non-white'. Russia must understand that western mentality against russia is primarily defensive and reactive, and also realize (probably already do but foolishly thinks they can take advantage of the west for long) that their chief historical and real enemy lies to the south and east.

Russians have a long proud history of destroying invaders and defending itself against threats. I can respect their unique tenacity and will, but I do believe that it is being leveled in a very counter productive and wrong direction, one that will ultimately leave russia alone and isolated against increasingly violent non-western enemies.

I do hope that in the future we Americans and Russians can come to see eye to eye and sit on the same table, if not as friends or allies, then at least as associates with more common interests than not. Future demands that it be so, because the world will not hesitate to take advantage of west-russian tit for tat infantile wrangling to advance its own racial and cultural goals that are decidedly anti-western and anti-russian.

You make some good point, but also got power dynamics upside down   Repeatedly, russian nations aspired to be accepted by the west, due to shared culture, religion and yes, even race. How have that ended up for Russians?

In 13th century western Crusaders and Poles backstabbed and occupied modern day western Ukraine and Belarus, while the rest of the nation faced genocide from Mongolic Empire.

In 17th century just after finally subduing eastern Nomads, the ruling dynasty in Russia died out, again Westerners attacked from west and north. Poles burned down Moscow.

In 18th century resurgent Russia saw itself as Third Rome (after collapse of Byzantines at the hand of Turks) and protectors of all Christians, educated Russians considered it norm to speak and write in French (as natural successor of latin). Shortly thereafter Moscow was burned down by Napoleon.

In early 20th century basically the same story repeated again, when Germans (whose culture was again adored as opposed to plebean "muzhik" nature of rural Russians) exported Jew-Kalmyk Lenin into war torn country, raping it internally for generations to come.

And I am not even getting into cold war or attempts at dissecting Russia in the nineties from Anglosaxons. As Madeleine Albright (Czech-jewish American), then Secretary of State under Bill Clinton have said: "Russia is way too large to by ruled by single nation." Thats how Westerners treat their partners 

You already saw open, extended hand of Russia and every time you ended up pissing all over it.

Even, as non-Russian I see clearly, that from their viewpoint Chinese are more reliable and honest partners.

You mention instances where west initiated invasions of russia - but putting nazi's aside (ones that entirety of the west banded together to eliminate), rest are by products of middle ages and factors that went along with it - religion, primarily.

No one today is expecting the pontiff of rome or, by some bizarre reasoning, protestant groups to initiate a crusade to purge the 'heretics' of russian orthodoxy. This is actually a factor that is overshadowed when people speak of west-russian rivalry. Major historical source of enmity is gone.

More importantly, no western country wanted or succeeded in subjugating or ruling over russia and russian people for a simple reason: Their actions are primarily motivated by wariness of a large, imposing russian nation right on their borders with far greater manpower than any single or group of smaller european nation. This does not justify the invasions - but I am sure russians understand the sentiment of wariness that comes with having a potential threat on their borders to say the least.

You mentioned that russian wanted to be accepted and respected by the west, and that they strive to absorb western ways and culture. While the fact that they strove to learn western ways are true, their primary motive is same as anyone: To absorb what needs to be learned and strengthen their own position. More to the point, the belligerence and outwardly threatening and posturing behavior regardless of their fetish for german machines/french wine and literature/english lifestyle, etc etc obviously concerns the west far more, as it should be for any nation.

In essence, Russia is attempt to approach and create rapport purely on its own terms, while true exchange and rapport can only be created when both sides make certain compromises and reach an understanding of mutual common ground. Russia's greatest damage and carnage came not from the west on a fundamental level, because no matter how many hostilities commenced, aside from deranged nazis no one was truly dreaming of completely subjugating russia and killing off all russians. Now, the racial enemies to the east and south have no such scruples. How many russians and ukrainians where kidnapped by tartar raids to be enslaved? No one needs to even mention the threats of tamerlane and mongolic empire that almost completely trampled over russian people and many say irreparably damaged russian psyche at a fundamental level.

From russian historical point of view, west could indeed be viewed as legitimate enemies. However, you fail to mention that no western power held/wanted to hold russian under its yoke for the simple reason that fundamental thinking is different from that of rampaging enemies to the east and south - it is born out of caution and reactive hostility. Whether they succeeded in burning down moscow several times does not change the fact that they made little attempt to subjugate russia as a whole or commit genocide on a whole scale aside from nazis.

