EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 556
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
Narw
Poland884 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Honestly I can see that debating this issue with you specifically is not really worth it since it's just going to be an exchange of unpleasantries, and no productive discussion will come of random potshots being taken based on very incompatible interpretations of that history. In any case, I've said my part. | ||
|
Narw
Poland884 Posts
While you are at it you might consider coming back and explainig the military coolaboration between Poland and Nazi Germany. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9229 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6236 Posts
Russia is definitely behind Europe economically, but far ahead of where its GDP numbers say it is. Money goes a lot further in Russia than it does in Europe, and the economy is far less import/export based. GDP PPP is a better measure, although still not quite a perfect measure. Though it is plenty capable of economic coercion on smaller nations if it so desires, due to sheer size. Even if we use GDP PPP Russia's economy is still smaller than Germany's and not even close to the EU. Russia is also hardly self sufficient. Less export based you say but they're completly dependent on their commodity export and more specifically oil and gas. While you're right that the EU is very trade dependent most of that trade is still with their own allies. That's a key difference. What is missing in your whole imperialism story is that the alignment of the eastern countries with the US and the EU is because of Russia's agressive behaviour. While you're right in your example that Finland joined the Axis in ww2 you're conveniently leaving out the fact that Russia invaded Finland in 1939. The Baltics got invaded as well. The Ukraine is a terrible example because they got starved to death just a couple of years earlier by Russia. Not to mention the political oppresion. They did not really like Nazi Germany at all btw after the countless atrocities they comitted. And this is leaving out the fact that they were literal puppets of the USSR for decades afterwards. Your view of history is interesting to say the least. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 27 2016 04:17 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Legalord, trying to deflect critizism by bringing up WW2 and nazism. Shame he forgot that Russia allied with Nazi Germany to invade several countries. Let the events of 70 years ago be the past. Expecially one as mistaken as legalord's. Bitch please. WWII is constantly mentioned in topics like this because it played a large influence in the creation of the modern political alignment of the world. Fascist ideology didn't die in 1945; it exists and is prominent in the world, especially East Europe, to this day. On September 26 2016 18:13 RvB wrote: Even if we use GDP PPP Russia's economy is still smaller than Germany's and not even close to the EU. Russia is also hardly self sufficient. Less export based you say but they're completly dependent on their commodity export and more specifically oil and gas. While you're right that the EU is very trade dependent most of that trade is still with their own allies. That's a key difference. What is missing in your whole imperialism story is that the alignment of the eastern countries with the US and the EU is because of Russia's agressive behaviour. While you're right in your example that Finland joined the Axis in ww2 you're conveniently leaving out the fact that Russia invaded Finland in 1939. The Baltics got invaded as well. The Ukraine is a terrible example because they got starved to death just a couple of years earlier by Russia. Not to mention the political oppresion. They did not really like Nazi Germany at all btw after the countless atrocities they comitted. And this is leaving out the fact that they were literal puppets of the USSR for decades afterwards. Your view of history is interesting to say the least. See, that's a big difference. Saying "Russia is just a basket case the size of Italy" and "Russia just only has an economy the size of Germany but has way more people" is a very different statement. One is a ticking time bomb waiting to plunge the EU deep into a crisis, the other is the central power of the EU and has a disproportionate influence on the dealings of the entire union. And the PPP still doesn't cover some other factors worth noting. People of even relatively modest means commonly own one, and often two, homes. Food is cheap, even with sanctions on food imports leading to price hikes. Resources are plenty because there is a lot of land. Potential for growth is much greater - a country like Germany will have a hard time growing its economy since it's already quite developed, while Russia's will grow significantly just by allowing the anti-corruption measures and rebuilding projects from the previous collapse to take full effect. Russia is under sanctions on the financial markets, while Germany gets negative interest rates on its treasury bonds. Both obviously have