The future of Russia. Any foreign policy experts want to weigh in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

DP.... i'd consider her to be a Russified Armenian, one who'd probably be too cowardly to say anything if Putin went after Armenians and would continue to cheer Russia on if Armenians were genocided. Similar to how Ramzan Kadyrov is still a Z fanboy despite all of the horrible things Russia did to the Chechen people.

Russia did horrible things to Chechens?! LOL. How about Chechens becoming full of themselves after the USSR fell apart and doing horrible things to ethnic Russians who lived there. Also wanting independence that was absolutely impossible. I can’t think of a single country who would grant them independence in place of Russia.

"LOL" says someone about repeated Russian genocides against Chechens.

During the Russian conquest of the Caucasus in the 1800s, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced. There were as many as 1.5 million Chechens in the Caucasus in 1847, but as a result of war and expulsions, their number dropped to 140,000 in 1861, and then further to 116,000 by 1867.

And again in 1944, Russia committed genocide against Chechens, accusing them of being "Nazis" even though the Nazis were unsuccessful in recruiting Chechens. NKVD and thousands of Russian troops arrived and forced nearly 400,000 Chechens onto rail cars. 700 Chechens who resisted were locked in a barn and burned to death. Those who moved to slowly were shot. A quarter of them died as they were displaced, from freezing to death in uninsulated rail cars in extreme cold to starvation.

But "LOL genocide ha ha" says the PP. Astounding.
"They weren't treated horribly." Astounding.
No clue why some Chechens might harbor some resentment, distrust and animosity toward Russians. Astounding.

Chechens have never been independent, and outside of subsistence societies, have never been self-sufficient, either.

The brief time in history when they were kinda sorta independent produced thousands of salafi fighters, beheaded aid workers by the side of the road, and rank lawlessness of the kind that even the locals rebelled against. And let's not forget the world's most famous Chechen, Mr. Dzhohar Tsarnaev.

Yet when Russia cracked down on Chechnya, the innocent locals who also rejected the lawless fighters and warlords took a big part of the brunt of Russian punishment. That is what Russia does. They "liberate" cities by leveling them, randomly bombarding and destroying homes, schools, hospitals and everything else without discrimination. They did the same in Syria, they are doing the same in Ukraine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

DP.... i'd consider her to be a Russified Armenian, one who'd probably be too cowardly to say anything if Putin went after Armenians and would continue to cheer Russia on if Armenians were genocided. Similar to how Ramzan Kadyrov is still a Z fanboy despite all of the horrible things Russia did to the Chechen people.

Russia did horrible things to Chechens?! LOL. How about Chechens becoming full of themselves after the USSR fell apart and doing horrible things to ethnic Russians who lived there. Also wanting independence that was absolutely impossible. I can’t think of a single country who would grant them independence in place of Russia.

"LOL" says someone about repeated Russian genocides against Chechens.

During the Russian conquest of the Caucasus in the 1800s, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced. There were as many as 1.5 million Chechens in the Caucasus in 1847, but as a result of war and expulsions, their number dropped to 140,000 in 1861, and then further to 116,000 by 1867.

And again in 1944, Russia committed genocide against Chechens, accusing them of being "Nazis" even though the Nazis were unsuccessful in recruiting Chechens. NKVD and thousands of Russian troops arrived and forced nearly 400,000 Chechens onto rail cars. 700 Chechens who resisted were locked in a barn and burned to death. Those who moved to slowly were shot. A quarter of them died as they were displaced, from freezing to death in uninsulated rail cars in extreme cold to starvation.

But "LOL genocide ha ha" says the PP. Astounding.
"They weren't treated horribly." Astounding.
No clue why some Chechens might harbor some resentment, distrust and animosity toward Russians. Astounding.

What? LOL no. I'd be shocked if there were that many people in the North Caucasus altogether in the mid-1850s. Do you just pull numbers out of your ass?

Here is where the number comes from. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Chechens.html?id=PnjAlei9fe0C

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Russian but have lived in the US for over a decade
I still have family there so I visit regularly and have been going even after the invasion (it’s become much more expensive and cumbersome fyi)
My guess is that Russia will be Iran on steroids. A geriatric regime, extremely conservative and on the brink of dictatorship (but not to the extent of North Korea). The economy will be militarized (the so called mobilization economy), people won’t starve and will be able to move freely (finances permitting). However there will be no innovation and not much vibrancy if you know what I mean. However there is a rich legacy of kitchen cultural life from the soviet times, as well as post soviet cultural renaissance, so it not going to be all doom and gloom.
Yes there will be brain drain but also there will be a sufficient number of technically talented people who are believers and can keep the austere military economy afloat. And there is a certain taste for overcoming difficulties in the “genes” of the population.
As for the war, it will be a slow churn, one step forward and two steps back. I feel bad for the annexed regions and their population. They will suffer no matter the outcome.
Some parts of Russia might be under shelling too (some already are but I mean cities and not just Belgorod).
Basically, there will be life but no one without ties to Russia will want to live a life like that.

Interesting! Does your family have access to information or are they also blinded by the Russian propaganda machine? Do you enlighten them?
Also, do you think that the "overcoming difficulties" gene is still strong, especially after Western exposure and luxuries? Even with the youth? I'd think it'd be waning.

Family: it depends. None of them is totally blinded by the propaganda but they all think that Ukraine went too far in trying to be with the West and rejecting Russia, the Russian language, etc.
They don’t phrase it like that but that’s the essence.
None of them can face the fact that the war, the power struggle was a huge mistake. They think there is “something” to it. Even those who think Putin and his cronies are criminals etc
I tried to share my POV but while they are all respectful they clearly think I have been brainwashed
The “overcoming difficulties” gene is still there in a lot of people. One of the things that surprised me in connection with this war is how few people have actually been exposed to Western values and luxury beyond Burger King and such. And Chinese phones are preferred over Apple by and large

They don't understand and accept that Ukraine moving to the West and rejecting Russia is a direct result of Russia's continual meddling and corrupting of Ukraine, their invasion in 2014?
They don't understand that it is Russia's own belligerent behavior that is also pushing Finland and Sweden into NATO?

Why did Russia invade in 2014?