Why do I insist upon this view point, despite the historical evidences you point out? Because many soviet diplomats to the west have also made similar observations upon their return to the motherland after serving overseas - that the fundamental western approach to russia is born out of caution and wariness, not the kind of subjugation tyranny that were born from the east and south of russia. No matter the scale of hostilities in the past, the fundamental difference in mentality means that russia has far better future walking side by side with the west rather than continuously expressing hostility towards those who by world's standards are cousins.

It is agreed that west must also take a few steps to accept russians for who they are and start respecting their culture, as much as russians have. However, russian infantile behavior in reactive nationalism and general belligerence when dealing with the west, while meekly following along the leads of china and other non-western nations makes this difficult to respect from western point of view. Ignore for the moment all the mouthy liberals in the west - trust me a lot of westerners agree in public and hold quiet but fierce disdain for such people in private. The key point is that russia is too stubborn in counterproductive fashion when dealing with the west, wholly conciliatory and sometimes even seemingly supine towards those in the east and south who want to use and kill russians on racial and cultural level. This creates the impression that russian ultimately only respect brutality and strength - thus creating an enemy of russia rather than a potential ally. Conflict between west and russia is virtually one of fraternal conflict - closer you are, greater the damage, but in the end, no one can deny the relatively close relations between west and russia both culturally and racially.

Russian bitterness towards west for supposedly unreciprocated affection (why the fck does this start to sound like a woman pining for her ideal suitor) is understandable, but only if one considers russian position and that only. This insistence on doing things purely on russian terms is absolutely necessary for survival and victory - but not when you are trying to make friends or associates. At the same time, russia should never surrender who it is just to fit in - a combination of firm statement on uncompromising russian identity combined with willingness to accept west as a partner for who it is; this is what is needed. Given that russia is taking over someone's home and generally being hostile towards the west at the moment while seemingly bowing to chinese influence - because chinese are russian's cultural and racial enemies, makes this very very difficult for the west to regard russia as anything other than opportunistic enemies.

Future demands thus: That Russia revive itself and preserve its identity and strength, and at the same time, have the big enough heart and wisdom to accept west for what it is and consider the west as partners and associates to begin with, if not friends. Same is true for the west. No one should be thinking russia is absorbed in western culture - because russia is uniquely strong and reliable in its own way BECAUSE it is russian. Many in the west are beginning to see this, and you will find many former military officials in the west not so secretly holding a sense of nostalgia when soviet union was a 'reliable' rival - stubborn and hostile, but honorable and straightforward in its own strange way.



 
Chinese as reliable and honest? LOL

With respect to russian 'wisdom' in that regard, they are severely mistaken. I hope the silvonik ruling class are aware of this error in russia - and take steps to reach out to potential allies in the west with similar view points and common goals.

[Okurkabinladin]

You mention instances where west initiated invasions of russia - but putting nazi's aside (ones that entirety of the west banded together to eliminate), rest are by products of middle ages and factors that went along with it - religion, primarily.

No one today is expecting the pontiff of rome or, by some bizarre reasoning, protestant groups to initiate a crusade to purge the 'heretics' of russian orthodoxy. This is actually a factor that is overshadowed when people speak of west-russian rivalry. Major historical source of enmity is gone.

More importantly, no western country wanted or succeeded in subjugating or ruling over russia and russian people for a simple reason: Their actions are primarily motivated by wariness of a large, imposing russian nation right on their borders with far greater manpower than any single or group of smaller european nation. This does not justify the invasions - but I am sure russians understand the sentiment of wariness that comes with having a potential threat on their borders to say the least.

AFAIK, west banded together against Reich only after United States were directly challenged by Nazi Germany, german war machine wouldnt be able to start working in the first place, if not for western money and support - as bulwark against "eastern threat". You are quick to dismiss countless invasions and millions of dead Slavs, Kalmyks, Tatars, Caucasians and even Jews to "old mistakes". Yet geopolitics never changes and you perfectly described why. Russia is still considered too large and too strong, it will never be accepted as a partner unless it is depopulated and teritorially dissected first. US politicians are not even hiding it and as late as in the nineties, they found enough collaborators, traitors and naive idealists, who nearly made it happen. It is irrelevant how you will judge Putin - you are outsider. What matter is, that every person that stayed in the coutry understands, that without his aides and master plan, there would be no Russia today. Just more easily replaceable slaves, cheap resources and markets, that the west urgently needs.