demographic crises, Russia's being worse, but a lot of the reason for that crisis is a one-off collapse of the government. And Russia has a much stronger military (which, contrary to popular belief, is much more than a function of money spent, as China and Saudi Arabia will show you), which gives it much more independent influence on the world stage. Strong as a unified EU effort? No. Much stronger than your comparison to Italy would suggest? Easily. Russia is not nearly as dependent on its O&G exports as it once was. There was a time when the government was severely cash strapped, and gas exports were the only real large scale income that were available. That is no longer the case; it's simply a convenient cash source that is hard to downsize for political reasons. Although a lot of progress has been made on that front since the collapse of gas prices - specifically, the IT, agriculture, and domestic tourism industries have seen significant growth under sanctions, and that growth will remain after they ultimately expire. It is, however, a perfectly valid criticism to note that that growth should have been encouraged before the current situation arose, but every country is guilty of riding a gravy train up until it derails. You also mentioned that Europe trades mostly with its allies. This is true, although it does sort of coerce your choice of allies by economic interdependence. Which was of course the intent (stop fighting by developing economic ties that would be expensive to sever) but it's also much less stable than trade within a nation-state whose borders are unlikely to change. And there is much less solidarity within Europe as a whole than within a large country like Russia, China, or the US. And plenty of economic colonialism of less developed European countries. Military alignment is a tricky thing. In the case of Finland, I'm not saying that they are just as bad as the Nazis, or that they should be treated like Nazis. Plenty of countries aligned with Germany in some form or other, including Britain and the USSR, because at some points their interests aligned and war with Germany is really something you would prefer to avoid. In the same way that those alignments, and others such as Bulgaria should be mostly forgiven, the same is true for Finland. But that's not really the most significant matter at the center of those concerns. There was a significant sub-population of East Europe, including the Baltics and Ukraine, where people actively and enthusiastically took part in the Nazi ethnic cleansing campaign. Incidentally, these same people are the ones who most vocally oppose Russia in the modern era. Of course, the other side of the coin is the rather heavy handed security branch of the USSR, and all of the things it did. No one really supports the existence of a police state of that kind. The intelligence wing tended to overstep quite often and had all of the issues that are pretty well known in the West. However, the threats they sought to suppress - fascism, religious extremism, and the like - were genuine. Fascism is very much alive in East Europe even now. Most countries prefer not to acknowledge that aspect of their character and in the post-Soviet era actively seek to whitewash it, but it exists and is significant. On how the East European countries choose to align themselves... well it isn't as much of a free choice as you think. A powerful government that doesn't like the current leadership can get a new one in the little countries. Or bomb them into submission, like Yugoslavia or ME/NA. It happens all the time, and it's part of the dangers of a single unchecked powerful nation acting with impunity. And the population can easily be convinced to rework their political alignment accordingly, in an almost Orwellian "we have always been at war with EastAsia" fashion. Or at least suppress enough of the population that thinks otherwise for it not to matter. Ukraine, for example, has a spectrum of opinions as broad as soldiers who will not attack a Russian military mission even if ordered to do so by their own government, to people who believe that every Russian in Ukraine should be put into concentration camps. Neither position is a rare and unknown fringe group. Either could potentially be the leader of the country and the alignment of Ukraine would change dramatically based on which view is in power. Incidentally, the views on the hunger in Ukraine are very split on to what extent it was intentional starvation, and to what extent it was just terrible farming policy like the one that has made it very difficult for Russia to have its own agricultural industry (a matter which only now is finally seeing a resolution). To a large extent all small and dependent governments are puppets - they sure can't control their own policy. If the EU were to suddenly implode, in 20 years people in many countries would talk about how bravely they opposed and overthrew the "Brussels tyranny" and got their own freedom - the same post-facto rationalization took place with the end of the USSR. Part of changing alignment, even if by force, is rationalization because that's what people do. The one real exception is the Baltics, who really did just hate the USSR through and through, from the beginning, and we're very much the outcasts in the Soviet/Warsaw cultural community. In light of their extensive and ugly collaboration with the Nazis, and many other offenses not really worth addressing, I can't really say I have much sympathy for them for their "plight" of being forced to be part of the union and be treated like everyone else who was part of the union. Now, to wrap it all up. The initial issue of this entire discussion is whether or not Russia is imperialist. My argument is, it is but not in the way that people tend to see it. Russia and China are "control your sphere of influence" imperialists, as opposed to "colonize everything" British/American imperialists. The biggest concern is to ensure the security of the country, and imperial conquests pursue that goal to a much greater extent than to colonize. Although in the modern era, where war between powerful countries will simply end in everyone dying, an alternative means of ensuring that security, through somewhat neutral alignment and diplomacy, is very much feasible. That, rather than aggressive antagonism of powerful neighbors, should be the real goal of the East European states. Pretending that Russia is like Red Alert Stalin in the video I posted earlier is just misguided stupidity. In general a multipolar world is probably a better idea, because a unipolar world just leads to shittiness like the neoconservative movement (e.g. Republicans who decided that the US won and it's ideologically correct and should spread its correctness all around the world through force) and neoliberalism (a pretty poorly defined term, but with the same cultural self-righteousness of neocons and the same desire to force that position on others). Having multiple superpowers that can stop each other from being stupid is a good counterbalance to that. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
Let me just tick off two points, although I'm sure people will disagree: I don't think Georgia is a valid concern, because (as far as I know) the aggression there was started by Georgia itself and even fostered by the US before Russia ever made its move. I don't think Crimea is a valid concern because of the vast amount of history which leads me to believe that the people there did not like the rebel government which took over the country that their independent republic was a part of before they held the referendum. You can cite military presence, but the Russian military was allowed to be there, and as far as I know, no people were killed. Besides... + Show Spoiler + "the referendum occurred five days after the Crimean government announced the Declaration of Independence of the Republic of Crimea, which followed a parliamentary vote in which 78 out of 100 of Crimea's parliamentarians voted in favour of Crimea seceding from Ukraine." On the same wikipedia page where I got that quote, there's repeated polls between 2009 and 2011 which ALL say that the people of Crimea want to join Russia. It would be silly to refute their wishes and deny them the opportunity to do so. en.wikipedia.org That's not to say there are 0 concerns. I've heard they gave weapons to the people in the east of Ukraine who had largely voted for the government that was thrown out of Kiev by the rebels. Giving weapons to people is a bad thing to do, I agree, but the country was in turmoil all on its own. I think that as long as you keep the people in your own country (like Poland) in a state where they don't want to openly rebel, you're pretty safe from Russia in that regard. Not to mention that giving weapons to rebels is something another certain government is exceptionally fond of. Now, you can argue that Russia has only toned itself down because they are no longer one of two superpowers. But even if that is the only reason, isn't that enough? Isn't that enough to suggest reasonable trade with them is an option? Isn't that enough reason to build a lasting relationship with the intent of preserving peace rather than building up military forces outside their borders? I think that building up military forces tends to have the same effect as giving weapons to rebels: it will lead to those weapons being used. Rather, we should be giving the Eastern European countries a book on trade & diplomacy, so they will use that to further their goals instead of relying on a foreign military power to give them strength. That said, if Europe remains united in a trade and militaristic sense, then there should be little reason for concern even when it comes to Russia's imperialism. We have huge numbers of people, are better off economically, and we are a nuclear power on our own, which is all you seem to need to stop potential large scale invasions. We just don't need a military alliance with a country full of warmongers to help protect us against a threat that doesn't exist. I think the fear of Russia is based primarily on historical grievances which have little relevance in today's international political climate. Maybe there are some recent trade deals with Russia that you don't like? I mean, what it is that makes you fear them so much? When it comes to aggressive behaviour, I'm pretty sure the US takes the cake, and then orders a few thousand more of them because it's never quite satisfied. | ||