In 2014, Ukraine wanted to join the EU. But Putin didn't want this, so he had his corrupt, criminal puppet Yanukovich betray and derail them. Students began protesting, Yanukovich sent Berkut to violently beat them down, this violence made a lot of people upset causing the protests to escalate, ultimately resulting in Yanukovich's ouster. Putin invaded out of revenge for Yanukovich's ouster.

DP. I want $1K and will never get it. These were the chances that Ukraine would join EU any time soon. This is a very superficial explanation of why Russia invaded and what Ukrainian Maidan leaders wanted.

Superficial? I'd suggest some superficiality on your part to casually ignore that the Verkhovna Rada voted on the Ukraine-EU agreement and it passed with a solid majority, before Yanukovich unilaterally scuttled the deal and announced that Ukraine would instead pursue closer ties with Russia.

The EU would not have signed it without significant changes and it was heavily conditioned on a number of things
Honestly I am surprised Russia seemed so upset by it. Europe was trying to lure Ukraine in but it wasn’t going to make it easy
But of course Ukraine shouldn’t have angered the bear without any real chances of getting anything
I don’t believe they didn’t know it was all illusion and they had a long way ahead of them
There must have been something else. Like maybe politicians just using some popular gimmicks to stay in power

Well, that's quite a take. I certainly don't think everyone that was pro-Maidan was as pure as the driven snow, but I also don't think it's a real stretch to believe that the relatively young population of Ukraine wanted something different than to be a Putin puppet state. If anyone overplayed their hand here, it's Putin, time and again.

I don’t blame them, I would rather have American or any of the EU citizenships than Russian, too.
However they needed to be realistic. The West wasn’t going to welcome them with open arms. Russia wasn’t going to let go of what it considered theirs.
This whole illusion of Ukraine being Europe (or worse, a cynical lie by certain politicians) is what brought Ukraine to a sad state it is in now.
Is it fair that it can’t leave Russia’s orbit, at least without major destruction? No! But is it true? Certainly yes.

This is wrong.
The West had some legitimate concerns, yes. Ukraine had problems, but they were not insurmountable problems. Membership was definitely not off the table, it was far from a "cynical lie."
Meanwhile, Russia's other former SSRs and satellite states are further distancing themselves from Russia. Ukraine is taking the brunt, but I doubt Russia can survive trying to do the same to any other state that wants to pull itself out of Russia's orbit. Russia can barely manage a war on one front, let alone more than one.

I've been watching the independence game long enough. Every single one of them, starting with Mr. Dudaev, says the same thing - when we are independent, we'll live like Switzerland! Guess what, the only ones who ended up remotely like Switzerland were countries with enough resources like Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. The rest (and not excluding these two) found out that with independence, they are still corrupt, still slow, still inefficient, still backward. Where we are right now is the Lithuanians washing dishes in London, and the Uzbek washing dishes in Moscow.

Well I think a lot has now changed. We've found that the Russian bear used to be big and hungry but now he is just old, weak, gaunt and toothless. Georgia and the others have far less to fear from Russia now than they did before February 2022. And with Russia losing its military and economic clout, it also now has far less ability for its oligarch to get their tendrils into those countries to corrupt and rob them.

LOL you say that like there are no Ukrainian or Georgian oligarchs. Believe me, my dear, all former FSU countries have enough locals eager to sink their teeth into their country's assets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

DP.... i'd consider her to be a Russified Armenian, one who'd probably be too cowardly to say anything if Putin went after Armenians and would continue to cheer Russia on if Armenians were genocided. Similar to how Ramzan Kadyrov is still a Z fanboy despite all of the horrible things Russia did to the Chechen people.

Russia did horrible things to Chechens?! LOL. How about Chechens becoming full of themselves after the USSR fell apart and doing horrible things to ethnic Russians who lived there. Also wanting independence that was absolutely impossible. I can’t think of a single country who would grant them independence in place of Russia.

"LOL" says someone about repeated Russian genocides against Chechens.

During the Russian conquest of the Caucasus in the 1800s, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced. There were as many as 1.5 million Chechens in the Caucasus in 1847, but as a result of war and expulsions, their number dropped to 140,000 in 1861, and then further to 116,000 by 1867.

And again in 1944, Russia committed genocide against Chechens, accusing them of being "Nazis" even though the Nazis were unsuccessful in recruiting Chechens. NKVD and thousands of Russian troops arrived and forced nearly 400,000 Chechens onto rail cars. 700 Chechens who resisted were locked in a barn and burned to death. Those who moved to slowly were shot. A quarter of them died as they were displaced, from freezing to death in uninsulated rail cars in extreme cold to starvation.

But "LOL genocide ha ha" says the PP. Astounding.
"They weren't treated horribly." Astounding.
No clue why some Chechens might harbor some resentment, distrust and animosity toward Russians. Astounding.

What? LOL no. I'd be shocked if there were that many people in the North Caucasus altogether in the mid-1850s. Do you just pull numbers out of your ass?

Here is where the number comes from. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Chechens.html?id=PnjAlei9fe0C

Nonsense. Pure, partisan, non-scientific nonsense.

First, there are no real scientific sources to determine how many Chechens were there in the mid-1850s. Let alone the fact that at the time they were referred to as Vainakhs, which includes both Chechens and Ingush. It is entirely possible that the group they called "Chechens" included the Ingush, the Kumyk, the Kistins and god knows who else.

Second, the earliest sources compiled by imperial Russian sources in the early 19th century put the number of "Chechens" anywhere at 150 to 200 thousand people, which sounds kinda sorta about right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

DP.... i'd consider her to be a Russified Armenian, one who'd probably be too cowardly to say anything if Putin went after Armenians and would continue to cheer Russia on if Armenians were genocided. Similar to how Ramzan Kadyrov is still a Z fanboy despite all of the horrible things Russia did to the Chechen people.

Russia did horrible things to Chechens?! LOL. How about Chechens becoming full of themselves after the USSR fell apart and doing horrible things to ethnic Russians who lived there. Also wanting independence that was absolutely impossible. I can’t think of a single country who would grant them independence in place of Russia.

"LOL" says someone about repeated Russian genocides against Chechens.

During the Russian conquest of the Caucasus in the 1800s, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced. There were as many as 1.5 million Chechens in the Caucasus in 1847, but as a result of war and expulsions, their number dropped to 140,000 in 1861, and then further to 116,000 by 1867.

