10Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksКакая замечательная клюква. Ну и как положено, общечеловеки опять приписали Сталину "гибель одного человека - трагедия, гибель миллионов - статистика".Originally Posted by diogen_
Какая замечательная клюква. Ну и как положено, общечеловеки опять приписали Сталину "гибель одного человека - трагедия, гибель миллионов - статистика".
клюква ?!
Anyway - the more they create videos like this, the better they feel about the fact that they themselves are responsible for millions of death around the world - in conflicts that the US has no business being involved in at all. Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Aghanistan, Pakistan (drone attacks), Libya (should have been left completely alone) and now Syria. +many more. Whatever Stalin was doing (which I understand is not a clearcut matter) he did in his own country - there are varying opinions and hard to no what is truth, propaganda or exaggeration.
I just think it's rather pathetic that so many people have to drag up Stalin, in discussions about modern politics. Stalin represents nobody but himself! He does not represent the USSR, Russia, modern Russian people or anything else. Sure, he lived in Moscow and called himself a Communist - but most educated people can recognise that that was just the beginning of his complex and rather self-serving ideological outlook.
Additionally: Hello!.......... it was 60 years ago! What does it matter? 60 years ago there was also segregation in the USA, colonialism oppression perpetrated by various European countries, imprisonment of gay people and sterilisation of gypsies in many present day European countries. Plus, according to many Russians here, Stalin actually accomplished some rather positive things in certain areas, and is appreciated by quite a few people. Either way - there is absolutely 0 connection between Stalin and the events in Syria.
OK.It means you don’t have any real evidence concerning US plans to break up China and Russia beside figments of your imagination that potentially they can do it, do you?
No, the real issue is that local communists realized all the futility of their former efforts to organize efficient command economy and had to agree to reform it using market methods in order to stay in power as long as possible.
Политика реформ и открытости — ВикипедияРеформы были начаты в 1978 по инициативе крыла прагматиков в Коммунистической партии Китая (КПК), которое возглавлял Дэн Сяопин, и продолжаются по сей день. Реформаторы поставили перед собой цель создания прибавочной стоимости, достаточной для финансирования модернизации китайской экономики, которая находилась на грани катастрофы после провала политики «большого скачка» и командных методов, проводимых Мао Цзэдуном. Первоначальной задачей реформ было решение проблемы мотивации рабочих и крестьян и ликвидация экономических диспропорций, характерных для командных экономик.
Well I never made this claim, it seems to be an idea that some Russians subscribe to, rightly or wrongly. So I will not try to justify it because I have not idea or proof about whether it might be true. I can speculate though!
But it doesn't seem very unrealistic to me though. The US must have been jubilant when the USSR fell apart, and it has been very keen to encourage ex Soviet states distance themselves from Russia as much as possible since then...
Obviously there is some genuine local resentment in certain ex Soviet countries against Russia, but many agencies of the USA have been quite happy about this and made its best to reinforce and increase such feelings. I understand that there has been plenty of funding of all sorts of activities in ex Soviet republics, that essentially mount up to anti-Russia sentiments among those involved. Not to mention sponsoring of media with a fairly obvious angle.
As for China, this is probably a MAJOR reason why China chooses to stick with its media and internet censorship programs - as unpalatable as it is.
They've seen what happened in other countries when media is opened up - i.e. first an relentless stream of complaints from locals that demoralise everyone... then foreign capital moves in. Sweden made this type of change - scrapped state control over TV. Now, there is a dominance of foreign owned TV stations that angle
This is probably also the reason behind the Russian requirement for foreign sponsored organisations to register etc.
Well. What we know for sure.
- The US, Britain, Qatar sponsored the Chechen rebels. Britain even hosted the rebel "government in exile". The head of the secessionist regime Yandarbiyev has been killed by Russian special services in Qatar.
The rebel forces and terrorists had plenty of foreign-made equipment and instructors (including those from Saudi Arabia, a close US ally). The terrorists even those who bombed schools and took hostages in hospitals
were never called "terrorists" in Western media
- The western institutions, especially those from Baltic states help to promote separatist agenda in Tatarstan, i.e. in Kazan university. The emissaries from Saudi Arabia and Qatar are trying to impose radical Wahabi Islam in Tatarstan mosques and on the North Caucasus.
- We have already seen how the West broke up Yugoslavia which was a smaller model of the USSR. It is clear that the West also helped to break up the USSR as well.