You can speculate about it as much as you want, but even your diction betrays you. At no point, did you ask the question: What do the Russians/Other side/Partners want. You only mention what THEY MUST DO.

Ending of eternal rivalry between China, Russia and Iran wasnt brought about by mutual sympathies, but by instict of self-preservation in the last decades. Otherwise, Russia would be isolated, crushed and dissected. West has no use for Russia besides cheap resource and labor base - in fact look around this very topic, many members even here see the country exactly as that and its industrous people as little more, than talking apes. Thanks, but no thanks, this is not how friends speak of each other.

That doesnt mean US and Russia have to be enemies.

Just. Leave. Us. Finally. Alone.

[Balthazar]

Chinese as reliable and honest? LOL

Well, there are few examples from my own experience. As far I remember, I had no problem with chinese and japanese sellers... On the other hand, some part of our close western neighbours (you know whom I mean) are repeatedly trying to fool everyone. That's why I'm trying to have no business with them if there are other options.

[Balthazar]

I wouldn't say that this comparison is absolutely correct. You can't simply say that some country has a dictatorship while another is a democracy. Simply because the dictatorship and democracy are not mutually exclusive. This will sound funny, but dictatorship can be democratic.

India never had a military coup, and the governments were elected in without any election fraud or vote rigging. The army is not very powerful in India. Moreover, India is regarded as one of the best examples of parliamentary democracies in the Asian region. China, on the other hand, was an absolute dictatorship until the early 1990s.

I agree that there can be some cases, where the dictatorship and democracy are not mutually exclusive. But that is not the case with both India and China.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6f_sayw0mM   

[aahzmundus]

Except oil and weapon, what things does Russian really have?
We all see that Russian is really weak in recently oil price crash.
The exchange rate of ruble and the inflation in Russian as follow the  oil price crash imply that Russian is just a third - rate country who depends on selling cheap resources.
After the Soviet Union collapsed, the Economic of Russian growth just benefit from the oil price risen.

Weapons, mafia, drugs. Okay that's very stereotypical of me.
Lots of land, huge army, lots of power actually. Rich (You know what I mean) history

[stallion]

Culture, architecture, food, DRINKS, sports, special events, Russian dolls, sexy women and gangsters.

[Nemo1024]

Culture, architecture, food, DRINKS, sports, special events, Russian dolls, sexy women and gangsters.

When you say DRINKS, I hope you mean this:


http://www.ochakovo.ru/en/kvass

Because that's a traditional Russian drink. And it's delicious.

And this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mors_%28drink%29

For stronger stuff, Russians drank mjod (honey ale - mjod is a Russian word for "honey")

For vodka, you have to look further north, to the former Russian lands of Finland.

[Okurkabinladin]

Culture, architecture, food, DRINKS, sports, special events, Russian dolls, sexy women and gangsters.

When you say DRINKS, I hope you mean this:


http://www.ochakovo.ru/en/kvass

Because that's a traditional Russian drink. And it's delicious.

And this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mors_%28drink%29

For stronger stuff, Russians drank mjod (honey ale - mjod is a Russian word for "honey")

For vodka, you have to look further north, to the former Russian lands of Finland.

Distilled honey (called "med" in my place) is absolutely delicious!

[AJMax]

You mention instances where west initiated invasions of russia - but putting nazi's aside (ones that entirety of the west banded together to eliminate), rest are by products of middle ages and factors that went along with it - religion, primarily.

No one today is expecting the pontiff of rome or, by some bizarre reasoning, protestant groups to initiate a crusade to purge the 'heretics' of russian orthodoxy. This is actually a factor that is overshadowed when people speak of west-russian rivalry. Major historical source of enmity is gone.

More importantly, no western country wanted or succeeded in subjugating or ruling over russia and russian people for a simple reason: Their actions are primarily motivated by wariness of a large, imposing russian nation right on their borders with far greater manpower than any single or group of smaller european nation. This does not justify the invasions - but I am sure russians understand the sentiment of wariness that comes with having a potential threat on their borders to say the least.