And again in 1944, Russia committed genocide against Chechens, accusing them of being "Nazis" even though the Nazis were unsuccessful in recruiting Chechens. NKVD and thousands of Russian troops arrived and forced nearly 400,000 Chechens onto rail cars. 700 Chechens who resisted were locked in a barn and burned to death. Those who moved to slowly were shot. A quarter of them died as they were displaced, from freezing to death in uninsulated rail cars in extreme cold to starvation.

But "LOL genocide ha ha" says the PP. Astounding.
"They weren't treated horribly." Astounding.
No clue why some Chechens might harbor some resentment, distrust and animosity toward Russians. Astounding.

Chechens have never been independent, and outside of subsistence societies, have never been self-sufficient, either.

The brief time in history when they were kinda sorta independent produced thousands of salafi fighters, beheaded aid workers by the side of the road, and rank lawlessness of the kind that even the locals rebelled against. And let's not forget the world's most famous Chechen, Mr. Dzhohar Tsarnaev.

Yet when Russia cracked down on Chechnya, the innocent locals who also rejected the lawless fighters and warlords took a big part of the brunt of Russian punishment. That is what Russia does. They "liberate" cities by leveling them, randomly bombarding and destroying homes, schools, hospitals and everything else without discrimination. They did the same in Syria, they are doing the same in Ukraine.

You cannot really tell between a warlord or an innocent local in Chechnya and the Russians couldn't either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Russian but have lived in the US for over a decade
I still have family there so I visit regularly and have been going even after the invasion (it’s become much more expensive and cumbersome fyi)
My guess is that Russia will be Iran on steroids. A geriatric regime, extremely conservative and on the brink of dictatorship (but not to the extent of North Korea). The economy will be militarized (the so called mobilization economy), people won’t starve and will be able to move freely (finances permitting). However there will be no innovation and not much vibrancy if you know what I mean. However there is a rich legacy of kitchen cultural life from the soviet times, as well as post soviet cultural renaissance, so it not going to be all doom and gloom.
Yes there will be brain drain but also there will be a sufficient number of technically talented people who are believers and can keep the austere military economy afloat. And there is a certain taste for overcoming difficulties in the “genes” of the population.
As for the war, it will be a slow churn, one step forward and two steps back. I feel bad for the annexed regions and their population. They will suffer no matter the outcome.
Some parts of Russia might be under shelling too (some already are but I mean cities and not just Belgorod).
Basically, there will be life but no one without ties to Russia will want to live a life like that.

Interesting! Does your family have access to information or are they also blinded by the Russian propaganda machine? Do you enlighten them?
Also, do you think that the "overcoming difficulties" gene is still strong, especially after Western exposure and luxuries? Even with the youth? I'd think it'd be waning.

Family: it depends. None of them is totally blinded by the propaganda but they all think that Ukraine went too far in trying to be with the West and rejecting Russia, the Russian language, etc.
They don’t phrase it like that but that’s the essence.
None of them can face the fact that the war, the power struggle was a huge mistake. They think there is “something” to it. Even those who think Putin and his cronies are criminals etc
I tried to share my POV but while they are all respectful they clearly think I have been brainwashed
The “overcoming difficulties” gene is still there in a lot of people. One of the things that surprised me in connection with this war is how few people have actually been exposed to Western values and luxury beyond Burger King and such. And Chinese phones are preferred over Apple by and large

They don't understand and accept that Ukraine moving to the West and rejecting Russia is a direct result of Russia's continual meddling and corrupting of Ukraine, their invasion in 2014?
They don't understand that it is Russia's own belligerent behavior that is also pushing Finland and Sweden into NATO?

Why did Russia invade in 2014?

In 2014, Ukraine wanted to join the EU. But Putin didn't want this, so he had his corrupt, criminal puppet Yanukovich betray and derail them. Students began protesting, Yanukovich sent Berkut to violently beat them down, this violence made a lot of people upset causing the protests to escalate, ultimately resulting in Yanukovich's ouster. Putin invaded out of revenge for Yanukovich's ouster.

DP. I want $1K and will never get it. These were the chances that Ukraine would join EU any time soon. This is a very superficial explanation of why Russia invaded and what Ukrainian Maidan leaders wanted.

Superficial? I'd suggest some superficiality on your part to casually ignore that the Verkhovna Rada voted on the Ukraine-EU agreement and it passed with a solid majority, before Yanukovich unilaterally scuttled the deal and announced that Ukraine would instead pursue closer ties with Russia.

The EU would not have signed it without significant changes and it was heavily conditioned on a number of things
Honestly I am surprised Russia seemed so upset by it. Europe was trying to lure Ukraine in but it wasn’t going to make it easy
But of course Ukraine shouldn’t have angered the bear without any real chances of getting anything
I don’t believe they didn’t know it was all illusion and they had a long way ahead of them
There must have been something else. Like maybe politicians just using some popular gimmicks to stay in power

Well, that's quite a take. I certainly don't think everyone that was pro-Maidan was as pure as the driven snow, but I also don't think it's a real stretch to believe that the relatively young population of Ukraine wanted something different than to be a Putin puppet state. If anyone overplayed their hand here, it's Putin, time and again.

It's also quite a stretch to think that millions of Ukrainians were brainwashed by the CIA. Was Nuland gifted a magic CIA brainwashing wand, made by the Hogwarts Goblins of Langley, she just waves it around and says some pseudo-latin thing like "Cerebri Lavatio" and millions of previously Putin-loving Ukrainians all woke up zombified, chanting "ALL HAIL THE EUROPEAN UNION! REJECT THE SATAN THAT IS RUSSIA!"

PP here. I feel like there are a few people in violent agreement in this thread - like you and I. I was not one of the posters that mentioned Nuland before. I agree that the proposition that she magically brainwashed the Ukrainians is laughable, but it seems to play in Russia. I don't have a lot of expertise in this area, but the evil powerful woman making puppets of anyone opposed to Russia seems to be a favorite trope of theirs.

Then again, I was mistaken for Nuland once in what might have been the most DC pick up line ever, so I have a soft spot for her.

I am the first poster who mentioned her. As I said it is just the figure of speech. Ukraine was brainwashed by its own corrupt opposition which in turn was corrupted by the West to lure Ukrainians into thinking that they are one step from EU membership.

