Sputnik Will Be Broadcast in 30 Languages Next Year

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
I don't give a shit about your minor word games about who was a good soldier and therefore they must be like Hitler, yada, yada, yada.
You don't care to take on my arguments logically and rationally.
You have no idea of what is going on over there.

Have you talked or emailed anyone from there this week?
As I have said before, if you want to argue, then argue.

Don't bother trying to tell me how ignorant I am. I've made an argument to which you have not replied.
Have you talked or emailed to any of the refugees fleeing into Russia this week?

My wife and I have.
Contained within your argument is it's refutation. Who are the refugees fleeing from? They are fleeing from Ukrainians who are fighting against Russian forces (of Russian and Ukrainian origin).

This tells me that the annexation will encompass people who do not want to be a part of Russia. This is why it is occurring as a military annexation.
Look, I know you think you understand things because of your word associations, but you are out of your league on this subject.

Putin is not a brutal dictator, that is ridiculous.
So Russia is not imprisoning people for speaking about homosexuality?

So Russia did not imprison Pussy Riot?

For all your inside knowledge TAJ, you fail to see the obvious.
Hell, if he was a brutal dictator then the U.S. would probably be supporting him as we often do that.
Agreed. Especially since they have oil.
I have relatives there; they are scared. The only thing standing between them and tyranny or death from the Banderas are Russian tanks.
I am sorry for what you relatives are going through. I am not defending the actions of the Ukraine on their people.
Get real. Those people are not going to submit to a fascist government and you can forget about the history of the area and what is current going on in the area and pretend that the whole problem is Putin because you have a word association game comparing Putin and Hitler.

Don't you understand that your typing things on a page does not constitute what is real on the other side of the world?

The Anabaptist Jacques
 
You don't care to take on my arguments logically and rationally.

As I have said before, if you want to argue, then argue.

Don't bother trying to tell me how ignorant I am. I've made an argument to which you have not replied.

Contained within your argument is it's refutation. Who are the refugees fleeing from? They are fleeing from Ukrainians who are fighting against Russian forces (of Russian and Ukrainian origin).

This tells me that the annexation will encompass people who do not want to be a part of Russia. This is why it is occurring as a military annexation.

So Russia is not imprisoning people for speaking about homosexuality?

So Russia did not imprison Pussy Riot?

For all your inside knowledge TAJ, you fail to see the obvious.

Agreed. Especially since they have oil.

I am sorry for what you relatives are going through. I am not defending the actions of the Ukraine on their people.

Your arguments are silly, spurious, and a waste of time, and you clearly can't see that.

It does seem that you really do believe that what is true for you is true.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
That's a one sided perspective. I think that Putin is PREVENTING war (WWIII) rather than provoking it. I am reading almost daily the German version of "Voice of Russia" LINK HERE which is, a sister site of "Voice of Russia UK" which is now becoming "Sputnik". I am reading also pro US, pro NATO, pro Western stuff regularly. I think one has to do this to get a comprehensive picture of whats going on behind the scenes.
So you are reading Putin's propaganda and it says he is preventing war rather than starting it? This goes a way to demonstrating what I said to begin with; that Putin is a dictator who is setting up a propaganda machine to deflect criticism outside of Russia.

He invaded Georgia, he invaded the Ukraine. His actions are acts of war, no matter what you read. Nothing could be more plain.
There is another good article which I want to include a link below. It sheds light into the US agenda and why it would be important to Washington that Russia being rendered economically insignificant, broken up into smaller countries or even better, destroyed.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/washington-intends-russias-demise/5380314
Had a look at www.globalresearch.ca. They have a couple of articles on WHO's alleged sterilization programs and one on the USA sponsoring Islamic terrorists in China.

I agree you need to get your media from a variety of sources. That is not a good source.
Anyway, word is that Putin is ill, would have cancer and that's why he has mellowed recently. I hope these rumors aren't true. Now if Putin dies, God help us. A different breed of Russian leaders will take over, not so diplomatic as Putin. And I see chaos and pain in the horizon. Pain for EU countries in particular.
As I have said previously, Putin is the only person to have annexed a nation, or even attempted to in 25 years.

He is no diplomat.
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
:lol:

You really don't understand anything about this, do you?

:lol:

The Anabaptist Jacques
I don't understand anything your post. Unless you are laughing at yourself.

You apparently are still incapable of addressing an argument. Clearly what I wrote was to complex.

Let's start a little more simply shall we. Which of the following points from 1-7 do you disagree with?

1) Putin is a strong charismatic leader
2) Putin controls state media
3) Putin controls many aspects of Russian life
4) Putin persecutes homosexuals
5) Putin is criticizes western liberal values
6) Putin has a strong military focus
7) Putin has a state controlled focus on the economy
 
I don't understand anything your post. Unless you are laughing at yourself.

You apparently are still incapable of addressing an argument. Clearly what I wrote was to complex.

Let's start a little more simply shall we. Which of the following points from 1-7 do you disagree with?

