|
|
On March 13 2014 22:53 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 22:48 Gorsameth wrote:On March 13 2014 22:36 zeo wrote:On March 13 2014 22:32 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 22:03 zeo wrote:On March 13 2014 21:54 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 20:57 PaleMan wrote:
also i like how ppl so brainwashed that they don't even understand so called arabic spring was handcrafted by US and EU
they don't see trends thus they can't understand what happened in Ukraine Yes and the arab spring revolutions are horrible things that should have never happened, it's better not trying and staying in a dictature than taking the risk of another dictature; There are example, good ones like Tunisia and bad ones like Siria which situation is horrible just because Putin maintained an alliance coming from the Cold War. Even if these revolutions were handcrafted by the EU and US, they are still revolutions that will change these countries for the better in the short to long term. Perhaps you believe revolutions bring poverty, injustice, dead people like Putin tells you to. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/12/opinion/why-russians-back-putin-on-ukraine.html?hp&rref=opinion"Some observers in Russia have argued that the Russian preference for stability over change is a major obstacle to needed political transformation. And history shows that any attempt to halt revolutionary movements elsewhere through intervention threatens to bring the revolution home — exactly what Putin’s supporters fear." You would better understand what happens in your country first then talk about other countries. Media control and propaganda are growing and an enemy, the Ukraine junta showed itself and it benefits Putin hence his growing rate of approval. Which is funny, a disgusting dictator has a 68% approval rate in his country while in France Hollande's approval is 20%. It just shows how nationalistic your country is and how criticism of russians towards their government and its actions or their society in general is almost non existent. The majority of people here might be brainwashed like you say thinking the West had nothing to do with these revolutions (imo they helped them and will always try to prevent islamists from taking power in the case of the arab spring) but hey we have to make a choice, believe in a revolution that got the support of the West and that is trying to change a country or condamn it and prefer an oligarchy / dictature. No one really denies the method but that's not what's important in a revolution, they have never and will never be clean but at the end of the day when there are real revolutions coming from the people (like with Ukr, sorry but it's not a fascist coup) in the long term is always bringing good and needed change. People like you who trade their morals for nationalism should remember that. I'm sure the Libyans are happy now after they went from the richest country in Africa, with free electricity, healthcare, cheap fuel ($0.14 per liter), all banks in Libya were state owned and gave credit to all citizens with 0% interest, all newlyweds in Libya received $50,000 to buy their first apartment, if a Libyan buys a car, the government subsidized 50% of the price, if a Libyan was unable to get employment after graduation the state would pay the average salary of the profession as if he or she is employed until employment is found. And now they eat sand. Boy, I'm sure they are loving all that democracy under Sharia law right now. You are straight up lying and what happens in Lybia is the work of years of dictature with torture, media control, corruption and mass emprisonment of protesters. And no, life wasn't bright and neither was it the richest country of Africa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libya#EconomyJust like Russia today, the economy of Lybia was based on oil and gas exportation with lacks in the industrial sector. A corrupted state at the service of rich oligarchs. The french revolution began in the 1770s, it took almost a century for democracy to become stable (with countless empires, restorations etc...). It's just the first step for Lybia and I'm that when the situation will stabilize nobody will regret these times of dictature like nobody regret the USSR exept for the nomenclatura which Putin is part of. But the worst part of your way of thinking is that for you a revolution began by one's country own citizens bringing only bad things is another argument in favor of Russia's fascist actions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African_countries_by_Human_Development_Indexbased on 2012 data: + Show Spoiler + Funny considering that link tells none of the awesome facts you listen. To be completely fair, zeo is right about those awesome facts. http://timetolive.ru/p/10_2011/pri_kaddafi/ I'm lazy to find this stuff in English but it's well-known facts.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2179639
This paints a different picture, don't know the source but that's just quick googling.
Edit:
And someone actually believing that every newlywed couple gets 50 grand, i mean, come on.
|
Deutsche Bank: investors should not treat Russia as an emerging market. It’s not that far along, they say. “There is a strong case for re-classifying Russia as a frontier market,” writes analyst John-Paul Smith, a veteran of all things Russian. Source.
If Putin wanted to ensure the independence of the Russian economy from the world market, he's doing a wonderful job. His supporters at home might not agree when the economy grinds to a standstill, though.