AFAIK, west banded together against Reich only after United States were directly challenged by Nazi Germany, german war machine wouldnt be able to start working in the first place, if not for western money and support - as bulwark against "eastern threat". You are quick to dismiss countless invasions and millions of dead Slavs, Kalmyks, Tatars, Caucasians and even Jews to "old mistakes". Yet geopolitics never changes and you perfectly described why. Russia is still considered too large and too strong, it will never be accepted as a partner unless it is depopulated and teritorially dissected first. US politicians are not even hiding it and as late as in the nineties, they found enough collaborators, traitors and naive idealists, who nearly made it happen. It is irrelevant how you will judge Putin - you are outsider. What matter is, that every person that stayed in the coutry understands, that without his aides and master plan, there would be no Russia today. Just more easily replaceable slaves, cheap resources and markets, that the west urgently needs.

You can speculate about it as much as you want, but even your diction betrays you. At no point, did you ask the question: What do the Russians/Other side/Partners want. You only mention what THEY MUST DO.

Ending of eternal rivalry between China, Russia and Iran wasnt brought about by mutual sympathies, but by instict of self-preservation in the last decades. Otherwise, Russia would be isolated, crushed and dissected. West has no use for Russia besides cheap resource and labor base - in fact look around this very topic, many members even here see the country exactly as that and its industrous people as little more, than talking apes. Thanks, but no thanks, this is not how friends speak of each other.

That doesnt mean US and Russia have to be enemies.

Just. Leave. Us. Finally. Alone.

http://caravantomidnight.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/nato-russia-war.jpg

Let's leave aside your name and the fact that you are seemingly from senegal, yet pretend to speak for the russian people

What you say regarding how 'US financed third reich' is the same tired old tripe of anti-US blame game based on impulse to mouth off at the perceived enemy (the EVIL west) using whatever excuse you can fabricate to your liking to justify such childish thoughts. Anyone can see that. Bullsht transcends cultural and racial boundaries, as you have just amply demonstrated. By same logic, I can blame the russians or chinese for how africa and south America is today due to their inordinate amount of 'aid' given while masquerading under the guise of 'socialist solidarity' 'anti imperialism' while they themselves have (and still!) are siphoning off resources and using those people to their liking with full willing compliance of blind fools who think as you do. Many of those regimes who received such 'help' wound up being authoritarian socialist dictatorships that exploit their people in ways capitalists could only wish for. All while you manipulate and cajole locals with sweet talks of false empowerment that in the end turns against the most disadvantaged in their own country first and foremost.

Also, your attempts at twisting my words by saying I am 'disregarding' past actions as 'old mistakes' also reveals, by your own diction, a severely crippling bias from a very disrespectful viewpoint that inherently seeks to antagonize and start sht. I have specifically acknowledged the invasions and details of the crimes committed against the russian people - yet I have also addressed why such things differ from the threats russia faces from the south and the east, and why russia hopefully could come around to understanding that while they are fully justified in asking for acknowledgement of the past, it is counter productive and misunderstood action to believe that the west is either willing or wanting to 'enslave' russia.

You also place the lion's share of the blame for russia's post cold war crisis on the west once again - conveniently forgetting that local and border straddling criminals were instrumental in taking advantage of russia's momentary weakness and tearing apart their social fabric to the point where it faced an existential crisis. It is true that west sought to take advantage and some what attempted to 'subjugate' russia, or rather blunt its sharp edges to the point where it would be turned into something close to a vassal state - yet you might be surprised to find out that once such initiatives were planned and actually attempted to get off the ground, many people found out that russia didn't need any help in screwing itself over in ways that those EVIL imperialists could only dream of. In the end, west expanded its influence but I don't know how anyone could try to fabricate the idea that west wanted to goosestep march down to kremlin or invade russian borders. West has not invaded russia when it would have been ideal to do so - I doubt that same would have been true if the tables were turned. The talk about 'depopulation' and 'enslavement' doesn't even merit a response - if you want to keep trying to paint another as villain, you would do well to not speak from fantasies that serve to further fabricate your already full self-masturbatory lies. West could scarcely have taken advantage of russia more than how much they screwed themselves over, and frankly as long as russia didn't remain a threat, no one was pipe dreaming of conquering russia or 'enslaving' it population. If you keep talking about how it is 'enslavement' to maybe, just maybe deviate a little from 'my way or high way' attitude, than it is obvious that ANYTHING is capable of being villainized  as 'oppression'. Your vast fantasy of 'western conspiracy against russia' is childish finger pointing at best - its fake sense of insight revealing more about what you don't know and don't want to know, better than what you supposedly know.