- Certain Russian opposition figures get help from the United States, including some that openly advocate even making a nuclear strike on Russia. For example, Garri Kasparov, a leader of the "Solidarity" movement who lives in the US even called the West to employ Libyan scenario in Russia Гарри Каспаров призвал запад бомбить . Yelena Bonner, the Sakharov's widow who emigrated in the US also called to "bomb Russia as Iraq". Others petitioned the American embassy to make a series of "point strikes" on Russia Ъ-Газета - Демократическая общественность обратилась к Америке A recent trend was supporting Russian ethnic nationalism, racism and anti-immigration movements. Such US-sponsored "nationalists" go as far as to demand a separate "Russian republic" for ethnic Russians inside Russia. They also equivocally support the secession of the North Caucasus using racist arguments. A radical wing which calls themselves "National Democrats" represented for instance, by Shiropayev, advocate complete desintegration of Russia and openly admire Adolf Hitler.
- Regarding China, a recent Chinese Nobel prize laureate Liu Xiaobo is a dissident who supports the disintegration of China into a set of some tens of independent states. He also openly supports the US war in Iraq. Nobel prize award has been political in the past as well, for example when it was awarded to Solzhenitsyn and Pasternak for anti-Soviet literature, as well as Gorbachev for disintegration of the USSR. It is evident that the US openly supports the Tibetan and Uyghur separatism.
Interesting posting, Anixx....
I don't want to believe it, actually, I WANT to believe that the EU and Britain (in particular) are basically nice
countries that just make the occassional bad judgement... I want to believe the same thing about the USA too, actually - Who doesn't want to like the country that gave us bluejeans, country music and Bambi...... with spectacular nature and friendly, outgoing people. But the facts speak for themselves, sadly...! Anyone who sees behind the initial hype cannot fail to reflect on the utter unfairness, inconsistency and hypocrisy in the way that all three countries behave.
Nobody who is thinking clearly can honestly believe that it is right for countries to invade far away nations to force their worldview, economical ideology and "investments" on others. To split up nations, fly with driverless drones and bomb innocent civilians for a "higher cause", sponsor terrorists one day and torture or execute them the next day when the agenda no longer co-incides with your own. Etc, etc ! Doing any of this makes you worse than the enemy you claim to be fighting in the interest of the greater good. And then have the stomach to say you stand for global democracy and freedom! It's the ultimate hoax.
Finally, for me, I am disgusted to see what's happened to my own country while I was away. Media, which now has to be profitable, has turned into a pathetic translation machine for English language foreign policy articles already written by British or American press. Obviously this type of journalism is cheap and cost effective and the opinions expressed tie in with the opinions of the owners. This has the result that most people fall for the latest "this-dictator-is-evil-and-must-be-taken-down" propaganda from abroad. The only original journalism taking place are the endless "educational" articles about family politics and immigration, telling people what they need to think about pro-homosexuality, feminism or immigration. There is only one acceptable opinion on these topics and anyone who dares to express anything else is eaten alive by media until his life is essentially destroyed. Real journalism is all but dead, apart from in personal blogs. It's ironic that now that we have so many TV channels there are actually less real news than back in the days of two commerical free stations and only 3 daily news programs.
Note that there are 50 streets and squares in Turkey named after Chechen rebel leader (the so-called president) Dzhokhar Dudayev, and Turkey is a US ally. Similar places also exist in Poland, the Baltic states and in Western Ukraine.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Duday...art=0&t=m&z=11
The nerve of the US is just unbelievable. He should "get the hell out" of Syria's business. It's none of his concern what happens in a tiny state on the other side of the Eart.US Defense Sec. Leon Panetta has advice for Syria’s President Assad: “If you want to be able to protect yourself and your family, you’d better get the hell out now.” Panetta also warned that the US would not repeat the mistakes it made in Iraq.
"All that is necessary for the forces of evil to triumph is for enough good men to do nothing."
Regardless of an agenda of the US, or your feelings concerning the US, there is no doubt in my mind that the government of Syria has and is currently perpetrating atrocities against its own people in the form of rape, pillaging, torture, murder, etc. It is a sad day indeed when the direction that lines run on a map are used to justify that it's okay to allow a government to systematically kill innocent men, women, and children.
The brutalization of innocent people should be everyone's business.
What's the evidence for such claims? Accusations or rape is just ridiculous delirium that the West throws at any army they did not like, starting from the Goebbels accusations against the Red Army. There is no basis to believe that any army ever commited any large-scale rape against even foreign people not to say own people. Rape is a very often accusation because it is impossible to disprove: you do not need a heap of bodies to throw rape accusations.
It is quite evident that Syria is putting down an armed rebellion supplied from abroad.