Edit:
The U.S. launched a last-ditch effort Wednesday to avert a potentially costly diplomatic crisis with Moscow ahead of a vote Sunday in Crimea on whether the region should leave Ukraine and return to Russia. Top Obama administration officials sought to ramp up the pressure on Moscow even as they braced for a possible diplomatic failure. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Russia "may well" end up annexing the restive region, and began to focus on steps Moscow could take to slow the process. Source.
|
On March 13 2014 20:57 PaleMan wrote:
also i like how ppl so brainwashed that they don't even understand so called arabic spring was handcrafted by US and EU
they don't see trends thus they can't understand what happened in Ukraine
You didn't even realize that most of those countries were US allies (Egypt and Bahrein) or had friendly relations with them (Tunisia and Lybia). You're not even brainwashed. You're just plain ignorant.
|
Russian Federation1953 Posts
Ghanburighan you just sound like offended kid in this thread (no homo)
|
On March 13 2014 22:44 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, oh
all of a sudden it's Putin fault
omg
"i don't have a clue what happens in Syria, better blame Putin" Acertos 2014
Sorry but he is a fucking bastard that already made fascists move with Georgia, Syria and now Ukraine along with the situation in his own country.
And I'm sure I have more clues than you on most things that happen in this world, in this case Putin has been blocking since the beginning an UN intervention in Syria.
He could have embraced human rights and democracy with almost all other countries or criticize and be neutral like the chinese but he prefers to show the fearful might of Russia and maintain ties with Syria.
Russia is one the major factor for the horror in Syria right now you can't deny that.
|
On March 13 2014 22:58 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 20:57 PaleMan wrote:
also i like how ppl so brainwashed that they don't even understand so called arabic spring was handcrafted by US and EU
they don't see trends thus they can't understand what happened in Ukraine You didn't even realize that most of those countries were US allies (Egypt and Bahrein) or had friendly relations with them (Tunisia and Lybia). You're not even brainwashed. You're just plain ignorant.
Friendly relations with Libya? Am I missing something?
|
Russian Federation1953 Posts
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On March 13 2014 22:55 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 22:53 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:On March 13 2014 22:48 Gorsameth wrote:On March 13 2014 22:36 zeo wrote:On March 13 2014 22:32 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 22:03 zeo wrote:On March 13 2014 21:54 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 20:57 PaleMan wrote:
also i like how ppl so brainwashed that they don't even understand so called arabic spring was handcrafted by US and EU
they don't see trends thus they can't understand what happened in Ukraine Yes and the arab spring revolutions are horrible things that should have never happened, it's better not trying and staying in a dictature than taking the risk of another dictature; There are example, good ones like Tunisia and bad ones like Siria which situation is horrible just because Putin maintained an alliance coming from the Cold War. Even if these revolutions were handcrafted by the EU and US, they are still revolutions that will change these countries for the better in the short to long term. Perhaps you believe revolutions bring poverty, injustice, dead people like Putin tells you to. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/12/opinion/why-russians-back-putin-on-ukraine.html?hp&rref=opinion"Some observers in Russia have argued that the Russian preference for stability over change is a major obstacle to needed political transformation. And history shows that any attempt to halt revolutionary movements elsewhere through intervention threatens to bring the revolution home — exactly what Putin’s supporters fear." You would better understand what happens in your country first then talk about other countries. Media control and propaganda are growing and an enemy, the Ukraine junta showed itself and it benefits Putin hence his growing rate of approval. Which is funny, a disgusting dictator has a 68% approval rate in his country while in France Hollande's approval is 20%. It just shows how nationalistic your country is and how criticism of russians towards their government and its actions or their society in general is almost non existent. The majority of people here might be brainwashed like you say thinking the West had nothing to do with these revolutions (imo they helped them and will always try to prevent islamists from taking power in the case of the arab spring) but hey we have to make a choice, believe in a revolution that got the support of the West and that is trying to change a country or condamn it and prefer an oligarchy / dictature. No one really denies the method but that's not what's important in a revolution, they have never and will never be clean but at the end of the day when there are real revolutions coming from the people (like with Ukr, sorry but it's not a fascist coup) in the long term is always bringing good and needed change. People like you who trade their morals for nationalism should remember that. I'm sure the Libyans are happy now after they went from the richest country in Africa, with free electricity, healthcare, cheap fuel ($0.14 per liter), all banks in Libya were state owned and gave credit to all citizens with 0% interest, all newlyweds in Libya received $50,000 to buy their first apartment, if a Libyan buys a car, the government subsidized 50% of the price, if a Libyan was unable to get employment after graduation the state would pay the average salary of the profession as if he or she is employed until employment is found. And now they eat sand. Boy, I'm sure they are