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

[Anonymous]

Clueless Russian, after having invaded, oppressed, suppressed and repeatedly genocided Chechens for the last 250 years:

"Gee, I just don't get why these Chechens are so angry. They're just bad people, that's all."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Clueless Russian, after having invaded, oppressed, suppressed and repeatedly genocided Chechens for the last 250 years:

"Gee, I just don't get why these Chechens are so angry. They're just bad people, that's all."

They are bad to each other, too.

For instance, it wasn't Russians who made Chechens give custody exclusively to fathers in case of divorce, and bar access to mothers. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens the blood vendetta. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that women who marry out must be excommunicated or killed. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that a dead son is preferred to a gay son. That's self taught.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know a Chechen American family who lives in the area. Great, upstanding people. US citizens and as American as anyone. One kid serving in the military. And registered Democrats which surprised me because I would assume they would be conservative, but one of the kids is even what you would call “woke.” I know another Chechen family who are doctors, business owners, real estate agents. There is nothing in the DNA of Chechens or anyone else that says they can’t be good people and contributing members of society. It’s about having and creating a society worth contributing to, and I don’t think the Russian government has provided that.

Some of you are shamefully bigoted, it’s astonishing.

Chechens outside of their natural habitat are people like any other. Chechens in a majority setting are forced to live by their own laws even if they personally disagree with them because the family honor is more important than the feelings of any individual member of the family.

[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:

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.

I can't tell if you're describing Iraq or Ukraine.

Russia definitely did this to Chechens. And now they are doing it to Ukraine as well. Totally beyond me what your weird insinuatin about "Iraq" is supposed to mean.

Just that your description of Russia's M.O. sounds suspiciously like...oh, every other country making war on another country.

I must have missed the part where the American troops in Iraq rounded up most of the Iraqis and loaded them into cattle cars with no food and water and sent them off to some wasteland in the frozen north. And burned the ones who resisted alive.

Did you miss half a million dead Iraqis too? Or are you only counting the dead who are white?

Are you missing the part where American soldiers didn't kill those Iraqis? Most of them were killed by insurgents, ISIS, sectarian groups et cetera. And how disgusting of you to suggest "only counting the dead who are white."

Gee, that's like saying, I didn't kill that guy, I only put him in a box car with no food or water in subzero temperature. It's like...you want the freedom to fock up countries and total immunity from the bad stuff that happens in a focked-up country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clueless Russian, after having invaded, oppressed, suppressed and repeatedly genocided Chechens for the last 250 years:

"Gee, I just don't get why these Chechens are so angry. They're just bad people, that's all."

They are bad to each other, too.

For instance, it wasn't Russians who made Chechens give custody exclusively to fathers in case of divorce, and bar access to mothers. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens the blood vendetta. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that women who marry out must be excommunicated or killed. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that a dead son is preferred to a gay son. That's self taught.

Even if it were all true, Russians could have just left them alone.

And Russians can be homophobic too, and plenty of Russian men beat their wives, are alcoholics, gangsters and thugs. At least Chechens don’t drink. The difference is one group wants to impose their way of life and political influence over others. The other just wanted to be left alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clueless Russian, after having invaded, oppressed, suppressed and repeatedly genocided Chechens for the last 250 years:

"Gee, I just don't get why these Chechens are so angry. They're just bad people, that's all."

They are bad to each other, too.

For instance, it wasn't Russians who made Chechens give custody exclusively to fathers in case of divorce, and bar access to mothers. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens the blood vendetta. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that women who marry out must be excommunicated or killed. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that a dead son is preferred to a gay son. That's self taught.

Even if it were all true, Russians could have just left them alone.

And Russians can be homophobic too, and plenty of Russian men beat their wives, are alcoholics, gangsters and thugs. At least Chechens don’t drink. The difference is one group wants to impose their way of life and political influence over others. The other just wanted to be left alone.

What do you mean? It IS all true.

The world saw what happened in Chechnya when it was kinda sorta left alone. It was not pretty. There is no viable path to independence for them, and no one wants a salafi funded failed state next door. So, no. I find it curious that you think any part of Russia that wants to be "left alone" needs to immediately be set free, but god forbid a part of Azerbaijan wants to be independent, or a part of Ukraine, too. Then you all are like, "territorial integrity!" That's apparently only for some countries and not for others. Good to know! Just like civil rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clueless Russian, after having invaded, oppressed, suppressed and repeatedly genocided Chechens for the last 250 years:

"Gee, I just don't get why these Chechens are so angry. They're just bad people, that's all."