Syrian army cleanses the Damascus neighbourhood.
http://video.yandex.ru/iframe/news-a...nj2igh59.4706/
Weapons taken from the rebels:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/wYbxyEO...yer_detailpage
The claims are being made by refugees and people in Syria willing to speak up about it.What's the evidence for such claims? Accusations or rape is just ridiculous delirium that the West throws at any army they did not like
1
2
3
I suppose it's just a coincidence that German hospital records show that abortion rates began to surge in parts of Germany within months of being occupied by the Red Army. The thousands of personal accounts from women claiming to have been raped are lies, just as are the accounts of men who served in the Red Army claiming to have witnessed it. I am not sure why so many are so skeptical against this idea--nobody is judging Russia today for these actions, nor does it doesn't diminish the accomplishments of the Soviet Union in its victory in the Great Patriotic War. Many rapes of German women likely occurred by American soldiers as well as Soviet. I take objection to your statement that there is no basis to believe that any army ever committed large-scale rape, since, historically, that was actually a norm for many cultures post victory, and they freely admitted it and wrote about it.starting from the Goebbels accusations against the Red Army. There is no basis to believe that any army ever commited any large-scale rape against even foreign people not to say own people.
This does not justify the massacre of innocent men, women, and children.It is quite evident that Syria is putting down an armed rebellion supplied from abroad.
So there are no proofs, only accusations by the rebels.The claims are being made by refugees and people in Syria willing to speak up about it.
LOL. Where are those "thousands of accounts"?The thousands of personal accounts from women claiming to have been raped are lies, just as are the accounts of men who served in the Red Army claiming to have witnessed it.
In two major Berlin hospitals in 1945 there were registered only 9 cases of rape (claimed by the women), by unspecified men.
The statistics of incidents shows that in American and British occupation zones after the war the rate of rapes by military was higher than in Soviet zone (still far from thousands though).
Nobody here is "justifying the massacre of innocent men, women and children". Do you think that either Annixx or I support that?
Your problem is that you have only seen ONE side of the story, namely the story that is being constantly touted by the so called "free press" in whatever country you live.
- Do you realise that it is possible to take a news event and ONLY report those facts that suit your agenda? This can help purvey a vision that is completely different to what actually happens. Some journalists do this consciously, others unconsciously by just looking for, and thus finding, evidence that fits their view of events.
- Alternatively, you can choose to receive news reports only from those sources that report news that suit your agenda, and not report news from their opponents. (e.g. in the Syria conflict, accept as fact everything that the rebels say - there are practically no Western journalists in Syria at the moment, they receive 2nd 3rd hand information passed on by the rebels to Reuters etc).
- Or you can be a bit sketchy on the background details, saying "50 died in Damascus.. blah, blah" and omitting the fact that it was actually the rebels that killed them, rather than the government forces (this has been happening a lot in the Syria conflict).
These types of media tricks have been happening for a century; it was standard fare for both sides during the Cold War, it is used by both sides in the Palestine conflict, etc, etc.
It is up to you if you want to be a media SHEEP, simply following the herd, swallowing everything that media rams down your throat... As long as it stays at that... !
But if you think that what you have seen in mainstream media about Syria is the full truth, and particularly, if you believe that this is justification for any form of military intervention in Syria, then you have been manipulated, similarly to Germans in the 3rd Reich, to mention a rather extreme example of how educated people with some moral integrity can be manipulated by a media and state agenda into believing that war is right and all the other lies that we know they were told there.
It is very sad that this conflict is taking place and that people are dying.
But if there was a violent conflict in your country, would you want a larger country on the other side of the eart, like China, to start arming the anti-government forces...... then step in and set up shop and start pursuing their own interests while ostensibly saving your people from themselves.... And what if you discovered, by the time China set up military bases and were patrolling the streets in your town, that they had an agenda going back as far as 15 years, for taking down the government in your country...?
This analogy corresponds very closely to what we see happening in Syria right now, only it haven't played out to the end yet... But it is pretty clear what the end game is.
One more thing you can take for whatever it is, or what it means to you: The whole (relatively large) local Christian minority in Syria support Assad: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_1...tand-by-assad/
While under Dudayev Ukrainians were robbed, killed, exiled together with Russians.
What part of Ukraine has been under his rule?
He means Ukrainians who lived in Chechnya. Under Dudayev there was a large-scale ethnic cleansing in Chechnya where all non-Chechens were evicted or murdered. The cleansing has been supported by the West.What part of Ukraine has been under his rule?
You don't know what you're saying, obviously.
Posting Permissions
Russian Lessons | Russian Tests and Quizzes | Russian Vocabulary |
Reply With Quote