1) Putin is a strong charismatic leader
2) Putin controls state media
3) Putin controls many aspects of Russian life
4) Putin persecutes homosexuals
5) Putin is criticizes western liberal values
6) Putin has a strong military focus
7) Putin has a state controlled focus on the economy

You really don't get it, kid, do you?

Life and reality are real things, not sentences on a computer screen.

I talk daily to people there.

What should I tell them?

How about "Oh don't worry Nadia, you're better off if you let the Banderas kill you and the kids because someone showed me his argument here which isn't really an argument but only his interpretation of what he thinks is going on."

I have never seen so much belief from someone that their own personal thoughts and opinions trumped reality. (outside of a Scientologist)

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
Here's Putin (he's in the front row) controlling the masses in Russia.

http://youtu.be/tw0kJf_15QE

The Anabaptist Jacques
This is your evidence that Putin is not a dictator. That he is in the front row of a rock concert?

Do you honestly think that he is not surrounded by FSB? That everyone who went into that building did not go through a metal detector?

The guy is ex KGB TAJ. He is a powerful politician. He has enemies. If he is making a public appearance, the security is solid.

Oh, and by the way, if you were trying to refute my assertion that he is trying to get back some of that imperial power that he fought for and lost in the cold war the song 'Back to the USSR' was not the best choice.
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
Your arguments are silly, spurious, and a waste of time, and you clearly can't see that.

It does seem that you really do believe that what is true for you is true.

The Anabaptist Jacques
Your ad-hominem attacks are silly, spurious and a waste of time.

I can see we are already past the point where you are able to actually address anything I have posted.

In fact, you never did address anything I posted.
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
You really don't get it, kid, do you?

Life and reality are real things, not sentences on a computer screen.

I talk daily to people there.

What should I tell them?

How about "Oh don't worry Nadia, you're better off if you let the Banderas kill you and the kids because someone showed me his argument here which isn't really an argument but only his interpretation of what he thinks is going on."

I have never seen so much belief from someone that their own personal thoughts and opinions trumped reality. (outside of a Scientologist)

The Anabaptist Jacques
That the Ukrainians are brutal does not mean that Putin is not.

Putin has imprisoned homosexuals and feminists in Russia. He is brutal.

As I have said numerous times on this thread, I am not defending Ukrainian persecution, I am simply seeing Putin for what he is.
 

Balthasar

Patron Meritorious
///snipped///

As I have said previously, Putin is the only person to have annexed a nation, or even attempted to in 25 years.

He is no diplomat.

The Crimean citizen voted with 93% to rejoin Russia. That is called democracy. It's similar to the reunification of Eastern and Western Germany which is just about to fall within your 25 year time frame. Also similar to the very recent Scottish referendum whether or not they remain part of the United Kingdom.

Following your own arguments, Western Germany would then also have "annexed" Eastern Germany. Beside that, the time when Crimea was holding their referendum, the Ukraine government was illegal. They basically walked into the president offices during the night and told the surprised people next day they were the new government. By the way, the Crimean government contrary to the Ukrainian was a legally elected one.
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
The Crimean citizen voted with 93% to rejoin Russia. That is called democracy. It's similar to the reunification of Eastern and Western Germany which is just about to fall within your 25 year time frame. Also similar to the very recent Scottish referendum whether or not they remain part of the United Kingdom.
The Ukrainians did not get a referendum. They got a war. Their was no blood in the streets when he Berlin wall came down.

As I have already stated, I support the same sorts of unification that has taken place in western Europe.
Following your own arguments, Western Germany would then also have "annexed" Eastern Germany.
Annexation involves military force. The unification of East and West Germany was done legally and with consensus.
Beside that, the time when Crimea was
holding their referendum, the Ukraine government was illegal. They basically walked into the president offices during the night and told the surprised people next day they were the new government. By the way, the Crimean government contrary to the Ukrainian was a legally elected one.
 
Your ad-hominem attacks are silly, spurious and a waste of time.

I can see we are already past the point where you are able to actually address anything I have posted.

In fact, you never did address anything I posted.

That's right.

Because you're not debating, you're masturbating.

You repeat your narrowly defined statements over and over, up and down, for your own self-gratification.

You surely do not appear interested in learning or widening your perspective.

I suspect you may think there is nothing else to know than your own ideas.

I noticed on a few occasions when someone disagreed with you that you merely dismissed their views as propaganda.

Yet you have no first hand knowledge of the discussion which means you too have only heard what someone else has told you.

To me your thoughts and ideas are worthless.

You have a right to say what you think.

But you have no inherent right to be taken seriously.

And I don't take you seriously because of the foolishness and narrow-mindedness of your statements.

And the worst thing is you can't even see it.

Henry Kissinger is a brilliant mind when it comes to Diplomacy; you would know that if you ever read his books.

Yet you dismissed his opinion out of hand because you didn't approve of his some of his actions.

Well, where is your Nobel Prize if you know so much more than him?

What war did you negotiate to an end?

And weren't you in a brainwashed space alien cult called Scientology?

What does that make your opinion worth?

No, sorry, to me you're just a ego with a keyboard that is out of touch with reality under discussion.

This problem is a real thing to me because my loved ones lives hang in the balance.