They are bad to each other, too.

For instance, it wasn't Russians who made Chechens give custody exclusively to fathers in case of divorce, and bar access to mothers. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens the blood vendetta. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that women who marry out must be excommunicated or killed. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that a dead son is preferred to a gay son. That's self taught.

Even if it were all true, Russians could have just left them alone.

And Russians can be homophobic too, and plenty of Russian men beat their wives, are alcoholics, gangsters and thugs. At least Chechens don’t drink. The difference is one group wants to impose their way of life and political influence over others. The other just wanted to be left alone.

Russians can be homophobic, yes, but a Russian father can simply hate his gay son without feeling the family pressure to kill him, or to punish a misbehaving wife or female relative. Russians are too numerous to be tribal.

[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:

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.

I can't tell if you're describing Iraq or Ukraine.

Russia definitely did this to Chechens. And now they are doing it to Ukraine as well. Totally beyond me what your weird insinuatin about "Iraq" is supposed to mean.

Just that your description of Russia's M.O. sounds suspiciously like...oh, every other country making war on another country.

I must have missed the part where the American troops in Iraq rounded up most of the Iraqis and loaded them into cattle cars with no food and water and sent them off to some wasteland in the frozen north. And burned the ones who resisted alive.

Did you miss half a million dead Iraqis too? Or are you only counting the dead who are white?

Are you missing the part where American soldiers didn't kill those Iraqis? Most of them were killed by insurgents, ISIS, sectarian groups et cetera. And how disgusting of you to suggest "only counting the dead who are white."

Gee, that's like saying, I didn't kill that guy, I only put him in a box car with no food or water in subzero temperature. It's like...you want the freedom to fock up countries and total immunity from the bad stuff that happens in a focked-up country.

Wow, what a DUMB take. Iraqi insurgents, ISIS and others *literally* pointed the guns and pulled the triggers. *LITERALLY* detonated the bombs. Like when they literally killed 796 people in a single day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Yazidi_communities_bombings

[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:

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.

I can't tell if you're describing Iraq or Ukraine.

Russia definitely did this to Chechens. And now they are doing it to Ukraine as well. Totally beyond me what your weird insinuatin about "Iraq" is supposed to mean.

Just that your description of Russia's M.O. sounds suspiciously like...oh, every other country making war on another country.

I must have missed the part where the American troops in Iraq rounded up most of the Iraqis and loaded them into cattle cars with no food and water and sent them off to some wasteland in the frozen north. And burned the ones who resisted alive.

Did you miss half a million dead Iraqis too? Or are you only counting the dead who are white?

Are you missing the part where American soldiers didn't kill those Iraqis? Most of them were killed by insurgents, ISIS, sectarian groups et cetera. And how disgusting of you to suggest "only counting the dead who are white."

Gee, that's like saying, I didn't kill that guy, I only put him in a box car with no food or water in subzero temperature. It's like...you want the freedom to fock up countries and total immunity from the bad stuff that happens in a focked-up country.

Wow, what a DUMB take. Iraqi insurgents, ISIS and others *literally* pointed the guns and pulled the triggers. *LITERALLY* detonated the bombs. Like when they literally killed 796 people in a single day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Yazidi_communities_bombings

If only there was a stable ruler in that country who made groups like ISIS impossible!

Also: insurgents? Like, you want the freedom to invade countries but these countries have no right to resist? Insurgents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clueless Russian, after having invaded, oppressed, suppressed and repeatedly genocided Chechens for the last 250 years:

"Gee, I just don't get why these Chechens are so angry. They're just bad people, that's all."

They are bad to each other, too.

For instance, it wasn't Russians who made Chechens give custody exclusively to fathers in case of divorce, and bar access to mothers. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens the blood vendetta. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that women who marry out must be excommunicated or killed. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that a dead son is preferred to a gay son. That's self taught.

Even if it were all true, Russians could have just left them alone.

And Russians can be homophobic too, and plenty of Russian men beat their wives, are alcoholics, gangsters and thugs. At least Chechens don’t drink. The difference is one group wants to impose their way of life and political influence over others. The other just wanted to be left alone.

