Jump to content
FlorbFnarb

Shit's blowing up in Paris; our EU peeps all okay?

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, hallo1994 said:

Things are looking faster....

Hopefully, he'll step down. 

https://www.rt.com/news/324045-putin-erdogan-su-downing/

 

Much as I'd like to see Erdogan go, I don't like anything that is any sort of boost to Putin in any way, and frankly Putin is the bigger problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Much as I'd like to see Erdogan go, I don't like anything that is any sort of boost to Putin in any way, and frankly Putin is the bigger problem.

Srsly, you rate Putin as more dangerous than terrorism? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Florb, I strongly believe that you are wrong in your assessment.

Russia doesnt support terrorism in a direct or indirect manner.

Erdogan does! His son is managing the oil sales for ISIS via Turkey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Paaranoja said:

Srsly, you rate Putin as more dangerous than terrorism? 

I rate Russia as having the physical ability to do more harm than ISIS; surely that's incontestable?  ISIS is of course more likely to do harm in the near future, but their future is simply bleak.  They are ideologically committed to both holding land (their claims to being the caliphate require it) and to open conflict with both the non-Muslim world and most of the rest of the Muslim world, the vast majority of whom they consider to be apostates. They are also dependent upon both holding land and open conflict for their marketing appeal; no jihad, no jihadists flooding in as recruits.

The problem is that holding land and waging war against multiple enemies work against each other; ISIS is not Al Qaeda and must wage open, conventional war against the outside world in addition to sponsoring terrorism.  When Al Qaeda cells are attacked, they can flee to attack another day.  ISIS cannot wage only guerilla war, or they are de facto ceding control of terroritory to those they call invaders...which undermines their claim to the caliphate.  They must fight openly when attacked, but their conventional forces, while strong enough to push back low-morale Iraqi and Syrian troops, have often faced defeat at the hands of motivated Kurdish troops and have no chance whatsoever in the long run against NATO or Russian forces.

So while in the short term ISIS is the real threat, in the long run they are simply doomed; the question isn't will they be defeated, it's how much damage they will do before going down, and what the post-war Middle East will look like.

In contrast, Russia is no danger whatsoever except to Ukraine, Georgia, and the Baltic states; Putin is not daft enough to invade the EU tomorrow or start firing on American ships.  He is a real long-term ideological problem, however.  He is corrupting Russia's politics badly, and has been doing so for a long time.  He is actively trying to establish Russia as a great power in opposition to Europe and America, not as a part of the West but as a rival.  That's absolutely absurd in terms of Russian military and economic power, but he does have dreams of Russian superpower status; he has said he considers the dissolution of the Soviet Union the greatest disaster of the 20th century, and Stalin is seeing a resurgence in popularity in Russia.  He deeply resents the continued existence of NATO and its expansion, but the fact is that after the breakup of the Soviet Union, NATO was simply a western peacekeeping and general mutual-defense organization with no specific threat apart from managing conflicts in Yugoslavia and the like.  If Putin resents NATO, he needs to look in the mirror to assign blame, because he is the sole reason that NATO is back go to being a counter to Russia.  His aggressive attitude towards multiple former Soviet satellites and republics is the reason NATO is in the Russia-countering business.

Putin could have been the guy who cleaned up Russian corruption after Yeltsin's decline (a truly sad story) and brought Russia into the West as a productive and stable global trading partner.  Instead he has used corruption to strengthen his corporatist control over private and public Russian institutions, he's used his energy surplus as a tool for political bullying, and he has deliberately fostered disputes with the EU and America.  He has purposely driven Russia toward conflict with the west - not because he actually wants open war, but because he doesn't want to be one nation among many in a peacefully trading First World, he wants Russia to be top dog, and that requires him to send signals to those he wants to dominate - "Who, whom?" in the words of Lenin.

For the sake of America and Europe, and for Russia's sake, Putin must be countered.  Yes, he fights terrorists - but so what?  Hitler was adamantly anticommunist and Stalin was staunchly anti-Nazi; that doesn't mean we should have trusted either of them for an instant.