loving all that democracy under Sharia law right now. You are straight up lying and what happens in Lybia is the work of years of dictature with torture, media control, corruption and mass emprisonment of protesters. And no, life wasn't bright and neither was it the richest country of Africa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libya#EconomyJust like Russia today, the economy of Lybia was based on oil and gas exportation with lacks in the industrial sector. A corrupted state at the service of rich oligarchs. The french revolution began in the 1770s, it took almost a century for democracy to become stable (with countless empires, restorations etc...). It's just the first step for Lybia and I'm that when the situation will stabilize nobody will regret these times of dictature like nobody regret the USSR exept for the nomenclatura which Putin is part of. But the worst part of your way of thinking is that for you a revolution began by one's country own citizens bringing only bad things is another argument in favor of Russia's fascist actions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African_countries_by_Human_Development_Indexbased on 2012 data: + Show Spoiler + Funny considering that link tells none of the awesome facts you listen. To be completely fair, zeo is right about those awesome facts. http://timetolive.ru/p/10_2011/pri_kaddafi/ I'm lazy to find this stuff in English but it's well-known facts. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2179639This paints a different picture, don't know the source but that's just quick googling. Edit: And someone actually believing that every newlywed couple gets 50 grand, i mean, come on.
Even if something from this list is way exaggerated, i guess it's still something and better than having nothing and country in shambles like right now.
And also if everything was as bad as it mentioned in article, i guess it's ridiculous then how could Libya be second country in Africa in human living rankings.
On March 13 2014 23:04 Acertos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 22:44 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, oh
all of a sudden it's Putin fault
omg
"i don't have a clue what happens in Syria, better blame Putin" Acertos 2014 Sorry but he is a fucking bastard that already made fascists move with Georgia, Syria and now Ukraine along with the situation in his own country. And I'm sure I have more clues than you on most things that happen in this world, in this case Putin has been blocking since the beginning an UN intervention in Syria. He could have embraced human rights and democracy with almost all other countries or criticize and be neutral like the chinese but he prefers to show the fearful might of Russia and maintain ties with Syria. Russia is one the major factor for the horror in Syria right now you can't deny that.
Fascist move with Georgia? When? I guess, when Georgia tried to genocide whole Tskhinvali while OSCE spectators ran from the city? And i guess it's ok going ham against Putin even if he wasn't alone who blocked UN intervention. We've seen it already in 1999, it wasn't better than Milosevic.
|
On March 13 2014 23:07 Sent. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 22:58 hypercube wrote:On March 13 2014 20:57 PaleMan wrote:
also i like how ppl so brainwashed that they don't even understand so called arabic spring was handcrafted by US and EU
they don't see trends thus they can't understand what happened in Ukraine You didn't even realize that most of those countries were US allies (Egypt and Bahrein) or had friendly relations with them (Tunisia and Lybia). You're not even brainwashed. You're just plain ignorant. Friendly relations with Libya? Am I missing something?
Possibly. Relations improved after Lybia gave up the Lockerbie bombers.
Here's a nice example of cooperation between the US and Gadaffi:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdel-Hakim_Belhadj
|
On March 13 2014 17:34 DonKey_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 17:29 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 17:21 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:11 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 17:09 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:02 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 16:44 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 16:32 nunez wrote:
[quote]
you're not criticizing the video though. i think it sums up some of the under-reported parts of the conflict at least.
'fuck the eu' being the least interesting part of the nuland leak and putting focus on backlash of western backing of 'politically expedient groups' (too funny) to shape policies.
haven't heard estonian leak before, only read about it. sounded convincing.
also i can't argue with not being told about us backing of syrian rebels wrt the conflict in ukraine. i gotta give them that. The Estonian leak actually appeared in this thread way before it appeared even on RT. And there was extensive discussion on it in this very thread. Yes, it's authentic, but it doesn't say anything negative. It was a cut-out of a conversation reporting on a rumour. It established no facts. like i said, i only read about it, but didn't hear it until now. i must have skimmed some of the extensive discussion in this thread. #filtered same with nuland leak, it made a much bigger impression on me when i heard it. leaks are a good source of info. #unfiltered what's "negative" in this context? remind me again, which twitter accounts have fact establishing retweet power? need someone to get on this. Don't be glib. If you listened to the actual tape, you'd know that Paet was reporting on a rumour he was told, it's not like it's actually fact. Also, there was some miscommunication between Paet and the person who started the rumour. This is what Olga Bogomolets responded: + Show Spoiler +
Myself I saw only protesters. I do not know the type of wounds suffered by military people," she told The Telegraph. "I have no access to those people."
