GostHacked Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Why do you continually go out of your way to defend Putin and his illegal and immoral war? I don't get it. Maybe you can point out where I am defending Putin? I'll wait. Our economic freedoms are much greater. How can you not know this? Too big to fail. Economic freedom? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Yes...but that was a different time. Other parts of Europe went on to literally become "Balkanized". This is Ukraine's time in barrel. Also, the Russians have a justified paranoia that predates the Cold War by generations. They still count the graves. And that confirms my point........several decades ago, the West wouldn't have tolerated the current Russian actions in Ukraine... Quote
Bonam Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 And that confirms my point........several decades ago, the West wouldn't have tolerated the current Russian actions in Ukraine... Several decades ago, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. Quote
overthere Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 And that confirms my point........several decades ago, the West wouldn't have tolerated the current Russian actions in Ukraine... 10 years ago. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
overthere Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Several decades ago, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. and effectively, it is again. Russia now controls their industrial heartland. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Derek 2.0 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Several decades ago, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. Thanks, but as I transfixed earlier, Ukraine for West Germany......Yes, I know there is no longer a West Germany.... Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 10 years ago. That's open to debate........I doubt the positions of most European governments have changed. Quote
Bonam Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) Thanks, but as I transfixed earlier, Ukraine for West Germany......Yes, I know there is no longer a West Germany.... Yes, that was true for West Germany. But I don't think it's ever been true for Ukraine. Right now, the West isn't responding. In the 90s, if Russia had tried to take (keep) Ukraine, the west would have done nothing. Before that, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. In the aftermath of WWI, when Ukraine was taken over by Soviet Union, the West did nothing. Russian annexation of Ukraine in the 18th century also went unopposed by "the West" at the time. You can go further and further back in history and find that in no case did "the West" ever lift a finger to protect Ukraine against Russian (or any other) aggression. Nor will it do so now. Edited February 17, 2015 by Bonam Quote
overthere Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Both Bushes and likely Clinton would have gone Defcon + over Ukraine. So would Reagan if he'd been President after the fall of the USSR. Obama? Nyet. The US has been spanked pretty hard twice in the last decade. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Derek 2.0 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Yes, that is true for Western Germany. But I don't think it's ever been true for Ukraine. Right now, the West isn't responding. In the 90s, if Russia had tried to take (keep) Ukraine, the west would have done nothing. Before that, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. In the aftermath of WWI, when Ukraine was taken over by Soviet Union, the West did nothing. Russian annexation of Ukraine in the 18th century also went unopposed by "the West" at the time. You can go further and further back in history and find that in no case did "the West" ever lift a finger to protect Ukraine against Russian (or any other) aggression. Nor will it do so now. I think you're missing the point.......Post WW II, the West very much confronted, and fought wars and proxy wars, Russian aggression and influence around the world..... Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Both Bushes and likely Clinton would have gone Defcon + over Ukraine. So would Reagan if he'd been President after the fall of the USSR. Obama? Nyet. The US has been spanked pretty hard twice in the last decade. GWB let Putin roll into Georgia...... Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 GWB let Putin roll into Georgia...... Yes...how soon they forget. The U.S. gets to choose the "spankings". Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Argus Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 I can see why the people in Russia find Putin so popular WWWTT All if it because of the development of oil, not because of Putin's reign of terror. But then, you're the guy who admires like in Communist China ,so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised you'd admire fascist Russia, too. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
GostHacked Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 All if it because of the development of oil, not because of Putin's reign of terror. But then, you're the guy who admires like in Communist China ,so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised you'd admire fascist Russia, too. What's fascist about Russia? Chances are whatever you are going to say can be applied to most western nations. Quote
Hudson Jones Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Putin nationalized most of the oil by taking them away from several people who were close to Gorbechov and took control of multi-billion dollar oil companies (Hooray for capitalism/democracy). After they were nationalized and oil prices started to rise, the economy surged and made a big jump. The price of oil is the reason why Russia's economy is nose diving right now. They rely heavily on it. Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
GostHacked Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Putin nationalized most of the oil by taking them away from several people who were close to Gorbechov and took control of multi-billion dollar oil companies (Hooray for capitalism/democracy). After they were nationalized and oil prices started to rise, the economy surged and made a big jump. The price of oil is the reason why Russia's economy is nose diving right now. They rely heavily on it. They rely on it so much they are willing to cut the supply off to Europe? Fancy that, Ukraine has been discovered to have a large deposit of natural gas that needs to be tapped. Quote