You presume to tell me what my 'diction' tells you, while fully revealing your intention to merely twist my words according to your own perceptions into what fits your view point. I have addressed what both russia AND west must do, despite their misgivings regarding the necessary actions involved. What MUST BE is often different from what one wants, and having a big heart and backbone to follow through with doing what needs to be done must be applied equally on both parties. The basic mentality of the west is that Russia, being proud or otherwise, is something they can live with - however, your tone betrays a sense of wounded aggressor's sentiment that you are trying to mask - defeated aggression as 'victims of oppression' since you are clearly unwilling to accept that anyone aside from yourself could be on equally strong standing both on cultural, psychological, and racial level. West is confident and secure in its own identity and values - something that people with your kind of mentality clearly cannot stand. At the very least, it is very similar to putting a bucket of ice next to a fireplace and complaining that it melts - and therefore the fireplace is evil. At best, it is patently naive and ignorant - most likely it is a punishable offense due to the kind of disrespect it displays in its patent disregard for others, and mouthy disrespect it represents. At that point, your own attitude almost seem to justify actions of third reich in regards to jews or russians, russian actions in chechnya, or  the slavery of africans by arabs.

I consider the facts of what needs to be done, and accept that regardless of west or russia, they must both conduct themselves beyond their immediate wants and impulses to come to a common ground and understanding. The fact that you believe you are doing told what to do (you aren't even russian but that's somehow beside the point) so reflexively and childishly, while completely disregarding the fact that the other side is also making efforts to accommodate russian situation reveals a clear hostile intent that requires retaliation. There is only so far anyone can go to accommodate for the sake of negotiations.

In the end, what is needed is destruction of mindless hostile attitude and unwillingness to face the truth of the matter, both in west and russia. What both sides needs is true strength to establish their respective positons, and come to see eye to eye enough that they could at least consider each other associates. West can live with the fact that russia will eye us with suspicion and a bit of necessary hostility of one nation state against another - west fully acknowledges russian will and identity that has carried it thus far. However, russia cannot seem to acknowledge or respect west (or anyone) to the necessary degree that only a strong sense of self-confidence and innate strength can provide - russia always seem to go out of its way to throw a fit no matter where in the world west conducts its business, even within our own borders. In essence, it gives a strong impression that they cannot be comfortable unless they are somehow able to control or influence the actions of another on their own terms ONLY.  

I base my observations, actions, and supposed 'assumptions' on your attitude and tone, plus the facts of the world as they are. If the west was truly trying to enslave, invade, or otherwise act as an outright aggressor, there is little reason to pass up chances in history that it did - and with fully knowledge of the potential benefits of such actions were it actually acting as an imperialist in its genuine form. The inherent sense of aggression and arrogance present in hearts of men and women are corrected, disciplined, and directed by a greater sense of purpose and standards in the west far more than other parts of the world - hence its reluctance to commit itself fully to fascism or genocide, unlike mongolic empire, african empires and its treatments of mass enslavement of those they conquered, or the arab muslim world and their continued slavery practice that still exists today in barely concealed form in the millions of indentured servants. I do not need to invent fanciful self-rationalizing story of 'intent to enslave' while it is clear that slavery and oppression exists in far greater quantity, both openly and covertly, outside of the western world. Also, as ridiculous as it sounds, the fact is those who aligned with the west by majority came out as winners from the cold war, while the other camp mostly came out impoverished, weak, confused, and in desperate straits of political instability. This is simply due to the fact that western approach and basic mentailty isn't quite as oppressive or imperialistic as you fantasize (primarily to find a convenient target to blame, while eagerly praising your own dictators and actual oppressors practically kneeling before them to suck them off like a slave). Next time you feel you can run your mouth about such things, you are advised to watch yourself well. Offense committed is not easily forgotten.

Did west commit crimes of mass murder, conquest, and invasions? Yes. Did the rest of the world do the same, even worse, and has the disrespectful attitude to not even acknowledge their greater crimes while today trying to manipulate western values to conveniently paint the west as villains while impudently acting as if they are victims? Absolutely.