What do you mean? It IS all true.

The world saw what happened in Chechnya when it was kinda sorta left alone. It was not pretty. There is no viable path to independence for them, and no one wants a salafi funded failed state next door. So, no. I find it curious that you think any part of Russia that wants to be "left alone" needs to immediately be set free, but god forbid a part of Azerbaijan wants to be independent, or a part of Ukraine, too. Then you all are like, "territorial integrity!" That's apparently only for some countries and not for others. Good to know! Just like civil rights.

Oh what a surprise... the Chechens were radicalized. Couldn't possibly have had anything to do with all of the Russian genocide and oppression. Nah, not at all.

[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:

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.

I can't tell if you're describing Iraq or Ukraine.

Russia definitely did this to Chechens. And now they are doing it to Ukraine as well. Totally beyond me what your weird insinuatin about "Iraq" is supposed to mean.

Just that your description of Russia's M.O. sounds suspiciously like...oh, every other country making war on another country.

I must have missed the part where the American troops in Iraq rounded up most of the Iraqis and loaded them into cattle cars with no food and water and sent them off to some wasteland in the frozen north. And burned the ones who resisted alive.

Did you miss half a million dead Iraqis too? Or are you only counting the dead who are white?

Are you missing the part where American soldiers didn't kill those Iraqis? Most of them were killed by insurgents, ISIS, sectarian groups et cetera. And how disgusting of you to suggest "only counting the dead who are white."

Gee, that's like saying, I didn't kill that guy, I only put him in a box car with no food or water in subzero temperature. It's like...you want the freedom to fock up countries and total immunity from the bad stuff that happens in a focked-up country.

Ah right, right. It's America's fault because they didn't use their magic Hogwarts CIA Brain Washing Wand. They should have just waved it in the air and solved hundreds of years worth of Muslim sectarian divides, solved ISIS and everything else, like how they brainwashed all of those Ukrainian students into protesting Yanukovich. How foolish that they didn't think of that.

Yes, this is sarcasm. And it's clear where the different lines of bullshit Russian propaganda begin to collide with each other.

[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:

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.

I can't tell if you're describing Iraq or Ukraine.

Russia definitely did this to Chechens. And now they are doing it to Ukraine as well. Totally beyond me what your weird insinuatin about "Iraq" is supposed to mean.

Just that your description of Russia's M.O. sounds suspiciously like...oh, every other country making war on another country.

I must have missed the part where the American troops in Iraq rounded up most of the Iraqis and loaded them into cattle cars with no food and water and sent them off to some wasteland in the frozen north. And burned the ones who resisted alive.

Did you miss half a million dead Iraqis too? Or are you only counting the dead who are white?

Are you missing the part where American soldiers didn't kill those Iraqis? Most of them were killed by insurgents, ISIS, sectarian groups et cetera. And how disgusting of you to suggest "only counting the dead who are white."

Gee, that's like saying, I didn't kill that guy, I only put him in a box car with no food or water in subzero temperature. It's like...you want the freedom to fock up countries and total immunity from the bad stuff that happens in a focked-up country.

Wow, what a DUMB take. Iraqi insurgents, ISIS and others *literally* pointed the guns and pulled the triggers. *LITERALLY* detonated the bombs. Like when they literally killed 796 people in a single day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Yazidi_communities_bombings

If only there was a stable ruler in that country who made groups like ISIS impossible!

Also: insurgents? Like, you want the freedom to invade countries but these countries have no right to resist? Insurgents?

It was Iraqis killing Iraqis. But do go on with your dumb self.

[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:

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.

I can't tell if you're describing Iraq or Ukraine.

Russia definitely did this to Chechens. And now they are doing it to Ukraine as well. Totally beyond me what your weird insinuatin about "Iraq" is supposed to mean.

Just that your description of Russia's M.O. sounds suspiciously like...oh, every other country making war on another country.

I must have missed the part where the American troops in Iraq rounded up most of the Iraqis and loaded them into cattle cars with no food and water and sent them off to some wasteland in the frozen north. And burned the ones who resisted alive.

Did you miss half a million dead Iraqis too? Or are you only counting the dead who are white?