I think it was a trade deal and not a membership.

Yes but I am talking about the way ordinary people felt.
Like they are almost almost the EU!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

DP.... i'd consider her to be a Russified Armenian, one who'd probably be too cowardly to say anything if Putin went after Armenians and would continue to cheer Russia on if Armenians were genocided. Similar to how Ramzan Kadyrov is still a Z fanboy despite all of the horrible things Russia did to the Chechen people.

Russia did horrible things to Chechens?! LOL. How about Chechens becoming full of themselves after the USSR fell apart and doing horrible things to ethnic Russians who lived there. Also wanting independence that was absolutely impossible. I can’t think of a single country who would grant them independence in place of Russia.

"LOL" says someone about repeated Russian genocides against Chechens.

During the Russian conquest of the Caucasus in the 1800s, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced. There were as many as 1.5 million Chechens in the Caucasus in 1847, but as a result of war and expulsions, their number dropped to 140,000 in 1861, and then further to 116,000 by 1867.

And again in 1944, Russia committed genocide against Chechens, accusing them of being "Nazis" even though the Nazis were unsuccessful in recruiting Chechens. NKVD and thousands of Russian troops arrived and forced nearly 400,000 Chechens onto rail cars. 700 Chechens who resisted were locked in a barn and burned to death. Those who moved to slowly were shot. A quarter of them died as they were displaced, from freezing to death in uninsulated rail cars in extreme cold to starvation.

But "LOL genocide ha ha" says the PP. Astounding.
"They weren't treated horribly." Astounding.
No clue why some Chechens might harbor some resentment, distrust and animosity toward Russians. Astounding.

One of the PPs said that what Russia is doing in Chechnya and North Caucasus in general is damage control. I agree with her. Nothing is baseless violence. Siberia wasn’t always Russian either

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Russian but have lived in the US for over a decade
I still have family there so I visit regularly and have been going even after the invasion (it’s become much more expensive and cumbersome fyi)
My guess is that Russia will be Iran on steroids. A geriatric regime, extremely conservative and on the brink of dictatorship (but not to the extent of North Korea). The economy will be militarized (the so called mobilization economy), people won’t starve and will be able to move freely (finances permitting). However there will be no innovation and not much vibrancy if you know what I mean. However there is a rich legacy of kitchen cultural life from the soviet times, as well as post soviet cultural renaissance, so it not going to be all doom and gloom.
Yes there will be brain drain but also there will be a sufficient number of technically talented people who are believers and can keep the austere military economy afloat. And there is a certain taste for overcoming difficulties in the “genes” of the population.
As for the war, it will be a slow churn, one step forward and two steps back. I feel bad for the annexed regions and their population. They will suffer no matter the outcome.
Some parts of Russia might be under shelling too (some already are but I mean cities and not just Belgorod).
Basically, there will be life but no one without ties to Russia will want to live a life like that.

Interesting! Does your family have access to information or are they also blinded by the Russian propaganda machine? Do you enlighten them?
Also, do you think that the "overcoming difficulties" gene is still strong, especially after Western exposure and luxuries? Even with the youth? I'd think it'd be waning.

Family: it depends. None of them is totally blinded by the propaganda but they all think that Ukraine went too far in trying to be with the West and rejecting Russia, the Russian language, etc.
They don’t phrase it like that but that’s the essence.
None of them can face the fact that the war, the power struggle was a huge mistake. They think there is “something” to it. Even those who think Putin and his cronies are criminals etc
I tried to share my POV but while they are all respectful they clearly think I have been brainwashed
The “overcoming difficulties” gene is still there in a lot of people. One of the things that surprised me in connection with this war is how few people have actually been exposed to Western values and luxury beyond Burger King and such. And Chinese phones are preferred over Apple by and large

They don't understand and accept that Ukraine moving to the West and rejecting Russia is a direct result of Russia's continual meddling and corrupting of Ukraine, their invasion in 2014?
They don't understand that it is Russia's own belligerent behavior that is also pushing Finland and Sweden into NATO?

Why did Russia invade in 2014?

In 2014, Ukraine wanted to join the EU. But Putin didn't want this, so he had his corrupt, criminal puppet Yanukovich betray and derail them. Students began protesting, Yanukovich sent Berkut to violently beat them down, this violence made a lot of people upset causing the protests to escalate, ultimately resulting in Yanukovich's ouster. Putin invaded out of revenge for Yanukovich's ouster.

DP. I want $1K and will never get it. These were the chances that Ukraine would join EU any time soon. This is a very superficial explanation of why Russia invaded and what Ukrainian Maidan leaders wanted.

Superficial? I'd suggest some superficiality on your part to casually ignore that the Verkhovna Rada voted on the Ukraine-EU agreement and it passed with a solid majority, before Yanukovich unilaterally scuttled the deal and announced that Ukraine would instead pursue closer ties with Russia.

The EU would not have signed it without significant changes and it was heavily conditioned on a number of things
Honestly I am surprised Russia seemed so upset by it. Europe was trying to lure Ukraine in but it wasn’t going to make it easy
But of course Ukraine shouldn’t have angered the bear without any real chances of getting anything
I don’t believe they didn’t know it was all illusion and they had a long way ahead of them
There must have been something else. Like maybe politicians just using some popular gimmicks to stay in power

Well, that's quite a take. I certainly don't think everyone that was pro-Maidan was as pure as the driven snow, but I also don't think it's a real stretch to believe that the relatively young population of Ukraine wanted something different than to be a Putin puppet state. If anyone overplayed their hand here, it's Putin, time and again.

I don’t blame them, I would rather have American or any of the EU citizenships than Russian, too.
However they needed to be realistic. The West wasn’t going to welcome them with open arms. Russia wasn’t going to let go of what it considered theirs.
This whole illusion of Ukraine being Europe (or worse, a cynical lie by certain politicians) is what brought Ukraine to a sad state it is in now.
Is it fair that it can’t leave Russia’s orbit, at least without major destruction? No! But is it true? Certainly yes.

I don't know that I agree with this. We can quibble about what "open arms" means here, but the fact that the West was rooting for Ukraine to succeed/stand on its own is exactly the issue. Too bad if Putin has a different interpretation of "his" than the rest of the world.