World is in no potion to lecture west about morality or crimes, and would do well to remember that it is a double edged sword no matter who is wielding it.

Russians need to learn to live with the fact that west is west, just as west should fully acknowledge russia as being russia, and both sides need to stop fcking with each other with disinformation and tit for tat game that is ultimately counterproductive. Lastly, world has no need to delusional fools who dream themselves the new revolutionaries when they are just common children looking for easy way out. I intend to fully impose the standards of productive initiative on myself and ask others to do the same for themselves, regardless of respective differences in situations or outlook - for common standard and agreement is the foundation of understanding and destruction of ignorance. The world, however, has even greater degree of ignorance to work through than the west, and amusingly enough has managed to convince itself otherwise while trying to vilify the west for all their problems. This will eventually lead to a very brutal and destructive war, and I guarantee you that west as no intention of letting any such criminals who try to fck with its people to live on the face of the planet - as would be expected of any decent human being when faced with ignorant behavior and unwarranted attitudes.

[Souldream]

May be of interest (in the light of the general information blockade of Russia): http://innovation.gov.ru/

Heard of LHC of CERN? Some parts were built in Russia.
Heard of American Atlas V rocket? Its engines are Russian RD-180.

Yes .... And All Russian rockets have more then 75% of USA electronic ....

Perhaps you will beleive it as this is from Russian media LoL

http://svpressa.ru/economy/article/124761/

[Anony]

Vodka, Missiles, Army, Poor People, Rich people, Extremely Rich people, Filthy Rich People and then there is Putin  I have read an article where it says that Putin has about 800 cars, 40+ Aeroplanes, 20 Ships, and his assets are worth $20billion 

[bryant.coleman]

I have read an article where it says that Putin has about 800 cars, 40+ Aeroplanes, 20 Ships, and his assets are worth $20billion 

I have also read an article which says that Obama has 4 wives and 40 children. Should I believe that?

If Putin is really having 40 aircraft and 20 ships, they must be the invisible ones. Becasue no one in Russia has seen them. And regarding Putin's net worth, Bill Browder once claimed that it amounts to $200 billion. You can add one more zero, and make it $2,000 billion ($2 trillion).

[Marbit]

Chinese as reliable and honest? LOL

Well, there are few examples from my own experience. As far I remember, I had no problem with chinese and japanese sellers... On the other hand, some part of our close western neighbours (you know whom I mean) are repeatedly trying to fool everyone. That's why I'm trying to have no business with them if there are other options.

As far as Chinese people are concerned, they really are hard working people. Chinese that I have encountered, I've seen them as dedicated and honest to their work.
Generalizing is something we shouldn't be doing though, you can judge a race or community based on the actions of a few.

[fuzion]

Except oil and weapon, what things does Russian really have?
We all see that Russian is really weak in recently oil price crash.
The exchange rate of ruble and the inflation in Russian as follow the  oil price crash imply that Russian is just a third - rate country who depends on selling cheap resources.
After the Soviet Union collapsed, the Economic of Russian growth just benefit from the oil price risen.

Russians have good nuclear weapons that I have heard

[Nemo1024]

Let's leave aside your name and the fact that you are seemingly from senegal, yet pretend to speak for the russian people

Leaving aside the wall of text (some of which I agree with, some of which is historically inaccurate), I, as an ethnic Russian, find this line as the most objectionable in what you wrote. What gives you the right to deny him the right to speak for the Russian people?

I don't know if he is ethnically Russian or has connections to Russia. I don't care. If he feels Russian at heart and what he says is factually correct, than he can speak on behalf of Russians.

Russian Federation is a common home of over 200 ethnic groups and nationalities speaking over 100 languages and dialects. You don't have to be ethnically Russian to be Russian. You need to identify with the Russian culture and  be able to live peacefully under the same roof with other peoples. And that's the key.
Russia has hundreds of years of experience with a functioning multi-ethnical, mutli-confessional, multi-cultural society. Everything that Europe tries and fails to emulate and preaches to Russia (what an irony).

Russian Minister of Defence, Shojgu is ethnic Tuvan. The Mayor of Moscow Sobjanin is part-Mansi, part-Ural Cossack. The Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Lavrov is part-Georgian.

So, you see, when speaking about "Russian people", being from Senegal is not an excluding criteria.

PS: He claims to hark to Czech Republic, so I don't know where you got Senegal from... Fail again?