Hudson Jones Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 They rely on it so much they are willing to cut the supply off to Europe? Fancy that, Ukraine has been discovered to have a large deposit of natural gas that needs to be tapped. When you get a chance, check this article. It's reported that U.S. is behind Saudi's lowering of oil prices. It is to put pressure on Russia and Iran, who rely heavily on oil exports. It makes sense. Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
GostHacked Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 When you get a chance, check this article. It's reported that U.S. is behind Saudi's lowering of oil prices. It is to put pressure on Russia and Iran, who rely heavily on oil exports. It makes sense. I don't think that is the case. The problem is there is a lot of product on hand. Saudi Arabia kept the production up while the price was dropping. Typically they would drop production create a small deficit and make money on the 'limited' supply. The price would have been to entice those nations that deal with the US petrodollar to stick with it. It was more of keeping customers than pushing back on Russia. In a way you are correct, it seems rather convenient when Russia along with BRICS to create a new oil market causes a ripple effect where prices are lower because of competition in the markets. A nation could buy oil from Russia with a different currency. The US greenback/petro dollar is losing its strength as a world currency. Quote
Bonam Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 I think you're missing the point.......Post WW II, the West very much confronted, and fought wars and proxy wars, Russian aggression and influence around the world..... But never inside Russia's traditional sphere of influence, which includes Ukraine. Quote
ASIP Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Care to expand on this statement? In no way I am going to justify actions of Hitler. He's one of the biggest world's villain. What I meant is that Hitler was a product of the Western civilization. He had some principles. He never used WMD. He negotiated. Putin is a product of the unscrupulous bottom of the Russian society. He has mentality of a third-rate criminal. He's blackmailed the world with a nuclear strike. He has no mercy for its own people. He does not negotiate, he lies and takes advantage. He's a villain, blood-thirsty villain. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 18, 2015 Report Posted February 18, 2015 But never inside Russia's traditional sphere of influence, which includes Ukraine. The Ukraine left the Russian sphere of influence during the Summer of 1991. Quote
Moonlight Graham Posted February 18, 2015 Report Posted February 18, 2015 Unlike Hitler though, as mentioned, Putin’s Russia has the greater potential to be far more dangerous then Hitler’s Nazi Germany……So is Putin presently as bad as Hitler? Not at all, but he has the potential to be far more dangerous to, likewise the rest of the World is greatly hindered in directly confronting him….and Putin knows thi You can say that a lot of states have the "potential" to worse than Hitler. Putin doesn't show the ideological leanings to do what Hitler did. Putin hasn't shown to be determined to take over all of Europe, kill millions of Jews or any other ethnicity and start some sort of master race. Putin wants a strong Russia (including wanting "anti-Russian" western interests to screw off), wants to reunite former USSR or Russian Empire territory inhabited by Russian speakers with current Russia, and wants to be seen as a hero to Russians (which he is). Putin is still dangerous because of his willingness to break basic international law, but you can say the same for the US and other western countries. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Derek 2.0 Posted February 18, 2015 Report Posted February 18, 2015 You can say that a lot of states have the "potential" to worse than Hitler. Putin doesn't show the ideological leanings to do what Hitler did. Putin hasn't shown to be determined to take over all of Europe, kill millions of Jews or any other ethnicity and start some sort of master race. Putin wants a strong Russia (including wanting "anti-Russian" western interests to screw off), wants to reunite former USSR or Russian Empire territory inhabited by Russian speakers with current Russia, and wants to be seen as a hero to Russians (which he is). Putin is still dangerous because of his willingness to break basic international law, but you can say the same for the US and other western countries. Right, Putin hasn’t threatened to take over Europe, just irradiate it... Quote
Bonam Posted February 18, 2015 Report Posted February 18, 2015 In no way I am going to justify actions of Hitler. He's one of the biggest world's villain. What I meant is that Hitler was a product of the Western civilization. He had some principles. He never used WMD. He negotiated. Er... what principles did he have, besides German supremacy and hatred of "subhumans"? As for WMDs, he used all the worst and most deadly weapons available. Yes... he didn't use nukes, because he didn't have them (though Germany was also trying hard to develop them). He used gas to eradicate civilian populations. All this worse than Hitler stuff is silly scaremongering. Quote
Big Guy Posted February 18, 2015 Report Posted February 18, 2015 Putin does what he thinks is best for Russia. He may believe him being a dictator is the best for Russia. I agree completely with Moonlight - and offer a prediction: The situation in the Middle East is going to hell in a basket. As the situation deteriorates the coalition will need Iran getting involved and Iran will not move without a Russian OK. This ceasefire in Ukraine will continue to be shaky but the rebels and Putin will get what they want. There will be a referendum and most of Eastern Ukraine will join Russia. Russian involvement will be required for any solution to the Middle East fiasco. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.