The west didn’t and doesn’t care about Ukraine one bit. I am not talking about gullible Americans but the governments. They care about having a stable predictable neighbor and about not letting Russia or China or anyone for that matter become strong enough to threaten the US and its allies.
This was the whole reason of dangling the EU carrot in front of Ukraine and Georgia. Apparently Georgians were a little smarter to keep their mouths shut about their EU ambitions and also more lucky since they are of less value to Russia than Ukraine. So now Ukraine bears the brunt of the Russian anger.
Again, I am not defending Russia but just explaining the reasoning

The west likes stability, and it likes good trade partners. And I know of a lot of Americans who worked with Ukraine and viewed Ukraine very favorably. Ukraine has a lot of good software developers and other innovators, in addition to its more traditional economy. If they didn't truly care about Ukraine there wouldn't even have been any carrots dangled.

Maybe we just have different definitions of care

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Russian but have lived in the US for over a decade
I still have family there so I visit regularly and have been going even after the invasion (it’s become much more expensive and cumbersome fyi)
My guess is that Russia will be Iran on steroids. A geriatric regime, extremely conservative and on the brink of dictatorship (but not to the extent of North Korea). The economy will be militarized (the so called mobilization economy), people won’t starve and will be able to move freely (finances permitting). However there will be no innovation and not much vibrancy if you know what I mean. However there is a rich legacy of kitchen cultural life from the soviet times, as well as post soviet cultural renaissance, so it not going to be all doom and gloom.
Yes there will be brain drain but also there will be a sufficient number of technically talented people who are believers and can keep the austere military economy afloat. And there is a certain taste for overcoming difficulties in the “genes” of the population.
As for the war, it will be a slow churn, one step forward and two steps back. I feel bad for the annexed regions and their population. They will suffer no matter the outcome.
Some parts of Russia might be under shelling too (some already are but I mean cities and not just Belgorod).
Basically, there will be life but no one without ties to Russia will want to live a life like that.

Interesting! Does your family have access to information or are they also blinded by the Russian propaganda machine? Do you enlighten them?
Also, do you think that the "overcoming difficulties" gene is still strong, especially after Western exposure and luxuries? Even with the youth? I'd think it'd be waning.

Family: it depends. None of them is totally blinded by the propaganda but they all think that Ukraine went too far in trying to be with the West and rejecting Russia, the Russian language, etc.
They don’t phrase it like that but that’s the essence.
None of them can face the fact that the war, the power struggle was a huge mistake. They think there is “something” to it. Even those who think Putin and his cronies are criminals etc
I tried to share my POV but while they are all respectful they clearly think I have been brainwashed
The “overcoming difficulties” gene is still there in a lot of people. One of the things that surprised me in connection with this war is how few people have actually been exposed to Western values and luxury beyond Burger King and such. And Chinese phones are preferred over Apple by and large

They don't understand and accept that Ukraine moving to the West and rejecting Russia is a direct result of Russia's continual meddling and corrupting of Ukraine, their invasion in 2014?
They don't understand that it is Russia's own belligerent behavior that is also pushing Finland and Sweden into NATO?

Why did Russia invade in 2014?

In 2014, Ukraine wanted to join the EU. But Putin didn't want this, so he had his corrupt, criminal puppet Yanukovich betray and derail them. Students began protesting, Yanukovich sent Berkut to violently beat them down, this violence made a lot of people upset causing the protests to escalate, ultimately resulting in Yanukovich's ouster. Putin invaded out of revenge for Yanukovich's ouster.

DP. I want $1K and will never get it. These were the chances that Ukraine would join EU any time soon. This is a very superficial explanation of why Russia invaded and what Ukrainian Maidan leaders wanted.

Superficial? I'd suggest some superficiality on your part to casually ignore that the Verkhovna Rada voted on the Ukraine-EU agreement and it passed with a solid majority, before Yanukovich unilaterally scuttled the deal and announced that Ukraine would instead pursue closer ties with Russia.

The EU would not have signed it without significant changes and it was heavily conditioned on a number of things
Honestly I am surprised Russia seemed so upset by it. Europe was trying to lure Ukraine in but it wasn’t going to make it easy
But of course Ukraine shouldn’t have angered the bear without any real chances of getting anything
I don’t believe they didn’t know it was all illusion and they had a long way ahead of them
There must have been something else. Like maybe politicians just using some popular gimmicks to stay in power

Well, that's quite a take. I certainly don't think everyone that was pro-Maidan was as pure as the driven snow, but I also don't think it's a real stretch to believe that the relatively young population of Ukraine wanted something different than to be a Putin puppet state. If anyone overplayed their hand here, it's Putin, time and again.

I don’t blame them, I would rather have American or any of the EU citizenships than Russian, too.
However they needed to be realistic. The West wasn’t going to welcome them with open arms. Russia wasn’t going to let go of what it considered theirs.
This whole illusion of Ukraine being Europe (or worse, a cynical lie by certain politicians) is what brought Ukraine to a sad state it is in now.
Is it fair that it can’t leave Russia’s orbit, at least without major destruction? No! But is it true? Certainly yes.

This is wrong.
The West had some legitimate concerns, yes. Ukraine had problems, but they were not insurmountable problems. Membership was definitely not off the table, it was far from a "cynical lie."
Meanwhile, Russia's other former SSRs and satellite states are further distancing themselves from Russia. Ukraine is taking the brunt, but I doubt Russia can survive trying to do the same to any other state that wants to pull itself out of Russia's orbit. Russia can barely manage a war on one front, let alone more than one.

I've been watching the independence game long enough. Every single one of them, starting with Mr. Dudaev, says the same thing - when we are independent, we'll live like Switzerland! Guess what, the only ones who ended up remotely like Switzerland were countries with enough resources like Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. The rest (and not excluding these two) found out that with independence, they are still corrupt, still slow, still inefficient, still backward. Where we are right now is the Lithuanians washing dishes in London, and the Uzbek washing dishes in Moscow.

Well I think a lot has now changed. We've found that the Russian bear used to be big and hungry but now he is just old, weak, gaunt and toothless. Georgia and the others have far less to fear from Russia now than they did before February 2022. And with Russia losing its military and economic clout, it also now has far less ability for its oligarch to get their tendrils into those countries to corrupt and rob them.