But she said she had asked for a full forensic criminal investigation into the deaths that occurred in the Maidan. "No one who just sees the wounds when treating the victims can make a determination about the type of weapons. I hope international experts and Ukrainian investigators will make a determination of what type of weapons, who was involved in the killings and how it was done. I have no data to prove anything.
"I was a doctor helping to save people on the square. There were 15 people killed on the first day by snipers. They were shot directly to the heart, brain and arteries. There were more than 40 the next day, 12 of them died in my arms.
"Our nation has to ask the question who were the killers, who asked them to come to Ukraine. We need good answers on the basis of expertise."
Mr Paet's assertion that an opposition figure was behind the Maidan massacre was not one she could share.
"I think you can only say something like this on the basis of fact," she said. "Its not correct and its not good to do this. It should be based on fact."
She said the new government in Kiev had assured her a criminal investigation had begun but that she had not direct contact with it so far.
"They told me they have begun a criminal process and if they say that I believe them. The police have not given me any information on it."
glib my posting style alone. ofc they scramble to save face afterwards, but not as interesting, and ofc you have to employ some semblance of critical thinking, but leaks are a more interesting source of info than your regular @what-have-yous #MyFavoriteColor, and probably as close as we plebs will get to the juicy stuff atm. So what did you learn from that leak? are we doing the interview right now? Don't avoid the question. Instead of making superficial statements, actually make a claim we can verify, what did that leak teach you. i'll repeat my 'claim' since it didn't stick the first time: i thought paet sounded convinced that the opposition was behind the shootings. good luck with the verification process and you're not getting into my apartement btw. The problem with that leak is that it was kind of hearsay in the video. Who was the woman(a doctor?) the Estonian PM was talking about that gave him his information? What is her credibility? We don't know because of the way the author edited that portion. edit: He really should have provided the full recording to give the full context.
She is pretty credible. She was one of the leading doctors on Euromaidan and some activists literally died in her arms. But what she really said was that she reiterated the rumor that some protesters and governmental forces could be killed by the same shooters. She DID NOT see the latter ones' bodies so she could not compare the wounds. The rumor was pretty popular here in Ukraine in the early days after the mass killings. In fact pro-Yanukovich officials, like Klyuev, were very active in spreading those, probably trying to push the blame around. Rumors kind of faded away since there was not enough evidence to support it.
About the evidence:
I have seen myself a video of high-ranked Berkut officer in tears saying his guys were shot in their backs. Some of the confusion was added by the fact that some sniper "spots" were changing hands. While others, like in Ukraine Hotel, quickly ended up behind the front line when protesters pushed forward. At least a few governmental snipers were spotted there. So they could very well be shooting protesters in their backs, and there are reports that they were. There is also at least one video showing a bullet hitting a tree from the protesters' back side.
|
On March 13 2014 23:07 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp
What if they started it?
If the americans started the syrian revolution (which is not the case btw, it came after the tunisian revolution which was the first one) then Russia has to do everything in its power to prevent it from succeeding?
Syria's regime was corrupted, favorised an elite and worse different etnicities. Now if the US had interest in starting a revolution which goal is to have a liberal friendly (West friendly) and democratic (the goal of the protesters) regime. There are no moral nor logical reasons for Russia preventing it, it just acted in fascist and Cold War like fashion without any regards for human beings and even if the US had interests, their action would have helped the population of Syria.
You can hate the US all you want and you seem to have a problem with things US related but you shouldn't become the advocate of wars just because of it.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On March 13 2014 23:30 Acertos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:07 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp What if they started it? If the americans started the syrian revolution (which is not the case btw, it came after the tunisian revolution which was the first one) then Russia has to do everything in its power to prevent it from succeeding? Syria's regime was corrupted, favorised an elite and worse different etnicities. Now if the US had interest in starting a revolution which goal is to have a liberal friendly (West friendly) and democratic (the goal of the protesters) regime. There are no moral nor logical reasons for Russia preventing it, it just acted in fascist and Cold War like fashion without any regards for human beings and even if the US had interests, their action would have helped the population of Syria. You can hate the US all you want and you seem to have a problem with things US related but you shouldn't become the advocate of wars just because of it.
You need to stop using word "fascist" when you have no idea about its meaning.
Everything in politics has logical reasons, learn it.
You just can have no idea about their logic, that's all.
|
It's the "but USA!" diversionary tactic that Russian apologists use. It's very common here. When Russia is criticized, just say "but USA!" and this will off topic posts for another page.
|
Russian Federation1953 Posts
On March 13 2014 23:30 Acertos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:07 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp What if they started it? If the americans started the syrian revolution (which is not the case btw, it came after the tunisian revolution which was the first one) then Russia has to do everything in its power to prevent it from succeeding? Syria's regime was corrupted, favorised an elite and worse different etnicities. Now if the US had interest in starting a revolution which goal is to have a liberal friendly (West friendly) and democratic (the goal of the protesters) regime. There are no moral nor logical reasons for Russia preventing it, it just acted in fascist and Cold War like fashion without any regards for human beings and even if the US had interests, their action would have helped the population of Syria. You can hate the US all you want and you seem to have a problem with things US related but you shouldn't become the advocate of wars just because of it.
every regime is corrupted even so called demoratic regimes
if you don't understand this you better not post in political threads at all
USA is interested in chaos throughout the world
its good for dollar
|
On March 13 2014 23:49 PaleMan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:30 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 23:07 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp What if they started it? If the americans started the syrian revolution (which is not the case btw, it came after the tunisian revolution which was the first one) then Russia has to do everything in its power to prevent it from succeeding? Syria's regime was corrupted, favorised an elite and worse different etnicities. Now if the US had interest in starting a revolution which goal is to have a liberal friendly (West friendly) and democratic (the goal of the protesters) regime. There are no moral nor logical reasons for Russia preventing it, it just acted in fascist and Cold War like fashion without any regards for human beings and even if the US had interests, their action would have helped the population of Syria. You can hate the US all you want and you seem to have a problem with things US related but you shouldn't become the advocate of wars just because of it. every regime is corrupted even so called demoratic regimes
And yet democracies tend to be a less corrupted then dictatorships and people actually get to have a say in things.
|
Russian Federation1953 Posts
On March 13 2014 23:51 SilentchiLL wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:49 PaleMan wrote:On March 13 2014 23:30 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 23:07 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp What if they started it? If the americans started the syrian revolution (which is not the case btw, it came after the tunisian revolution which was the first one) then Russia has to do everything in its power to prevent it from succeeding? Syria's regime was corrupted, favorised an elite and worse different etnicities. Now if the US had interest in starting a revolution which goal is to have a liberal friendly (West friendly) and democratic (the goal of the protesters) regime. There are no moral nor logical reasons for Russia preventing it, it just acted in fascist and Cold War like fashion without any regards for human beings and even if the US had interests, their action would have helped the population of Syria. You can hate the US all you want and you seem to have a problem with things US related but you shouldn't become the advocate of wars just because of it. every regime is corrupted even so called demoratic regimes And yet democracies tend to be a less corrupted then dictatorships and people actually get to have a say in things.
nope
i hate to say it but you live in occupied country
there is ~100.000 american troops sitting in military bases in Germany
your chancellor is a puppet in US hands
is it democracy?
i doubt it
|
On March 13 2014 23:49 PaleMan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:30 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 23:07 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp What if they started it? If the americans started the syrian revolution (which is not the case btw, it came after the tunisian revolution which was the first one) then Russia has to do everything in its power to prevent it from succeeding? Syria's regime was corrupted, favorised an elite and worse different etnicities. Now if the US had interest in starting a revolution which goal is to have a liberal friendly (West friendly) and democratic (the goal of the protesters) regime. There are no moral nor logical reasons for Russia preventing it, it just acted in fascist and Cold War like fashion without any regards for human beings and even if the US had interests, their action would have helped the population of Syria. You can hate the US all you want and you seem to have a problem with things US related but you shouldn't become the advocate of wars just because of it. every regime is corrupted even so called demoratic regimes if you don't understand this you better not post in political threads at all USA is interested in chaos throughout the world its good for dollar
Can you stop insulting people?
