[flagged]
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/10/14/is-alaska-next-on-...
Is the deputy prime minister of Russia demanding Alaska back enough of a citation?
Or do you actually not care for any evidence, comrade?
A Perspective on Ukraine
11–20 of 24 posts
Re: A Perspective on Ukraine
#12[flagged]
> Point to the Russian documents with the same clarity and direction that one can, for example, point to the PNAC policy statements [1], which resulted in Iraq losing 5% of its population.
Current Russian regime knows that it cannot clearly explain the invasion of Ukraine. And yet, they invaded, occupied territories, quickly annexed them etc.
Something something "actions speak louder than words".
Re: A Perspective on Ukraine
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
Poorly worded, I suspect. I think the comparison is how modern Germany treats the nazi part of their past to how modern Russia treats the Soviet part of their past.
What I mean is: Russia today is more akin to Germany in the 1930s, bitter over their past failures and humiliation at the hands of allied states a decade or so earlier, and eager to get back to conquest to show the world how great and powerful they are.
I see the similarity, and it does not increase my peace of mind for the future...
Re: A Perspective on Ukraine
#14[flagged]
Here's Medvedev saying that, after they're done with Ukraine, Russia should take some of Poland: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-medvedev-floats...
February 24th, 2023, so it's not some ancient history...
Re: A Perspective on Ukraine
#15[flagged]
The author (who grew up in Poland while it was a puppet state of the USSR) offers examples literally in the same paragraph that you quoted. The full paragraph is:
Russia’s expansionist policy, on the other hand, continues to cast a long shadow across Europe. The country has a long history of conquest, but for centuries, its vast dominion resembled a loose federation of fiefdoms, not a single state; it wasn’t until the emergence of the USSR that a cohesive national identity — along with a renewed focus on global expansion — started to take hold. Through various machinations, the USSR soon ended up annexing Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania; and seizing military and political control of Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, and other neighboring states. For decades, the residents of these lands suffered repression and economic hardships — and were barred from leaving the Soviet-controlled world.
Re: A Perspective on Ukraine
#16> In contrast to Nazi Germany, the days of the Soviet Union are not a point of national shame; former communist dignitaries are not banished from public life, streets and entire towns still bearing their names. Nostalgia coupled with bitterness continues to define Russian politics. Actually, Nazi Germany was filled with nostalgia coupled with bitterness over the treaty of Versailles. They felt hard done by in WW1, an…
Poorly worded, I suspect. I think the comparison is how modern Germany treats the nazi part of their past to how modern Russia treats the Soviet part of their past.
[dead]
Re: A Perspective on Ukraine
#17Re: A Perspective on Ukraine
#18[flagged]
The author (who grew up in Poland while it was a puppet state of the USSR) offers examples literally in the same paragraph that you quoted. The full paragraph is: Russia’s expansionist policy, on the other hand, continues to cast a long shadow across Europe. The country has a long history of conquest, but for centuries, its vast dominion resembled a loose federation of fiefdoms, not a single state; it wasn’t until th…
>Russia’s expansionist policy,
What policy? This is a generalization. Specifically, which articles ratified by the Kremlin make this official state policy?
Any blowhard can say what they want. Where is the official state policy to support this argument?
Re: A Perspective on Ukraine
#19Re: A Perspective on Ukraine
#20[flagged]
Often the dark actions are wrapped in good words. So we either read "we Russians stand for the world peace" and understand we need to prepare for war, or don't read nothing at all, except intelligence reports about increasing military forces on the borders. > Otherwise, this is just agitprop. On whos side? Will anybody honestly argue about Russia's expansionist policy? After events which can be interpreted as a solid…
If you have chosen sides, you've lost.
This is about preventing the circumstances whereby yet more war and calamity are foisted on the world.
Western public love to pontificate that they 'know' (telepathically?) what the Russian state 'wants'. But they can't point to a single policy document to support their argument - just more agitprop.
>Or, in other words, who's doing agitprop here?
Those who profess to know what official state policy is, without actually having read any.