Why the American media are so pathologically anti-Russian

[Serb]

Originally posted by Saras
ALL HAIL TEH LORD GOD!

Russia bars foreign-owned firms from key assets

Thank you for the good news. Go, Putin, Go!!!
Saras, Russia is not some kind of Kazakhstan where foreigners owns everything. We are not ****ing banana republic, we make our own and the only spaceships on this planet that make ISS stay on its orbit.
Forget about this, if you don't like our rules, get the **** out of Russia. Putin

[Dinner]

Serb, do you ever notice how just abut everyone but you agrees the Russian government is selectively enforcing certain laws on Putin's political opposition?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Saras


Have you ever wondered why Amercians dont give a flying rats pancreas who buys their 'strategic' assets? BECAUSE IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER!

Blah...blah...blah...
WHAT STRATEGIC ASSETS? You mean Columbia or Tri Star Pictures?

Íàçîâè ìíå õîòü îäíó èíîñòðàííóþ êîìïàíèþ, êîòîðàÿ äîáûâàåò íåôòü íà òåððèòîðèè ÑØÀ. Äà ó íèõ è íåôòè òî íå îñòàëîñü íè õåðà, áûëà áû íåôòü, â Èðàê áû íå ïîïåðëèñü.

What will happen now is - Putins buddies will buy the assets at lower prices than they would have been had they been sold in open and fair auctions. Sheesh, 'national interests' MY ARSE!

Bulsh!t. What Putin's buddies? Names please. FYI, the bulk of such assets was sold alredy. I can't see another wave of privatization in Russia, because Yåltsin's buddies already stolen all valuable pieces.

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Serb

Whatever. Lands taken by USSR in 1939 were populted by Ukranians and Byelorussians (I'm talking about 90+ percents figures here) and these were the lands captured by Poland in 1921.
In case of Poland, you justify such actions, in case of USSR you condemn them, despite Poland was the first who started it.

I'll divide it into several points:
When it comes to who started it, the Czechs started it in case of Cieszyn, and both sides started it when it comes to eastern Poland/western Ukraine/whatever.

When it comes to 90% figures, You're wrong.
Poles were less than 20% minority only in three wojewodztwa: Stanislawow, Polesie (Brzesc) and Wolyn (Luck). In none they were less than 10%, though they were close to it in these three.
When it comes to Podole, Lwow, Wilno, Nowogrodek and Bialystok, Lublin wojewodztwa, they were a majority, in some of them a definite one (You could argue when it comes to Podole, it was about even there). In fact, USSR has taken grounds on which there were absolutely NO Ukrainians, Lithuanians or Byelorussians, up to Warsaw.

And when it comes to the differences...
1) Zaolzie and a couple of mountain villages Poland's taken is insignificant territorially, consisting perhaps 1% of Czechoslovak state, or less. In comparison, USSR has taken over half of Poland.
2) Zaolzie was hardly any center of Czech culture, while the importance of Vilnius and Lwow for Polish cuture can only be compared to the one of Krakow and Warsaw
3) Poland has taken only some territories inhabited majorly by Poles. In comparison, USSR has taken (as I've already mentioned) not only all the territories with any, even insignificant, minorities, but also grounds clearly Polish, up to Vistula and Warsaw.
4) Poland didn't intend to destroy Czechoslovakia, while USSR did intend to destroy Poland
5) Poland just pressured Czechoslovakia, so that it gave the lands without fight (and that's why the claims were moderate, I guess), while USSR just invaded.
6) Poland operated alone, though profitting from German pressure on Czechoslovakia. USSR and nazi Germany cooperated closely.

While Poland did a bad deed, USSR did something much much worse.

Sure, Gorbachev is the traitor and he has no idea about histrory. His "histroric mission" was to destroy the USSR. And this ****** fullfiled his mission. Why should I (or anyone else) trust to incompetent traitor in matters where his goal was to lie as much as he could to make USSR look worse as possible?
I trust Gorbachev no more than I trust Dr. Goebels, because they are speaking the same.