|
On March 13 2014 23:54 PaleMan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:51 SilentchiLL wrote:On March 13 2014 23:49 PaleMan wrote:On March 13 2014 23:30 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 23:07 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp What if they started it? If the americans started the syrian revolution (which is not the case btw, it came after the tunisian revolution which was the first one) then Russia has to do everything in its power to prevent it from succeeding? Syria's regime was corrupted, favorised an elite and worse different etnicities. Now if the US had interest in starting a revolution which goal is to have a liberal friendly (West friendly) and democratic (the goal of the protesters) regime. There are no moral nor logical reasons for Russia preventing it, it just acted in fascist and Cold War like fashion without any regards for human beings and even if the US had interests, their action would have helped the population of Syria. You can hate the US all you want and you seem to have a problem with things US related but you shouldn't become the advocate of wars just because of it. every regime is corrupted even so called demoratic regimes And yet democracies tend to be a less corrupted then dictatorships and people actually get to have a say in things. nope i hate to say it but you live in occupied country there is ~100.000 american troops sitting in military bases in Germany your chancellor is a puppet in US hands is it democracy? i doubt it
Yes, there are allied troops in bases in our country. Our chancellor is very much not a US puppet.
And yes, it is a democracy.
One very good way to find out if you are living in a democracy is to see if there are multiple possible results to an election. We do have those. Now think about your elections. Do you really think that anyone but Putin will win the next election? The next step you should take is ask yourself WHY that is the case. Then you might realize that you are living in a dictatorship.
|
On March 13 2014 23:54 PaleMan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:51 SilentchiLL wrote:On March 13 2014 23:49 PaleMan wrote:On March 13 2014 23:30 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 23:07 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp What if they started it? If the americans started the syrian revolution (which is not the case btw, it came after the tunisian revolution which was the first one) then Russia has to do everything in its power to prevent it from succeeding? Syria's regime was corrupted, favorised an elite and worse different etnicities. Now if the US had interest in starting a revolution which goal is to have a liberal friendly (West friendly) and democratic (the goal of the protesters) regime. There are no moral nor logical reasons for Russia preventing it, it just acted in fascist and Cold War like fashion without any regards for human beings and even if the US had interests, their action would have helped the population of Syria. You can hate the US all you want and you seem to have a problem with things US related but you shouldn't become the advocate of wars just because of it. every regime is corrupted even so called demoratic regimes And yet democracies tend to be a less corrupted then dictatorships and people actually get to have a say in things. nope i hate to say it but you live in occupied country there is ~100.000 american troops sitting in military bases in Germany your chancellor is a puppet in US hands is it democracy? i doubt it
You have no idea what you're talking about, the american soldiers here were placed to defend us against russia, not to hold us down, they'd actually be pretty bad in a defensive scenario against our army, the number is also not even close to what you stated.
And you vastly overestimate America's power, when Bush asked Schröder to help in his war he got the cold shoulder.
I know that your media is pretty propaganda heavy and that russia isn't the best example of a democracy, but even then what you said is horribly ignorant.
(And we actually get quite a lot of money from letting the american troops stay here)
|
On March 13 2014 23:54 PaleMan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:51 SilentchiLL wrote:On March 13 2014 23:49 PaleMan wrote:On March 13 2014 23:30 Acertos wrote:On March 13 2014 23:07 PaleMan wrote:
Acertos, or maybe US started another arabic spring by the book of Gene Sharp What if they started it? If the americans started the syrian revolution (which is not the case btw, it came after the tunisian revolution which was the first one) then Russia has to do everything in its power to prevent it from succeeding? Syria's regime was corrupted, favorised an elite and worse different etnicities. Now if the US had interest in starting a revolution which goal is to have a liberal friendly (West friendly) and democratic (the goal of the protesters) regime. There are no moral nor logical reasons for Russia preventing it, it just acted in fascist and Cold War like fashion without any regards for human beings and even if the US had interests, their action would have helped the population of Syria. You can hate the US all you want and you seem to have a problem with things US related but you shouldn't become the advocate of wars just because of it. every regime is corrupted even so called demoratic regimes And yet democracies tend to be a less corrupted then dictatorships and people actually get to have a say in things. nope i hate to say it but you live in occupied country there is ~100.000 american troops sitting in military bases in Germany your chancellor is a puppet in US hands is it democracy? i doubt it
Do you know what democracy is? Are you saying that there are US troops in germany with out the permission of the german people (democraticly elected government and parlament) ? How do you connect these claims of yours with the question wether its democracy or not?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9GiGFVn.png)