DP. You may be right about the first point.
Was it worth millions of Ukrainians having their lives uprooted and some of them even lost? I don’t know.
As for the oligarchs, the former republics have their own

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

DP.... i'd consider her to be a Russified Armenian, one who'd probably be too cowardly to say anything if Putin went after Armenians and would continue to cheer Russia on if Armenians were genocided. Similar to how Ramzan Kadyrov is still a Z fanboy despite all of the horrible things Russia did to the Chechen people.

Russia did horrible things to Chechens?! LOL. How about Chechens becoming full of themselves after the USSR fell apart and doing horrible things to ethnic Russians who lived there. Also wanting independence that was absolutely impossible. I can’t think of a single country who would grant them independence in place of Russia.

"LOL" says someone about repeated Russian genocides against Chechens.

During the Russian conquest of the Caucasus in the 1800s, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced. There were as many as 1.5 million Chechens in the Caucasus in 1847, but as a result of war and expulsions, their number dropped to 140,000 in 1861, and then further to 116,000 by 1867.

And again in 1944, Russia committed genocide against Chechens, accusing them of being "Nazis" even though the Nazis were unsuccessful in recruiting Chechens. NKVD and thousands of Russian troops arrived and forced nearly 400,000 Chechens onto rail cars. 700 Chechens who resisted were locked in a barn and burned to death. Those who moved to slowly were shot. A quarter of them died as they were displaced, from freezing to death in uninsulated rail cars in extreme cold to starvation.

But "LOL genocide ha ha" says the PP. Astounding.
"They weren't treated horribly." Astounding.
No clue why some Chechens might harbor some resentment, distrust and animosity toward Russians. Astounding.

Chechens have never been independent, and outside of subsistence societies, have never been self-sufficient, either.

The brief time in history when they were kinda sorta independent produced thousands of salafi fighters, beheaded aid workers by the side of the road, and rank lawlessness of the kind that even the locals rebelled against. And let's not forget the world's most famous Chechen, Mr. Dzhohar Tsarnaev.

I am the LOL PP and of course I didn’t laugh about genocide but about the rosy notion of innocent Chechens suffering from the evil Russians’ oppression.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

DP.... i'd consider her to be a Russified Armenian, one who'd probably be too cowardly to say anything if Putin went after Armenians and would continue to cheer Russia on if Armenians were genocided. Similar to how Ramzan Kadyrov is still a Z fanboy despite all of the horrible things Russia did to the Chechen people.

Russia did horrible things to Chechens?! LOL. How about Chechens becoming full of themselves after the USSR fell apart and doing horrible things to ethnic Russians who lived there. Also wanting independence that was absolutely impossible. I can’t think of a single country who would grant them independence in place of Russia.

"LOL" says someone about repeated Russian genocides against Chechens.

During the Russian conquest of the Caucasus in the 1800s, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced. There were as many as 1.5 million Chechens in the Caucasus in 1847, but as a result of war and expulsions, their number dropped to 140,000 in 1861, and then further to 116,000 by 1867.

And again in 1944, Russia committed genocide against Chechens, accusing them of being "Nazis" even though the Nazis were unsuccessful in recruiting Chechens. NKVD and thousands of Russian troops arrived and forced nearly 400,000 Chechens onto rail cars. 700 Chechens who resisted were locked in a barn and burned to death. Those who moved to slowly were shot. A quarter of them died as they were displaced, from freezing to death in uninsulated rail cars in extreme cold to starvation.

But "LOL genocide ha ha" says the PP. Astounding.
"They weren't treated horribly." Astounding.
No clue why some Chechens might harbor some resentment, distrust and animosity toward Russians. Astounding.

Chechens have never been independent, and outside of subsistence societies, have never been self-sufficient, either.

The brief time in history when they were kinda sorta independent produced thousands of salafi fighters, beheaded aid workers by the side of the road, and rank lawlessness of the kind that even the locals rebelled against. And let's not forget the world's most famous Chechen, Mr. Dzhohar Tsarnaev.

Yet when Russia cracked down on Chechnya, the innocent locals who also rejected the lawless fighters and warlords took a big part of the brunt of Russian punishment. That is what Russia does. They "liberate" cities by leveling them, randomly bombarding and destroying homes, schools, hospitals and everything else without discrimination. They did the same in Syria, they are doing the same in Ukraine.

The locals mostly supported the warlords. Many not by choice but because they are all parts of clans there and they have no choice.
I am not the PP you are responding to fwiw

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Russian but have lived in the US for over a decade
I still have family there so I visit regularly and have been going even after the invasion (it’s become much more expensive and cumbersome fyi)
My guess is that Russia will be Iran on steroids. A geriatric regime, extremely conservative and on the brink of dictatorship (but not to the extent of North Korea). The economy will be militarized (the so called mobilization economy), people won’t starve and will be able to move freely (finances permitting). However there will be no innovation and not much vibrancy if you know what I mean. However there is a rich legacy of kitchen cultural life from the soviet times, as well as post soviet cultural renaissance, so it not going to be all doom and gloom.
Yes there will be brain drain but also there will be a sufficient number of technically talented people who are believers and can keep the austere military economy afloat. And there is a certain taste for overcoming difficulties in the “genes” of the population.
As for the war, it will be a slow churn, one step forward and two steps back. I feel bad for the annexed regions and their population. They will suffer no matter the outcome.
Some parts of Russia might be under shelling too (some already are but I mean cities and not just Belgorod).
Basically, there will be life but no one without ties to Russia will want to live a life like that.

Interesting! Does your family have access to information or are they also blinded by the Russian propaganda machine? Do you enlighten them?
Also, do you think that the "overcoming difficulties" gene is still strong, especially after Western exposure and luxuries? Even with the youth? I'd think it'd be waning.

Family: it depends. None of them is totally blinded by the propaganda but they all think that Ukraine went too far in trying to be with the West and rejecting Russia, the Russian language, etc.
They don’t phrase it like that but that’s the essence.
None of them can face the fact that the war, the power struggle was a huge mistake. They think there is “something” to it. Even those who think Putin and his cronies are criminals etc
I tried to share my POV but while they are all respectful they clearly think I have been brainwashed
The “overcoming difficulties” gene is still there in a lot of people. One of the things that surprised me in connection with this war is how few people have actually been exposed to Western values and luxury beyond Burger King and such. And Chinese phones are preferred over Apple by and large

They don't understand and accept that Ukraine moving to the West and rejecting Russia is a direct result of Russia's continual meddling and corrupting of Ukraine, their invasion in 2014?
They don't understand that it is Russia's own belligerent behavior that is also pushing Finland and Sweden into NATO?

Why did Russia invade in 2014?

In 2014, Ukraine wanted to join the EU. But Putin didn't want this, so he had his corrupt, criminal puppet Yanukovich betray and derail them. Students began protesting, Yanukovich sent Berkut to violently beat them down, this violence made a lot of people upset causing the protests to escalate, ultimately resulting in Yanukovich's ouster. Putin invaded out of revenge for Yanukovich's ouster.

DP. I want $1K and will never get it. These were the chances that Ukraine would join EU any time soon. This is a very superficial explanation of why Russia invaded and what Ukrainian Maidan leaders wanted.

Superficial? I'd suggest some superficiality on your part to casually ignore that the Verkhovna Rada voted on the Ukraine-EU agreement and it passed with a solid majority, before Yanukovich unilaterally scuttled the deal and announced that Ukraine would instead pursue closer ties with Russia.

The EU would not have signed it without significant changes and it was heavily conditioned on a number of things
Honestly I am surprised Russia seemed so upset by it. Europe was trying to lure Ukraine in but it wasn’t going to make it easy
But of course Ukraine shouldn’t have angered the bear without any real chances of getting anything
I don’t believe they didn’t know it was all illusion and they had a long way ahead of them
There must have been something else. Like maybe politicians just using some popular gimmicks to stay in power

Well, that's quite a take. I certainly don't think everyone that was pro-Maidan was as pure as the driven snow, but I also don't think it's a real stretch to believe that the relatively young population of Ukraine wanted something different than to be a Putin puppet state. If anyone overplayed their hand here, it's Putin, time and again.

I don’t blame them, I would rather have American or any of the EU citizenships than Russian, too.
However they needed to be realistic. The West wasn’t going to welcome them with open arms. Russia wasn’t going to let go of what it considered theirs.
This whole illusion of Ukraine being Europe (or worse, a cynical lie by certain politicians) is what brought Ukraine to a sad state it is in now.
Is it fair that it can’t leave Russia’s orbit, at least without major destruction? No! But is it true? Certainly yes.

I don't know that I agree with this. We can quibble about what "open arms" means here, but the fact that the West was rooting for Ukraine to succeed/stand on its own is exactly the issue. Too bad if Putin has a different interpretation of "his" than the rest of the world.

The west didn’t and doesn’t care about Ukraine one bit. I am not talking about gullible Americans but the governments. They care about having a stable predictable neighbor and about not letting Russia or China or anyone for that matter become strong enough to threaten the US and its allies.
This was the whole reason of dangling the EU carrot in front of Ukraine and Georgia. Apparently Georgians were a little smarter to keep their mouths shut about their EU ambitions and also more lucky since they are of less value to Russia than Ukraine. So now Ukraine bears the brunt of the Russian anger.
Again, I am not defending Russia but just explaining the reasoning

The west likes stability, and it likes good trade partners. And I know of a lot of Americans who worked with Ukraine and viewed Ukraine very favorably. Ukraine has a lot of good software developers and other innovators, in addition to its more traditional economy. If they didn't truly care about Ukraine there wouldn't even have been any carrots dangled.

Maybe we just have different definitions of care

Well, we've clearly and repeatedly seen the Russian definition of "care" - it's "do what we tell you to or we will blast your town into rubble and send any survivors that were left to freeze and starve to death in the middle of nowhere." I'll take western care over Russian care, thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

DP.... i'd consider her to be a Russified Armenian, one who'd probably be too cowardly to say anything if Putin went after Armenians and would continue to cheer Russia on if Armenians were genocided. Similar to how Ramzan Kadyrov is still a Z fanboy despite all of the horrible things Russia did to the Chechen people.

Russia did horrible things to Chechens?! LOL. How about Chechens becoming full of themselves after the USSR fell apart and doing horrible things to ethnic Russians who lived there. Also wanting independence that was absolutely impossible. I can’t think of a single country who would grant them independence in place of Russia.

"LOL" says someone about repeated Russian genocides against Chechens.

During the Russian conquest of the Caucasus in the 1800s, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced. There were as many as 1.5 million Chechens in the Caucasus in 1847, but as a result of war and expulsions, their number dropped to 140,000 in 1861, and then further to 116,000 by 1867.

And again in 1944, Russia committed genocide against Chechens, accusing them of being "Nazis" even though the Nazis were unsuccessful in recruiting Chechens. NKVD and thousands of Russian troops arrived and forced nearly 400,000 Chechens onto rail cars. 700 Chechens who resisted were locked in a barn and burned to death. Those who moved to slowly were shot. A quarter of them died as they were displaced, from freezing to death in uninsulated rail cars in extreme cold to starvation.

But "LOL genocide ha ha" says the PP. Astounding.
"They weren't treated horribly." Astounding.
No clue why some Chechens might harbor some resentment, distrust and animosity toward Russians. Astounding.

Chechens have never been independent, and outside of subsistence societies, have never been self-sufficient, either.

The brief time in history when they were kinda sorta independent produced thousands of salafi fighters, beheaded aid workers by the side of the road, and rank lawlessness of the kind that even the locals rebelled against. And let's not forget the world's most famous Chechen, Mr. Dzhohar Tsarnaev.

Yet when Russia cracked down on Chechnya, the innocent locals who also rejected the lawless fighters and warlords took a big part of the brunt of Russian punishment. That is what Russia does. They "liberate" cities by leveling them, randomly bombarding and destroying homes, schools, hospitals and everything else without discrimination. They did the same in Syria, they are doing the same in Ukraine.

You cannot really tell between a warlord or an innocent local in Chechnya and the Russians couldn't either.

"Kil 'em all and let God sort them out."
Psychopathic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

DP.... i'd consider her to be a Russified Armenian, one who'd probably be too cowardly to say anything if Putin went after Armenians and would continue to cheer Russia on if Armenians were genocided. Similar to how Ramzan Kadyrov is still a Z fanboy despite all of the horrible things Russia did to the Chechen people.

Russia did horrible things to Chechens?! LOL. How about Chechens becoming full of themselves after the USSR fell apart and doing horrible things to ethnic Russians who lived there. Also wanting independence that was absolutely impossible. I can’t think of a single country who would grant them independence in place of Russia.

"LOL" says someone about repeated Russian genocides against Chechens.

During the Russian conquest of the Caucasus in the 1800s, hundreds of thousands were killed or displaced. There were as many as 1.5 million Chechens in the Caucasus in 1847, but as a result of war and expulsions, their number dropped to 140,000 in 1861, and then further to 116,000 by 1867.

And again in 1944, Russia committed genocide against Chechens, accusing them of being "Nazis" even though the Nazis were unsuccessful in recruiting Chechens. NKVD and thousands of Russian troops arrived and forced nearly 400,000 Chechens onto rail cars. 700 Chechens who resisted were locked in a barn and burned to death. Those who moved to slowly were shot. A quarter of them died as they were displaced, from freezing to death in uninsulated rail cars in extreme cold to starvation.

But "LOL genocide ha ha" says the PP. Astounding.
"They weren't treated horribly." Astounding.
No clue why some Chechens might harbor some resentment, distrust and animosity toward Russians. Astounding.

Chechens have never been independent, and outside of subsistence societies, have never been self-sufficient, either.

The brief time in history when they were kinda sorta independent produced thousands of salafi fighters, beheaded aid workers by the side of the road, and rank lawlessness of the kind that even the locals rebelled against. And let's not forget the world's most famous Chechen, Mr. Dzhohar Tsarnaev.

Yet when Russia cracked down on Chechnya, the innocent locals who also rejected the lawless fighters and warlords took a big part of the brunt of Russian punishment. That is what Russia does. They "liberate" cities by leveling them, randomly bombarding and destroying homes, schools, hospitals and everything else without discrimination. They did the same in Syria, they are doing the same in Ukraine.

You cannot really tell between a warlord or an innocent local in Chechnya and the Russians couldn't either.

"Kil 'em all and let God sort them out."
Psychopathic.

Inspired by the American drone technique in Afghanistan, no doubt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But thanks for helping me prove my original point (despite the distractors) is still valid. The claim that this very ethnically diverse area was EVER "predominantly (red) Russian" would be a false claim. You might try to argue that Russia "conquered" the region by Stalin from a nationality standpoint, but it was never ethnically Russian. Since this part of history is never taught to Russians (yet people affected may remember and pass down to generations), Russian propagandists often trip themselves up by making statements they believe are true, but the locals / natives know are not.

Stalin's deportations are common knowledge. I was in high school in the late eighties and it was part of the history curriculum.

You are a propagandist, rewriting reality and claiming things that are obviously, provably wrong.

Still laughing over your stupid claim that "everyone thinks Simonyan is Russian". Like who? Your moron Russian studies professor?

Hmm. Since you're Russian, you probably need to directly discuss the matter directly with Simonyan. I'm sure you two would hit it off.

But if not, maybe you could watch this in the meantime?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYqWFLqeBg

Simonyan: "The fact that I work and the way I feel, I serve Russia when my Motherland, my nation sees fit. Many thanks, I bow my head. I'm still trying to earn my first medal, much less my fourth. If they see fit to give me an award, then I see it's fit to say, "I serve Russia". I say it with pride."

Commentator: "During the press conference the following day, I heard of a new goal orientatiom which [Putin] spoke about the intrical unity of Russian people which w ehave to achieve without fail. It was voiced for the first time, that all of our activities pertaining to Ukraine are mainly or largely determined through this goal. Do you see this as an advancement in our common and governmental world view, or am I exaggerating?"
Simonyan: "To me, this is not an advancement, but a more sincere and more public acknowledgement that this was always the goal. I'm sure you have no doubt that even 20 years ago Putin wanted to gather the Russian world to defend Russians and to have this opportunity. [..] Russians must be unified, or at least under protection."

Simonyan: "I think this is exactly what [Putin] meant. If we are able to defend the interests not only of Russia withim it's geographical boundaries, not only the interests of a map, but the interests of our people, the way many other nations do it; for example, the way the Jews do it, then we should use those abilities and we should expand those abilities. What do we consider the interests of Russian people? I believe this is a UN rule on nationality and ethnicity. It is not determined by blood. Have you ever tried a DNA test?"
Commentator: "I did. I was interested to see what kind of blood is in me.
Simonyan: "It's very funny, really funny what's in there. A real windbreak."
Commentator: "I often get into arguments over my wording that I will continue to use: "multinational Russian people." This is the wording that I use. I'm being attacked from both sides about this, but I believe that this is the essence of our people."
Simonyan: "There is an internationally accepted expression, it might be a UN expression, I would have to check. You're very close to it. Ethnicity* is defined by two factors: the first one is self-determination, as to whom you consider yourself and the second characteristic is the language. What is your native language. Whoever you think you are and what is your language, that is your nationality, even if you are a [black-skinned person - I can't write what she really said here since it's offensive]."

* = initially she said "ethnicity" then later changed to "nationality", so unclear which she actually meant? The funny part is look at the reactions and expressions of the other guests at the end of the clip.

Again, proves the point.

It doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and inability to read the reality.

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian. End of story.

But then again, like your ignorant ilk, you seem unable to distinguish between citizenship and ethnicity.

Please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish, I'd love to see that.

Um. Again I think you proved my point? The analogy you used ("please go ahead and tell Palestinian Israelis they are Jewish")? Replace the word "Palestinian Israeli" with Ukrainian, and "Jewish" with the Word "Russian" and you get..

Please go ahead and tell Ukrainians they are Russian, I'd love to see that.

No one said Ukrainians are Russians, stop fighting imaginary fights. Again, for the slow ones:

Simonyan=ethnic Armenian.

Number of people who think Simonyan is an ethnic Russian = zero. Excepts DCUM dummy.

Um. Well. Actually the people in Armenia doesn't think she's Armenian, so does that count?

"Konstantin Zatulin, who has been a fierce supporter of Armenia for many years, has been banned from entering Armenia by the current leader of Armenia," Simonyan wrote on Telegram. "Me too, by the way."
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/hawkish-russian-broadcaster-simonyan-says-she-has-been-banned-armenia-2022-10-26/

(BTW - not sure who you were going back and forth with, but it wasn't me, so...)