Are you missing the part where American soldiers didn't kill those Iraqis? Most of them were killed by insurgents, ISIS, sectarian groups et cetera. And how disgusting of you to suggest "only counting the dead who are white."

Gee, that's like saying, I didn't kill that guy, I only put him in a box car with no food or water in subzero temperature. It's like...you want the freedom to fock up countries and total immunity from the bad stuff that happens in a focked-up country.

Ah right, right. It's America's fault because they didn't use their magic Hogwarts CIA Brain Washing Wand. They should have just waved it in the air and solved hundreds of years worth of Muslim sectarian divides, solved ISIS and everything else, like how they brainwashed all of those Ukrainian students into protesting Yanukovich. How foolish that they didn't think of that.

Yes, this is sarcasm. And it's clear where the different lines of bullshit Russian propaganda begin to collide with each other.

If only there was an option to do nothing and not invade!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clueless Russian, after having invaded, oppressed, suppressed and repeatedly genocided Chechens for the last 250 years:

"Gee, I just don't get why these Chechens are so angry. They're just bad people, that's all."

They are bad to each other, too.

For instance, it wasn't Russians who made Chechens give custody exclusively to fathers in case of divorce, and bar access to mothers. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens the blood vendetta. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that women who marry out must be excommunicated or killed. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that a dead son is preferred to a gay son. That's self taught.

Even if it were all true, Russians could have just left them alone.

And Russians can be homophobic too, and plenty of Russian men beat their wives, are alcoholics, gangsters and thugs. At least Chechens don’t drink. The difference is one group wants to impose their way of life and political influence over others. The other just wanted to be left alone.

What do you mean? It IS all true.

The world saw what happened in Chechnya when it was kinda sorta left alone. It was not pretty. There is no viable path to independence for them, and no one wants a salafi funded failed state next door. So, no. I find it curious that you think any part of Russia that wants to be "left alone" needs to immediately be set free, but god forbid a part of Azerbaijan wants to be independent, or a part of Ukraine, too. Then you all are like, "territorial integrity!" That's apparently only for some countries and not for others. Good to know! Just like civil rights.

You are really trying to tell me that the “separatist” republics in Eastern Ukraine are actual freedom fighters that want self governance and Russia is just backing the little guy? Haha. Why is Russia trying to annex them?

Like you really think we believe that in 2008 Russia suddenly cared for the liberation of the Abkhaz people? And South Ossetia, a “country”with the same population as Silver Spring, Maryland? Give me a BREAK. Why do they all have Russian passports now?
What other conclusion can we draw other than Russia wanting to rebuild an empire?

But the damn Chechens in the early 90s just got too uppity.

I’m as critical of US foreign policy (and domestic policy, for that matter) as the next person. I myself lean left. One thing holds true though. People for various reasons WANT to come to America and become Americans. Whereas people become Russians (россияне) by force and violence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clueless Russian, after having invaded, oppressed, suppressed and repeatedly genocided Chechens for the last 250 years:

"Gee, I just don't get why these Chechens are so angry. They're just bad people, that's all."

They are bad to each other, too.

For instance, it wasn't Russians who made Chechens give custody exclusively to fathers in case of divorce, and bar access to mothers. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens the blood vendetta. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that women who marry out must be excommunicated or killed. It wasn't Russians who taught Chechens that a dead son is preferred to a gay son. That's self taught.

Even if it were all true, Russians could have just left them alone.

And Russians can be homophobic too, and plenty of Russian men beat their wives, are alcoholics, gangsters and thugs. At least Chechens don’t drink. The difference is one group wants to impose their way of life and political influence over others. The other just wanted to be left alone.

What do you mean? It IS all true.

The world saw what happened in Chechnya when it was kinda sorta left alone. It was not pretty. There is no viable path to independence for them, and no one wants a salafi funded failed state next door. So, no. I find it curious that you think any part of Russia that wants to be "left alone" needs to immediately be set free, but god forbid a part of Azerbaijan wants to be independent, or a part of Ukraine, too. Then you all are like, "territorial integrity!" That's apparently only for some countries and not for others. Good to know! Just like civil rights.

Oh what a surprise... the Chechens were radicalized. Couldn't possibly have had anything to do with all of the Russian genocide and oppression. Nah, not at all.

Territorial integrity for me but not for thee!