Uh? If He succeeded, He was VERY competent, wasn't He?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Serb, do you ever notice how just abut everyone but you agrees the Russian government is selectively enforcing certain laws on Putin's political opposition?

Oh boy, when you and everyone else here will understand that Khodorkovsky is just a thief? That he is not the opposition for the Putin, becase the party he protected and sponsored DID NOT gain any sugnificant support of population, they got less than 5% on last elections, becase most of the population of Russia REALLY, REALLY, REALLY hate this so-called party of reformers who robbed this popultaion and brought poverty for Russia.
Your media claims he is the leader of the opposition, but this is BS, because he wasn't and isn't the one of the leaders, and SUCH opposition is hilarious anyway and Putin have not a single to reason to be afraid of SUCH bunch of morons who call themselves the opposition.

[Dinner]

It's not very reasonable to say Gorbachev set out to destroy the Soviet Union. He made a poor choice in going for political liberalization before economic reforms but he had his back up against the wall. The Soviet system of collective farms was producing less food in 1980 then Tsarist Russia produced in 1910; that is dispite massive irrigation projects, mechanization, pesticides, and all of the agricultural advances of the 20th century. That meant the Soviets had import food from the west and that gave Reagan a huge lever to use against Gorbachev.

The other big mistake was not giving up on the arms race sooner. At the height of the amrs race the US was spending 3% of GDP on the military while the Soviets were spending around 40%-45% of GDP on the military. That sort of resource expenditure can't be maintained for long without economic collapse. If the Soviets were smart they would have given up on the arms race, accepted that the US will have a more advanced military, and instead concentrated on economic reforms like the Chinese did.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Heresson


I'll divide it into several points:
When it comes to who started it, the Czechs started it in case of Cieszyn, and both sides started it when it comes to eastern Poland/western Ukraine/whatever.

When it comes to 90% figures, You're wrong.
Poles were less than 20% minority only in three wojewodztwa: Stanislawow, Polesie (Brzesc) and Wolyn (Luck). In none they were less than 10%, though they were close to it in these three.
When it comes to Podole, Lwow, Wilno, Nowogrodek and Bialystok, Lublin wojewodztwa, they were a majority, in some of them a definite one (You could argue when it comes to Podole, it was about even there). In fact, USSR has taken grounds on which there were absolutely NO Ukrainians, Lithuanians or Byelorussians, up to Warsaw.

What a bullsh!t. No comments. Those lands were populated by 12 millions of non-Polish population (Ukranians and byelorussians mostly).

And when it comes to the differences...
1) Zaolzie and a couple of mountain villages Poland's taken is insignificant territorially, consisting perhaps 1% of Czechoslovak state, or less. In comparison, USSR has taken over half of Poland.

a) Look at map it was far from 1% of Czech territory and this land increased your industrial capacity by 150%. You did advance so fast to grab more of Czechoslovakia that Hitler commited his ELITE SS FREAKS to stop Poles from grabbing more.
b) USSR has taken half of Poland? News to me. From what I know, USSR took the lands Poland captured in 1921 and NOTHING MORE.
What make you think these Ukranian and Beylorussian lands were "half of Poland"? The fact that Poland attacked USSR in 1920 and conquered these lands in 1921? You think after 18 years these lands became yours permanently and USSR had no right to return these lands stolen by Poland earlier during its backstabing attack?
In 1939 USSR did the same as Poland did in 1920- back ****ing stab, but aside Poland in 1920, he did so to return its own stolen territories.

2) Zaolzie was hardly any center of Czech culture, while the importance of Vilnius and Lwow for Polish cuture can only be compared to the one of Krakow and Warsaw

Blah...blah...blah...
What a bullsh!t.
And importance of Vilnius for Lithuanian culture is nothing of course? Sure, who cares about Lithuanian capital, it belongs to Poland, right? Do you have any idea that USSR gave Vilnius to Lithuania (which was back then an absolutely soverign state) and furthermore, USSR BOUGHT via league of nations some former "Polish" lands from Germany and gave them to Lithuania fo free. F*cking Imperial USSR.

3) Poland has taken only some territories inhabited majorly by Poles. In comparison, USSR has taken (as I've already mentioned) not only all the territories with any, even insignificant, minorities, but also grounds clearly Polish, up to Vistula and Warsaw.

PURE SH!T. NO COMMENTS, except the fact that in 1939, USSR took territory which was stolen by Poland in 1921 due its attack against USSR, due to its undeniable aggression vs. USSR. Have you didn't attack Soviets in 1920, this attack of 1939 would never happen. You did your best to ruin all relations with USSR. YOU WERE GODDAMN HOSTILE FREAKS.

4) Poland didn't intend to destroy Czechoslovakia, while USSR did intend to destroy Poland

a) Poland had no balls, to destroy Czechoslovakia alone. Poland acted as greedy hyena (remeber Churchill). Hyenas never attack and never hunt themselves, they eat sh!t what lions left them. They are sh!t-eaters. Seeing that Czechs are too strong for glorious Polish Crusadres, they waited (and actually encouraged him) till lion (Germany) kill its victim (Czechoslovakia) and then go eat (grab parts of Czechoslovakia).
b) As for "USSR did intend to destroy Poland",
your problem is your knowledge of WW2 (as many of other westerners here) is so limited, so basic, so wrong. I did believe the same bullsh!t ten years ago, till I dig deeper.
Take my advise and read some memouirs of German generals, like Halder for example. Even Hitler himself had no intention to destroy Poland. He simply wasn't in aware that such thing is possible. Nobody knew that German blitzkreige will be a revolution in a warfare, that allow complete destruction of such state as Poland. Halder wrote in his diary after two weeks of combat - "the success of our forces is indescribable". Now you tries to convince me that Stalin knew more about the revolutionary German strategy more than Hitler himself? Bullsh!t. He had no idea that Germans can destroy Poland so fast, that Poles will be such cowards, YES, COWARDS. Stalin wanted a continued war of Poland+GB+France vs. Germany to weaken all of them and to win more time for re-armament. But your glorious goverment escaped Poland at Sept.3 after three days of war. At sept. 18 when Red Army enterd Poland there wasn't any organized resistance to Germans, because your own government betrayed your people. And it was absolutely clear that Poland is doomed and if USSR wouldn't take lands that rightfully belong to it, Germans will do it (notwithstanding the pact USSR and Germany signed). BTW, you still didn't show to me where in Molotov-Ribbentrop pact uis the part about division of Poland, where is the part about joint military operations. There are no such parts.

5) Poland just pressured Czechoslovakia, so that it gave the lands without fight (and that's why the claims were moderate, I guess), while USSR just invaded.

Bullsh!t. See above. Poland acted as greeedy hyena (Sir Winston Churchill). Hyenas do not hunt (invade) they wait till lion do the killing and then eat remaining sh!t.

6) Poland operated alone, though profitting from German pressure on Czechoslovakia. USSR and nazi Germany cooperated closely.

Bullsh!t.
Poland DID cooperated with Germany.
If Germany and USSR cooperated so closely, then why USSR entered Poland only at Sept. 18 when Poland was doomed already, because Polish government run from Poland with tail between thier legs after two days since Germans enterd its territory at Sept. 1, becase Germans already f*cked-up any more or less capable Polish forces, due to their revolutionary strategy, because there was no organized resistanence anymore. WHY Soviets and Nazis DIDN'T attack simultaneously if they cooperated closely as you claim?

While Poland did a bad deed, USSR did something much much worse.

Not at all. USSR returned the territory Poland took from Soviets 18 years ago. Poland did the same one year earlier with Czechoslovakia and thus (and by do not providing right of passage for the Soviets to protect its Ally- Czechoslovakia, YES, GODDAMNIT USSR, FRANCE and CZHECHOSLOVAKIA WERE ALLIES, untill France thanks to Britain betrayed Czechs and they surrendered without a fight) provoked WW2, and became another (not the first, because the first victim was Czechoslovakia) victim of WW2, due its own Polish greed and stupidity.

Uh? If He succeeded, He was VERY competent, wasn't He?