Westen weakness meant we couldn't knock the Axis out without allying with the Soviets, which strengthened Stalin's hand in postwar Europe and was a disaster for generations of Eastern Europe.

We shouldn't let that happen again.

2 minutes ago, gingxxx said:

Florb, I strongly believe that you are wrong in your assessment.

Russia doesnt support terrorism in a direct or indirect manner.

Erdogan does! His son is managing the oil sales for ISIS via Turkey

I'd be interested in seeing some reporting on that.  I don't deny Erdogan is and has been an increasing problem.

As for the rest, see my above post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Private_Miros said:

Discussing politics never ends well.

It can have issues in general, but I think people here have managed to discuss some fairly contentious stuff fairly civilly for the most part, with only a few exceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, just wow.

 

After soviet colapse there was not a single helping hand from the west to help rebuild Russia and other fractioned states. Instead economical and military pressure was used hoping and believing that USA will be unchecked power that could exploit everything and anyone for their gains. Not only that, the social brainwashing continued labeling Russians as satan spawns basically. 

 

West is de-facto the reason Putin exists and you think the best way to set russia straight is to do all that shit all over again? Another muscle flexing cold war? More economic and social sanctions?

You fail to grasp the mentality resulting from your "world police" stance. You push Russians and they will produce even more Putins as a result. Maybe the west can finally realise that the way to deal with Russia is not to strong arm it into submission but rather  compromise and find middle ground. 

 

Jeez, you are a perfect specimen of that russiophobic indoctrination. Describing Russia you very accurately describe USA as well, but since your Good/Bad compass is so out of alignment you cant even notice it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Paaranoja said:

Wow, just wow.

 

After soviet colapse there was not a single helping hand from the west to help rebuild Russia and other fractioned states. Instead economical and military pressure was used hoping and believing that USA will be unchecked power that could exploit everything and anyone for their gains. Not only that, the social brainwashing continued labeling Russians as satan spawns basically. 

 

West is de-facto the reason Putin exists and you think the best way to set russia straight is to do all that shit all over again? Another muscle flexing cold war? More economic and social sanctions?

You fail to grasp the mentality resulting from your "world police" stance. You push Russians and they will produce even more Putins as a result. Maybe the west can finally realise that the way to deal with Russia is not to strong arm it into submission but rather  compromise and find middle ground. 

 

Jeez, you are a perfect specimen of that russiophobic indoctrination. Describing Russia you very accurately describe USA as well, but since your Good/Bad compass is so out of alignment you cant even notice it.

Your post is absurd.  I have no "Russophobia", whatever that's supposed to mean; these days "[X]ophobia" is too often an attempt to shut down debate.

Regardless, your analysis is absurd.  The west didn't fork over enough money to "rebuild" Russia after the end of the Soviet Union?  What does that mean?  Russia wasn't devastated by a war; why did we need to hand money over to Russia?

Not did I say anything about strong-arming Russia into submission...I said we should stop Russia from strong-arming other countries into submission.  Russia is not the victim here; Georgia and Ukraine and the Baltic states are, and Putin is the cause of that.

Russia has a corrupted economy but instead of rebuilding that to, you know, sell things other people want, they instead start pushing around former Soviet republics and satellites for daring to not do as Putin says.

The history here is not really at question; NATO stopped being a Soviet-containing alliance with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and didn't become a Russia-containing alliance until Putin made it clear he had no interest in playing nice.

Putin is an old KGB spook that thinks the end of the Soviet Union, a totalitarian state, was a bad thing.  You cannot blame that on the West, and it's a special kind of absurd to say that pushing back at him is misguided.

Yes, Putin needs to be resisted.  He doesn't want to be part of a liberalized world, he wants to establish Russia to dominate the world.  That's the only success in his mind.  He isn't a liberal, he's an autocratic thug, and he's leading Russia down a path that leads nowhere good, for Russia, for Europe, or for the world.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Private_Miros said:

Discussing politics never ends well.

Especially not if you are discussing with someone who was born wrapped in an American flag and freedom and raised by an American Bald Eagle that fed him FREEEDOOOOOM and conspiracy for breakfast.

