11–20 of 57 posts
Russia is required to behave under first world standards when it comes to their commitments, but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade.
Surely Russia is second world if we are to use the three-world model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ...relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade. Because when given more civilized tools, they nonetheless alienate the world. They could have annexed Crimea peacefully, at least the part that they actually needed, but chose instead to engage in a semi-hot war while sending mixed signals with the referendum. Then President Obama completely shut the door on them, which did not h…
I just say that China or India (to put two bulky examples) have terrible civil rights AND environmental protection history and yet they aren't featured under a negative light on a daily basis in media.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"pissing in everyone else's face" - isn't it what US is doing?
Russia is trying too much, way above it head. It is a developing country, yet it is acting as if it is a strong power. It is both annoying and pathetic. At least US has earned its right to piss in everyone else's faces.
Fwiw, I don’t believe that this is what happening, noone is happy about counterproductive behavior, regardless which country it comes from (the US, Russia, China, Turkey, etc). However, in some cases there is not much you can do about it. Sigh, I wish all nations listed above could work together toward making this world a better place.
Russia is required to behave under first world standards when it comes to their commitments, but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade.
>relegated to third world Surely Russia is second world if we are to use the three-world model.
Russia is required to behave under first world standards when it comes to their commitments, but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade.
I assume you're referring to being kicked out of the G7, trade sanctions, etc? They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time, sending people to view the wonderful Salisbury Cathedral, etc.
Like, Russia's exclusion isn't something that just happened; there was massive provocation.
EDIT: Ah, a timely news article. As a general rule, G7 nations aren't doing THIS: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54002880
The headline from the BBC is a bit sensationalist I think, but that's what they have. Interesting article about retrieving the submarines though.
But if they do pull then up and have an accident the article claims fishing might have to stop for a while, so perhaps they are as good? I'm dubious on the claims though.
Either way, the tech and recovery is the interesting bit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ...relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade. Because when given more civilized tools, they nonetheless alienate the world. They could have annexed Crimea peacefully, at least the part that they actually needed, but chose instead to engage in a semi-hot war while sending mixed signals with the referendum. Then President Obama completely shut the door on them, which did not h…
I just say that China or India (to put two bulky examples) have terrible civil rights AND environmental protection history and yet they aren't featured under a negative light on a daily basis in media.
Russia is required to behave under first world standards when it comes to their commitments, but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade.