i wonder how this is going to affect dr. david duke since he has a lot of support in Ukraine and in Russia. i also heard that he got kicked out of northern italy and is not in LA anymore.
i wonder how this is going to affect dr. david duke since he has a lot of support in Ukraine and in Russia. i also heard that he got kicked out of northern italy and is not in LA anymore.
Whenever someone trots out this line, the only thing it proves is that the poster doesn't know any history prior to the 1930s.
I'm actually a pretty big history nerd.
Um, let me think..... do I give flying fuck what happens the the Ukraine? Um, absolutely not. Putin, have at it.
Given America's disgusting past of interventions, it is so precious that they protest against Russian intervention.
Regardless of your feverish war mongering -- it is not your or any other state's call -- it is Ukraine's call if it chooses to escalate the levels of warfare (invasion is war) from warm to hot, and to have military assistance provided by others.You do realize that we promised Ukraine we would defend them if they gave up their nukes, right? And they gave up their nukes. So....
You do realize that we promised Ukraine we would defend them if they gave up their nukes, right? And they gave up their nukes. So....
So fuck 'em. If you want to fight, strap on your guns and go. Russia has nukes genuis. This isn't some third world country that can't fight back. This is a country that has the power to end the United States and the world. Ukraine has zero strategic interest for America.... none, zilch.
Interesting but highly inaccurate....
Let me play devils advocate -- if the world thought that as a superpower your navy was rotting and decaying.....your submarine fleet was doing the same ands there was discord in your military...would you really want the world to know that things are not as they seem? Think about it.....
So we should only keep our word if we give our words to a country that is of strategic interest to us?
You are the definition of the compassionate liberal. "Fuck you and your friends. Fuck your children. You can all die in the streets." Unless you might me of strategic interest to us.
You are sick. Really sick.
This is kind of what I'm thinking.
All the media is completely one-side on the entire issue. One thing I've learned is that there is always, always, another side.
Like, how many people are aware that Crimea was annexed into Ukraine in 1954, and before that it had been part of.... Russia?
This, from 2012:
http://history.stackexchange.com/questions/4418/why-did-the-ussr-give-crimea-to-ukraine
Another tidbit from Wikipedia :
"On 24 August 2009, anti-Ukrainian demonstrations were held in Crimea by ethnic Russian residents. Sergei Tsekov (of the Russian Bloc[35] and then deputy speaker of the Crimean parliament[36]) said then that he hoped that Russia would treat the Crimea the same way as it had treated South Ossetia and Abkhazia."
It seems to me that the untold story here is that of a once independent region, annexed into Ukraine, with very strong Russian ties.
It would be like the USA giving Texas to Mexico, then Mexico deciding it was going to snub the USA and link up with Cuba. Texans wouldn't be too happy about it.
Yes that's a bit dramatic, but I think there is another side to this story - one which our brain dead, pathetic, bought and paid for western media is not presenting.
On 18 May 1944, the entire population of the Crimean Tatars was forcibly deported in the "Sürgün" (Turkish (Crimean Tatar) for exile) to Central Asia by Joseph Stalin's Soviet government as a form of collective punishment, on the grounds that they had collaborated with the Nazi occupation forces. An estimated 46% of the deportees died from hunger and disease. On 26 June of the same year, the Armenian, Bulgarian, and Greek population was also deported to Central Asia. By the end of summer of 1944, the ethnic cleansing of Crimea was complete. In 1967, the Crimean Tatars were rehabilitated, but they were banned from legally returning to their homeland until the last days of the Soviet Union. The Crimean ASSR was abolished on 30 June 1945 and transformed into the Crimean Oblast (province) of the Russian SFSR.
This is kind of what I'm thinking.
All the media is completely one-side on the entire issue. One thing I've learned is that there is always, always, another side.
Like, how many people are aware that Crimea was annexed into Ukraine in 1954, and before that it had been part of.... Russia?
This, from 2012:
http://history.stackexchange.com/questions/4418/why-did-the-ussr-give-crimea-to-ukraine
Another tidbit from Wikipedia :
"On 24 August 2009, anti-Ukrainian demonstrations were held in Crimea by ethnic Russian residents. Sergei Tsekov (of the Russian Bloc[35] and then deputy speaker of the Crimean parliament[36]) said then that he hoped that Russia would treat the Crimea the same way as it had treated South Ossetia and Abkhazia."
It seems to me that the untold story here is that of a once independent region, annexed into Ukraine, with very strong Russian ties.
It would be like the USA giving Texas to Mexico, then Mexico deciding it was going to snub the USA and link up with Cuba. Texans wouldn't be too happy about it.
Yes that's a bit dramatic, but I think there is another side to this story - one which our brain dead, pathetic, bought and paid for western media is not presenting.
This is just their Black Sea fleet. There's only 6 nations with borders on the Black sea. Russia doesn't need a top of the line fleet for this area.
Indeed. Anybody who thinks that what we get through the media is much more than astroturfing of public opinion has shit fer brains.
It's just another attempt to resurrect the Russian boogeyman, invoke the Neocon "Us against Them!" headset. Seems to be working on susceptible individuals.
More than 20 years of NATO invading and destroying countries around the world following interests of Western business elites and all Russia has been doing here is protecting Russians on their land against extermination from NATO.
Indeed. Anybody who thinks that what we get through the media is much more than astroturfing of public opinion has shit fer brains.
It's just another attempt to resurrect the Russian boogeyman, invoke the Neocon "Us against Them!" headset. Seems to be working on susceptible individuals.
How do you reconcile this position with the fact that a primary contributor to the 'close ties' and the Russian majorities in Crimea are the result of crimes against humanity undertaken by Russia?
Yeah, you get to be the majority in a place after you murder or deport everyone else. That doesn't mean that years later you get to use the results of your ethnic cleansing as a cause to re-invade.
The ethnic Russians in Crimea may not have always lived there, but they certainly do now. Do they have no rights because the Soviets did fucked up things in the 50s?
What rights do the people of russian background living in the Crimea not have that other Ukrainians have?