Florb, have you ever been outside of the states for an extended period of time? I can highly recommong a trip to Russia, as it seems that your views on them are a bit... out-dated and mis-aligned. Try and meet and speak (in person, not on the internet) with people from the European countries - in particular the Eastern European countries - and hear how it actually is to be living next door to Russia and how their relationship is with the big and bad Russia. It could help you gain a broader perspective than the brainwashing you (generally speaking, not you specifically) endure in the States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gingxxx said:

...

Russia doesnt support terrorism in a direct or indirect manner.

...

Supporting Assad did not help, if he had not veto'd UN intervention in Syria the less extreme rebels might have had a chance to set up a democratic government and might have had the power to throw IS out completely.

8 hours ago, Private_Miros said:

Discussing politics never ends well.

+1

8 hours ago, hallo1994 said:

For once youre stupid Florb...

Well worded argument... very good on content... mud / fecis slinging always works in debates...

5 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

...

Regardless, your analysis is absurd.  The west didn't fork over enough money to "rebuild" Russia after the end of the Soviet Union?  What does that mean?  Russia wasn't devastated by a war; why did we need to hand money over to Russia?

...

To be fair -> Reagan's arms race left the Sovjets in a bit of a tough place. It was a "cold war" but the effect was pretty much the same as a real war. Their economy was in shambles. After WW1 the same was the case in Germany. The US learned from that and made sure there would be no new discontent there... After the cold war they could have taken that lesson and used it to support Gorbatsjov (damn sure I am getting that name wrong) or even Yeltsin. The fact that is that Russians look to a strong leader and Putin provided that. 

In the end it's all power plays and games of thrones... the question is who gets hurt next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Your post is absurd.  I have no "Russophobia", whatever that's supposed to mean; these days "[X]ophobia" is too often an attempt to shut down debate.

right, you just label Russia as a problem because they really area threat in the world.

5 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Regardless, your analysis is absurd.  The west didn't fork over enough money to "rebuild" Russia after the end of the Soviet Union?  What does that mean?  Russia wasn't devastated by a war; why did we need to hand money over to Russia?

Its done via trading and diplomacy, to help rebuild economy and social structure. Russia was basicly shut off from the rest of the world and forced to do everything alone. ERGO Putin spawned.

5 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Not did I say anything about strong-arming Russia into submission...I said we should stop Russia from strong-arming other countries into submission.  Russia is not the victim here; Georgia and Ukraine and the Baltic states are, and Putin is the cause of that.

Im sorry,, i find it hypocritical when USA decides who can push or get pushed in the world. As of now, Russia took a good long look at USA neo-imperialism  and improved it by, more or less, legitimate political background, or at least by securing their own doorstep in comparison with USA whos last war with a bordering state was well in 19th century.

All Russia was/is doing is mirroring what USA/NATO does. NATO tries to tighten the noose around Russia, Russia tries to widen it. Its simple action-reaction, and im certain that after the cold war, its NATO who started its expansion politics trough Europe, or are you telling me that there is a crystal ball in Pentagon predicting future?

 

 

5 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Russia has a corrupted economy but instead of rebuilding that to, you know, sell things other people want, they instead start pushing around former Soviet republics and satellites for daring to not do as Putin says.

The history here is not really at question; NATO stopped being a Soviet-containing alliance with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and didn't become a Russia-containing alliance until Putin made it clear he had no interest in playing nice.

At the start of second Putin presidential term NATO already expanded by 10 more members, ALL of them in eastern Europe. And in 2004 the only thing Russia was doing was fighting Chechen terrorists blowing up in Russia. Kinda the sam what USA was doing post 9/11. Hipocracy much?

5 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Putin is an old KGB spook that thinks the end of the Soviet Union, a totalitarian state, was a bad thing.  You cannot blame that on the West, and it's a special kind of absurd to say that pushing back at him is misguided.

 

5 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Yes, Putin needs to be resisted.  He doesn't want to be part of a liberalized world, he wants to establish Russia to dominate the world.  That's the only success in his mind.  He isn't a liberal, he's an autocratic thug, and he's leading Russia down a path that leads nowhere good, for Russia, for Europe, or for the world.