zatic
Zurich15352 Posts
Wasen, Germany's second largest folk fest which opened last weekend, even saw record visitor numbers. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
I get it. You are really proud of your country, to the extent that you would happily write how powerful economically and militarily Russia is and how ok it is that the russian governement is just an extention of Putin and his cronies and how willingly Russia will use its military to further its aims. Unfortunately that's pretty much the definition of facism and imperialism that you are trying to say Russia isn't. You just need to open your eyes a little and see. | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
As the ruble crashed at the end of 2014 and Western sanctions hit some of Russia’s largest and most indebted firms, some analysts predicted the country was headed toward a credit crunch. In fact, Russia’s total stock of foreign debt actually fell by nearly 30% over the subsquent two years. go down the rabbit hole.Although preliminary data showed the external debt stock rose slightly in the first quarter of 2016, the rapid but relatively painless decrease in Russia’s external debt burden is an unsung success story, especially for the Central Bank of Russia (CBR). Unlike many countries with large foreign borrowing, Russia’s problem was not external government debt, which totals just $30bn. As a share of GDP it is less than 16%, which is far less than most emerging markets, to say nothing of peripheral European countries. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18832 Posts
On September 27 2016 16:17 zatic wrote: Good news (I guess): People worried that Oktoberfest would see a drop in visitors because of safety concerns caused by the series of incidents in Germany and France in early Summer. However, one week in visitor numbers are almost at the level of last year's - the difference made up entirely of the opening weekend, which saw fewer people due to the pouring rain last week. Wasen, Germany's second largest folk fest which opened last weekend, even saw record visitor numbers. But there are bands of Muslims in the street and everyone is afraid to leave their houses!......  | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 27 2016 19:10 Dangermousecatdog wrote: legalord, you are the one who mentioned WW2. Don't pretend it was someone else, and you did so entirely in an utterly crass and irrelevent way to change the subject. Namely that Russia is acting out its imperialism, that you yourself have written out threats to other countries and you now have just written a giant wall of text of so much nationalist and imperialist wishful thinking that you basically written out a Russian imperialist charter. I get it. You are really proud of your country, to the extent that you would happily write how powerful economically and militarily Russia is and how ok it is that the russian governement is just an extention of Putin and his cronies and how willingly Russia will use its military to further its aims. Unfortunately that's pretty much the definition of facism and imperialism that you are trying to say Russia isn't. You just need to open your eyes a little and see. Well that's a strawman and a half. I'm not sure why I even responded to you at all given that your demeanor here and in other threads is clearly that of a troll. I'm done with it now though. I write long posts about the issues because I know that for most, the perspective of Russia is very much underrepresented in the Western world. The supposed irrationality of Russia (and China) is simply ignorance of a decidedly non-West-European set of political considerations. However, for those who simply choose to respond to my posts with all the nuance and content of a child posting memes on Twitch chat, my only response is "fuck off." And that is my response to you. On September 27 2016 19:41 xM(Z wrote: well if you actually care, http://www.intellinews.com/comment-russia-s-central-bank-giving-credit-where-credit-is-due-97502/ go down the rabbit hole. "Unsung success story" I'm not sure I'd call it that given that I've seen quite a lot of praise for the Central Bank by Western commentators over the past two years. It doesn't really address the issue of government programs such as healthcare and pensions having a significant credit crunch as a result of the ruble crash though. | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
which is worse than fear, as far as your implied point goes | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9229 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:47 a_flayer wrote: What has Russia done since the fall of the Soviet Union that constitutes fearing them which can't be easily explained away by them simply responding to a situation that was created outside their control. What has Russia done in the past 20-25 years that constitutes a threat to the Eastern European countries? What have they done to Poland specifically, since our Polish friend seems terrified of Russia. + Show Spoiler + Let me just tick off two points, although I'm sure people will disagree: I don't think Georgia is a valid concern, because (as far as I know) the aggression there was started by Georgia itself and even fostered by the US before Russia ever made its move. I don't think Crimea is a valid concern because of the vast amount of history which leads me to believe that the people there did not like the rebel government which took over the country that their independent republic was a part of before they held the referendum. You can cite military presence, but the Russian military was allowed to be there, and as far as I know, no people were killed. Besides... + Show Spoiler + "the referendum occurred five days after the Crimean government announced the Declaration of Independence of the Republic of Crimea, which followed a parliamentary vote in which 78 out of 100 of Crimea's parliamentarians voted in favour of Crimea seceding from Ukraine." On the same wikipedia page where I got that quote, there's repeated polls between 2009 and 2011 which ALL say that the people of Crimea want to join Russia. It would be silly to refute their wishes and deny them the opportunity to do so. en.wikipedia.org That's not to say there are 0 concerns. I've heard they gave weapons to the people in the east of Ukraine who had largely voted for the government that was thrown out of Kiev by the rebels. Giving weapons to people is a bad thing to do, I agree, but the country was in turmoil all on its own. I think that as long as you keep the people in your own country (like Poland) in a state where they don't want to openly rebel, you're pretty safe from Russia in that regard. Not to mention that giving weapons to rebels is something another certain government is exceptionally fond of. Now, you can argue that Russia has only toned itself down because they are no longer one of two superpowers. But even if that is the only reason, isn't that enough? Isn't that enough to suggest reasonable trade with them is an option? Isn't that enough reason to build a lasting relationship with the intent of preserving peace rather than building up military forces outside their borders? I think that building up military forces tends to have the same effect as giving weapons to rebels: it will lead to those weapons being used. Rather, we should be giving the Eastern European countries a book on trade & diplomacy, so they will use that to further their goals instead of relying on a foreign military power to give them strength. That said, if Europe remains united in a trade and militaristic sense, then there should be little reason for concern even when it comes to Russia's imperialism. We have huge numbers of people, are better off economically, and we are a nuclear power on our own, which is all you seem to need to stop potential large scale invasions. We just don't need a military alliance with a country full of warmongers to help protect us against a threat that doesn't exist. I think the fear of Russia is based primarily on historical grievances which have little relevance in today's international political climate. Maybe there are some recent trade deals with Russia that you don't like? I mean, what it is that makes you fear them so much? When it comes to aggressive behaviour, I'm pretty sure the US takes the cake, and then orders a few thousand more of them because it's never quite satisfied. I'm not terrified of Russia. Our own "buffer zone" (Baltics, Belarus and Ukraine) is terrified of Russia and we need to help them keep their independence so we don't have to worry about being next. Hundred years ago we came up with (a bit unrealistic at that time) concept called Intermarium, which would be a defensive coaltion or federation of countries between Russia and Germany. I understand Poland is too weak to oppose those two but together with other Eastern countries we can force our bigger neighbours to respect our sovereignty. It would be something like sheeps making a defensive formation against wolves. The concept was designed to deter Russian aggression but it can also work against Germany as the Visegrad group showed with their "trolling" in europolitics. I know Intermarium is based on a Polish "empire" but how can you blame anyone for wanting to be a player instead of a playing field? Baltics, Belarus and Ukraine have sizeable Russian minorities and Russians like to protect minorities like Americans like to spread democracy. They always do that when their victim does something they don't like. When they attacked us in 1939 they said they're protecting Belarusian and Ukrainian minorities (from whom?). They couldn't protect minorities in the Baltics when they joined NATO in the 90s because of their internal problems. Now they're "protecting" the Russian minority in Ukraine, which coincidentally became endangered right after Ukraine started cooperating with the West. Belarus tries to play both ends but eventually they'll have to pick a side and when that happens, I'm sure it's not going to be peaceful. Elsewhere I said that I think Crimea should belong to Russia but I also think ethnic Russians were never in danger and doing things by force is not how you should solve disputes in Europe. Lastly, there are other reasons to be afraid of Russia. They keep doing cyberattacks like this one in Estonia, violating borders of other countries just to test their defenses like they did in Sweden, using their gas monopoly to blackmail other countries (free market, I know but that's just another reason to team up against them). Even before the Ukraine crisis they kept banning food imports from countries they had political disagreements with. If I wanted to put my tinfoil hat on I'd also mention the fact that 6 years after our presidential plane crashed in Russia they still didn't return us the wreckage because fuck you that's why. Now like 10-20% of people in my country believe Russians blew that plane up and we can't even disprove that because they refuse to cooperate with our officials. Russia just doesn't respect the weak. Maybe China and the US also don't but that's not our problem. The EU is a different story but we have some influence there and Germany tends to play fair(er) and respect the judgements of European courts which is muuuch more than what we could expect from Russia. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On September 27 2016 22:41 Sent. wrote: I'm not terrified of Russia. Our own "buffer zone" (Baltics, Belarus and Ukraine) is terrified of Russia and we need to help them keep their independence so we don't have to worry about being next. Hundred years ago we came up with (a bit unrealistic at that time) concept called Intermarium, which would be a defensive coaltion or federation of countries between Russia and Germany. I understand Poland is too weak to oppose those two but together with other Eastern countries we can force our bigger neighbours to respect our sovereignty. It would be something like sheeps making a defensive formation against wolves. The concept was designed to deter Russian aggression but it can also work against Germany as the Visegrad group showed with their "trolling" in europolitics. I know Intermarium is based on a Polish "empire" but how can you blame anyone for wanting to be a player instead of a playing field? Baltics, Belarus and Ukraine have sizeable Russian minorities and Russians like to protect minorities like Americans like to spread democracy. They always do that when their victim does something they don't like. When they attacked us in 1939 they said they're protecting Belarusian and Ukrainian minorities (from whom?). They couldn't protect minorities in the Baltics when they joined NATO in the 90s because of their internal problems. Now they're "protecting" the Russian minority in Ukraine, which coincidentally became endangered right after Ukraine started cooperating with the West. Belarus tries to play both ends but eventually they'll have to pick a side and when that happens, I'm sure it's not going to be peaceful. Elsewhere I said that I think Crimea should belong to Russia but I also think ethnic Russians were never in danger and doing things by force is not how you should solve disputes in Europe. Most of this stuff is pretty far back in history at this point. We've forgiven the Germans for their transgressions over half a century ago, you know. And while I agree with the sentiment that Russia protects Russians like America spreads democracy, I still don't think that countries in the European Union have much to fear from Russia in that regard. I certainly don't see any reasons here for building a network of missile systems around the country to "contain" them. Also, I wouldn't exactly call holding a referendum "doing things by force", although I'll agree that there were some dubious things happening, there wasn't much (if any) actual violence to speak of. That tends to be my main concern in these matters. How many people get killed or otherwise violated. Lastly, there are other reasons to be afraid of Russia. They keep doing cyberattacks like this one in Estonia, violating borders of other countries just to test their defenses like they did in Sweden, using their gas monopoly to blackmail other countries (free market, I know but that's just another reason to team up against them). Even before the Ukraine crisis they kept banning food imports from countries they had political disagreements with. If I wanted to put my tinfoil hat on I'd also mention the fact that 6 years after our presidential plane crashed in Russia they still didn't return us the wreckage because fuck you that's why. Now like 10-20% of people in my country believe Russians blew that plane up and we can't even disprove that because they refuse to cooperate with our officials. Russia just doesn't respect the weak. Maybe China and the US also don't but that's not our problem. The EU is a different story but we have some influence there and Germany tends to play fair(er) and respect the judgements of European courts which is muuuch more than what we could expect from Russia. Again I see no reasons for an extensive missile system with potential nuclear capabilities. This shit is just too dangerous to be messing around with like that. Also, while I haven't heard much from the Polish... president? I have noticed that he seems very anti-Russian in the few sentences that I heard/read from him. I wouldn't be very surprised if that caught on with Russian leaders as well. I don't want to play "blame the victim" in the case of that plane crash, but it does beg the question whether Poland could do more to establish friendly relations with Russia. Bigger countries not respecting smaller ones is a common problem in the world. That is why we need a Europe that has a unified voice on the world stage. So we can call out this kind of bullshit when it happens and have people listen. So we can call out the US for murdering thousands upon thousands of Arabs, instigating violence and fuelling terrorism with both weapons and the spirits of men who are sick of hearing about the US bombing their neighbours for over 25 years. I mean, bloody hell, Saddam Hussein was put to death for the murder of 139 Iraqis. I'm pretty sure Bush has a lot more death than that on his conscience, and now they wanna do the same to Assad and Syria? Not to mention the fact that we get to deal with refugees from all the fallout whenever they give weapons to random people (read: Taliban, ISIS, probably much more) in the region. I say kick the Americans out of Europe (mostly just the military, but removing some corporate influence might be nice too). Stand up for our European ideals of peace, equality, prosperity and freedom. Stop tolerating the warmongers and their obvious hostility to rest of the world. Freedom does not mean building military bases everywhere, overthrowing governments and forcing people to do your bidding. I'm even willing to bet Russia would change its tone in a positive way if we did that. If the Americans refuse to trade after we kick their military out, there's a much bigger country right on our doorstep with a shitton of oil and lots of people who I'm sure would be willing to work in factories commissioned by European businesses. Fuck my pizza is cold. | ||
|
Yurie
11897 Posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-Soviet_conflicts That wiki link is why any country bordering them is worried. Some of those aren't initiated by Russia but the majority is. The US is a bit more random in which countries it fights but isn't worrisome for most of the EU region which we are discussing. | ||
Nixer
2774 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 27 2016 22:41 Sent. wrote: Russia just doesn't respect the weak. Maybe China and the US also don't but that's not our problem. The EU is a different story but we have some influence there and Germany tends to play fair(er) and respect the judgements of European courts which is muuuch more than what we could expect from Russia. I'll let a_flayer take his own stance for this discussion (and besides, I've given my perspective and I'm pretty sure we disagree), but this one point is an interesting one I want to address. I wonder if Greece and the like would say that Germany "plays fair" and respects the weak. Indeed, one might argue that the Greek crisis has a rather significant element of exploitation associated with it, based on an arrangement that Poland played no small part in encouraging and maintaining. One might, in fact, question whether or not the perspective of "US and China not respecting weaker countries is not our problem" is just a desire to be "a player rather than the playing field" at least in some capacity. And that's fine. It really is - countries should act in their own self interest and it's foolish of them not to do so. But at the same time it sort of victim mentality and just makes Russia-bashing look like opportunism more than genuine concern. Some of the less charitable Russian nationalists might say that Poland decided it would rather be German than Slavic (being something of an intermediate between the two) and created a persecution story to rationalize it. I at the very least see some truth in that interpretation (although I can certainly sympathize with at least some of the actual grievances Poland has had to a much greater extent than that viewpoint would imply in context). | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On September 28 2016 05:14 Nixer wrote: Can you stop with the whataboutism, thanks. While I see where you are coming from with that statement, I'm just going with a "Look at yourself and your own behaviour" kind of deal. I certainly don't agree with Russia on many issues, but I am not a part of their military alliance. I am not a part of the Middle East. I am not a part of China. I am part of the West and NATO, and I say we should stop fucking killing people. Kicking the US and their weapons out of Europe/NATO would solve a lot of that because then I would no longer be part of it, and we would no longer essentially consent to the killing of people for reasons that I think are incredibly dubious and more related to money than to actual safety or the well-being of people. You're welcome. And speaking of imperialism. The US is about to go interplanetary and won't allow foreigners because it is considered a military operation. | ||
| ||