What possible reason would I have for wasting my time stroking your ego?

I'm sure you'll have a comeback for this, like how you understand it all and nobody wants to debate you.

I wrote this to let you know that I don't care what you think and also to let others know why.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
Wow! this is complete BS.

The USA never defeated the USSR. We never had a war.

“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

We had lots of proxy wars, with Americans and Russians dying in them.

In Korea, we had Russian pilots flying North Korean MiGs and getting into dogfights with our fighters. Besides supplying the North.

Vietnam with the Russians arming and supplying the North.

Afghanistan, with the US providing arms, supplies, and "advisers" to the Afghans.

Plus innumerable smaller conflicts.

When the USSR lost hope of being able to defeat the US, they collapsed. Their hope is now renewed with our feckless current President.
 
“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

We had lots of proxy wars, with Americans and Russians dying in them.

In Korea, we had Russian pilots flying North Korean MiGs and getting into dogfights with our fighters. Besides supplying the North.

Vietnam with the Russians arming and supplying the North.

Afghanistan, with the US providing arms, supplies, and "advisers" to the Afghans.

Plus innumerable smaller conflicts.

When the USSR lost hope of being able to defeat the US, they collapsed. Their hope is now renewed with our feckless current President.

They collapsed for internal reasons, not because of us.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
They collapsed for internal reasons, not because of us.

The Anabaptist Jacques

They collapsed because they tried to match us on the military buildup started by Reagan, and continued by Bush I, and the expenditures put their economy over the edge.

Plus, they had long had plans to maybe blitzkrieg into Western Europe through the Fulda gap. In Desert Storm, their military got a good look at how Soviet hardware, in the hands of Soviet-trained troops, did against US hardware and troops. It was not a pretty sight for their officers. It indicated that a conventional conflict between US and Soviet forces in Europe, despite the numerical superiority of the Soviets, would result in a massacre of the Soviet forces.

The poor performance of their military hardware, a major export item, also had an effect:

One of the most controversial issues to have emerged from the war in the Persian Gulf deals with the performance of Soviet weaponry: did it meet performance criteria or did it fail? The issue is one of great concern: a majority of the weapons systems used by Iraq in the war, especially air defense and combat aircraft, were of Soviet manufacture, and many of these same systems are used by the Soviets. The issue of Soviet weaponry also has serious political and economic overtones: in 1989, the Soviets provided some $15 billion in military assistance to Afghanistan, North Korea, Libya, Angola, Vietnam, Syria, and Cuba, much of it in military hardware. If it is discovered that Soviet weapon systems in Iraq failed, the Soviets stand to lose a great deal in terms of prestige and hard currency accounts.

The sum of the stresses put on the Soviet system by the US strongly helped the collapse along.
 
They collapsed because they tried to match us on the military buildup started by Reagan, and continued by Bush I, and the expenditures put their economy over the edge.

Plus, they had long had plans to maybe blitzkrieg into Western Europe through the Fulda gap. In Desert Storm, their military got a good look at how Soviet hardware, in the hands of Soviet-trained troops, did against US hardware and troops. It was not a pretty sight for their officers. It indicated that a conventional conflict between US and Soviet forces in Europe, despite the numerical superiority of the Soviets, would result in a massacre of the Soviet forces.

The poor performance of their military hardware, a major export item, also had an effect:



The sum of the stresses put on the Soviet system by the US strongly helped the collapse along.

Not at all.

First of all, their military spending did not increase while Reagan was president; not in real or nominal dollars.

Their problems were:

1) rising nationalism

2) Their internal pricing system

3) The traditional Soviet patronage system which was the successful administrate structure was dismantle, even made illegal and prosecuted, by Gorbachev's reforms.

That Reagan or Bush had anything to do with it is a myth.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

RogerB

Crusader
TAJ is correct in his analysis of the coming undone of the communist block.

This part by Enthetan, again touting propaganda media is way off . . .

They collapsed because they tried to match us on the military buildup started by Reagan, and continued by Bush I, and the expenditures put their economy over the edge.

Plus, they had long had plans to maybe blitzkrieg into Western Europe through the Fulda gap. In Desert Storm, their military got a good look at how Soviet hardware, in the hands of Soviet-trained troops, did against US hardware and troops. It was not a pretty sight for their officers. It indicated that a conventional conflict between US and Soviet forces in Europe, despite the numerical superiority of the Soviets, would result in a massacre of the Soviet forces.

Dunno how people anyone can write this stuff and believe it.

Note, Desert Storm, as cited in the piece used by Enthetan, began in August, 1990. The Iron Curtain communist block began "officiallly" coming apart in April, 1989 . . . like a year and a half earlier . . . Poland legalized Solidarity and had its first free election and kicked the commies out. And this after the moves by Gorbie who began the process of internally liberalizing the USSR scene. The Berlin Wall "came down" 4 months after the Polish election kicked out communist control.

Desert Storm had nothing, zilch, nada, to do with "Russian" thinking and nor them trying to match US spending on military buildup as a cause of the Iron curtain coming down and the end of the USSR communist setup.
 
Top