 

Well the fall of Soviet union brought hardship and suffering for so many nations and people, he is not wrong thinking that a new UNION will kinda help them and others, after all, EU is also a UNION trying to help its members. You really have to be seriously phobic to think that Russia is planing another totalitarian state and world dominance, or does the word socialism trigger your sleeper agent orders?

Anyone looking at the big picture can clearly see that Russia want to be a big power just like USA, and the best thing for the entire world would be a deal between USA and Russia where they could act together in building a better world for everyone and at the same time keeping each other in check. Having a unimposing world power roam free is never a good idea, something that became quite clear with USA's unopposed neo-imperialism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I predicted this the minute I saw a wall of arguments popping up.

Nobody argues Putin isn't a de facto autocratic dictator, which to Western standards is very bad indeed. To non-Western standards that might just be the only way for any non-Western country - and certainly a large, economically marginalized country that without heavy centralisation would be utterly divided and destitute - to play a role in the world's economy and, indeed, to even come close to mimic the foreign policy of the US and the West in general.

In summary, it isn't black or white, and it certainly isn't a story of good or bad; eventhough there might be distinction between bad and worse.

 

Florb brings out perfectly valid arguments, for someone with his upbringing and the leading views in his society. These arguments are largely the same as people outside US and EU use to rate the foreign policy of the US and the EU since the last quarter of the previous century. Safe to say neither of the two sides is correct, or completely wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Golem501 said:

Supporting Assad did not help, if he had not veto'd UN intervention in Syria the less extreme rebels might have had a chance to set up a democratic government and might have had the power to throw IS out completely.

+1

I was in the middle east and I have no doubt that democracy will not work there. The social structures and basic attitude is very different compared with Europe or the USA.

It is me, myself and I. My family, My clan. My tribe.

Assad and his father respected and supported the rights of minorities. Yes they are/were dictators for our understanding.

There are no moderate rebels! There is no moderate Islam. There is just one Islam.

When you take the Quran and the Sunna serious (and this is a basic principle of their believe) they will act like ISIS. No matter how they name themself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, gingxxx said:

I was in the middle east and I have no doubt that democracy will not work there. The social structures and basic attitude is very different compared with Europe or the USA.

It is me, myself and I. My family, My clan. My tribe.

Assad and his father respected and supported the rights of minorities. Yes they are/were dictators for our understanding.

There are no moderate rebels! There is no moderate Islam. There is just one Islam.

When you take the Quran and the Sunna serious (and this is a basic principle of their believe) they will act like ISIS. No matter how they name themself.

I will have to take your word for it. Sad thing is it's still all just powerplays both on tribal as well as national levels... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, gingxxx said:

I was in the middle east and I have no doubt that democracy will not work there. The social structures and basic attitude is very different compared with Europe or the USA.

It is me, myself and I. My family, My clan. My tribe.

Assad and his father respected and supported the rights of minorities. Yes they are/were dictators for our understanding.

There are no moderate rebels! There is no moderate Islam. There is just one Islam.

When you take the Quran and the Sunna serious (and this is a basic principle of their believe) they will act like ISIS. No matter how they name themself.

USA and Europe however are the epitome of altruism.

Your comment on islam is stupid and short sighted. It makes clear that you are not familiar at all with the Quran or with the Sunna, and have never heard of places like Indonesia or Malaysia, where Islam and even the Shari'a are part of the constitution and the legal system.

Places, regimes and interpretations like Saoudi Arabia, like ISIS, and to a lesser extent Iran are extremist exceptions to muslim islamistic standards.

Politics, populism and power use islam as a tool, not the other way round.

Seriously, it's when you read bullshit like that that you fear that ISIS is winning, or at least reaching their goal of polarizing and stigmatizing "Westerners" and "muslims", drawing in the majority into their extremist sect because they have no where else to go or to be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

He is actively trying to establish Russia as a great power in opposition to Europe and America, not as a part of the West but as a rival.  That's absolutely absurd in terms of Russian military and economic power, but he does have dreams of Russian superpower status

Why is that neseseraly bad? An opposing force keeps balance. A very dominant US has been tormenting countries for decades now for personal gain. Atleast now they have someone to keep them in check. And I'd personally prefer a dominant Russia that's driven by ethics,  religion etc reasons instead of a USA driven by corruption and greed and that's definitely what seems to be the case.

For everyone interested and curious google "Pythia 1 plan". That's how the US keeps countries dependent and why a Strong Russia is better for literally everyone except the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Private_Miros said:

Your comment on islam is stupid and short sighted. It makes clear that you are not familiar at all with the Quran or with the Sunna, and have never heard of places like Indonesia or Malaysia, where Islam and even the Shari'a are part of the constitution and the legal system.

Places, regimes and interpretations like Saoudi Arabia, like ISIS, and to a lesser extent Iran are extremist exceptions to muslim islamistic standards.

Politics, populism and power use islam as a tool, not the other way round.

Seriously, it's when you read bullshit like that that you fear that ISIS is winning, or at least reaching their goal of polarizing and stigmatizing "Westerners" and "muslims", drawing in the majority into their extremist sect because they have no where else to go or to be appreciated.

Bismi Allahi a Rachman a Rachim ....

I don't know your background in Islam and I don't like to discuss it any further.

Please complete the sentence:

La ihlla il Allah.....

and no worries I know the Q'uran and the Sunna and additional Sufi stuff. It is not about your interpretation or mine. It is about the reality that you can face in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Mali, Nigeria or Iran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gingxxx said:

and no worries I know the Q'uran and the Sunna and additional Sufi stuff. It is not about your interpretation or mine. It is about the reality that you can face in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Mali, Nigeria or Iran.

Iran is Shii'te...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, gingxxx said:

I was in the middle east and I have no doubt that democracy will not work there. The social structures and basic attitude is very different compared with Europe or the USA.

It is me, myself and I. My family, My clan. My tribe.

Can confirm the bold part, the only thing people there can do rly well is arguing and making a serious fuzz about nothing (atleast in the gulf coast countries)

There is a reason Saudi Arabi is basically a stalinist country, everything gets paid for by the state and the police monitors everything till the extreme, 0 freedom and when they are out of (oil) money riot mode will be enabled...

19 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

he has said he considers the dissolution of the Soviet Union the greatest disaster of the 20th century, and Stalin is seeing a resurgence in popularity in Russia.

The exact quote was (i think) ``People in Russia say that those who do not regret the collapse of the Soviet Union have no heart, and those that do regret it have no brain``

So thats a bit different, and he is sort of right, for say 95% of the people living in the soviet union live was fairly good, the most important things in life ar afterall: Food, Housing, Work (so there is a sort of purpose) &  group / community feeling. And in the soviet union everyone had that, education was free, every one had a house, a job, food, heating, nobody lived on the street in real poverty and there was a sense of community, ``it might be shit, but its our shit``. Sure if you resent this, get drafted to fight in afghanistan or lived in east europe outside the soviet union its a bit different, but life wasnt that bad for most people, especially compared to what it was before the USSR.

Putin is ofc a dictator and the way he treats hes own people will in the end bite ihm in the back, russia has many serious internal problems which are very hard to solve, the only real solution is to give up the ``though guy on the block`` attitude and turn to a ``normal`` europeaon country, but not only Russia should change, the EU, NATO and US aswell....

(and the US has certainly guilt to the current situation, instead of helping russia they privatized everything causing the total collapse of the economy, the US never gave Russia a fair chance, they simply saw a chance to beat them down even further....)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Russia#Transition_to_market_economy_.281991.E2.80.9398.29

Yeltsin's program of radical, market-oriented reform came to be known as a "shock therapy". It was based on the recommendations of the IMF and a group of top American economists, including Larry Summers.[45][46] The result was disastrous, with real GDP falling by more than 40% by 1999, hyperinflation which wiped out personal savings, crime and destitution spreading rapidly.[47][48]

It was american neo-con moron economics which trully crashed the system, east europe did it not as extreme and it in the end rebound fairly quick (also due to massive aid from western europe, but we (west europe) also benefitted from it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...