:
Grobachev was competent only in one feild- destruction (any idiot is an expert in this feild). In any other fields, he is an absolute moron.

p.s. don't bother to reply. You are in my ignore list now. I had to make it long time ago.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Oerdin
It's not very reasonable to say Gorbachev set out to destroy the Soviet Union. He made a poor choice in going for political liberalization before economic reforms but he had his back up against the wall. The Soviet system of collective farms was producing less food in 1980 then Tsarist Russia produced in 1910; that is dispite massive irrigation projects, mechanization, pesticides, and all of the agricultural advances of the 20th century. That meant the Soviets had import food from the west and that gave Reagan a huge lever to use against Gorbachev.

The other big mistake was not giving up on the arms race sooner. At the height of the amrs race the US was spending 3% of GDP on the military while the Soviets were spending around 40%-45% of GDP on the military. That sort of resource expenditure can't be maintained for long without economic collapse. If the Soviets were smart they would have given up on the arms race,

The only problem of Gorbachev is that he lack balls. He is not a leader, he is sucker. Such sucker was doomed to destroy the country. Case is closed.

accepted that the US will have a more advanced military,

Thanks, that was the good one. I'm nearly died.

p.s. And Rambo is a real person, right?

[Dinner]

Serb, can you at least admite that spending 40% of GDP on the military in order to match the US wasn't sustainable? The Soviets should have accepted second place militarially and cut back military spending.

[Saras]

:yawn:

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Serb


What a bullsh!t. No comments. Those lands were populated by 12 millions of non-Polish population (Ukranians and byelorussians mostly).

Serb, there were I think about or slighty less than 12 mln ethnic minorities in ENTIRE Poland (36% of 35mln)
Do You really think that villages 10 kms from Warsaw are "Ukrainian or Byelorussian"?

a) Look at map it was far from 1% of Czech territory and this land increased your industrial capacity by 150%. You did advance so fast to grab more of Czechoslovakia that Hitler commited his ELITE SS FREAKS to stop Poles from grabbing more.

Propaganda story, Serb.

b) USSR has taken half of Poland? News to me. From what I know, USSR took the lands Poland captured in 1921 and NOTHING MORE.

First of all, Poland actually regained independance in that time, also regained independance in lands that beonged to it before 1795, when it's lost it.
Secondly, Lublin and Bialystok were liberated by Poland before that. And Lwow, Stanislawow and Tarnopol Poles won in fight against independant Ukrainians, not USSR.

What make you think these Ukranian and Beylorussian lands were "half of Poland"? The fact that Poland attacked USSR in 1920 and conquered these lands in 1921? You think after 18 years these lands became yours permanently and USSR had no right to return these lands stolen by Poland earlier during its backstabing attack?
In 1939 USSR did the same as Poland did in 1920- back ****ing stab, but aside Poland in 1920, he did so to return its own stolen territories.

These lands belonged to Poland before 1795, Lwow, Tarnopol and Stanislawow before 1772. We've already discussed Serb. It's silly to call these territories somekind of rightful Soviet holdings. Both it and Poland were in statu nascendi. Also, Lwow, Tarnopol and Stanislawow regions never belonged to USSR, nor to Russia, before 1939.

And importance of Vilnius for Lithuanian culture is nothing of course? Sure, who cares about Lithuanian capital, it belongs to Poland, right? Do you have any idea that USSR gave Vilnius to Lithuania (which was back then an absolutely soverign state) and furthermore, USSR BOUGHT via league of nations some former "Polish" lands from Germany and gave them to Lithuania fo free. F*cking Imperial USSR.

1) Vilnius has great patriotic meaning for Lithuania, but at that time, there were hardly any Lithuanians in it. That's why it's hard to call it "Lithuanian center of culture" more than Wroclaw was for Poland.
Grodno was one of old parliament capitals of Poland, and it doesn't belong to Poland now.
Yes, USSR has given Vilnius to Lithuania - just to annex Lithuania some time later.

PURE SH!T. NO COMMENTS, except the fact that in 1939, USSR took territory which was stolen by Poland in 1921 due its attack against USSR, due to its undeniable aggression vs. USSR. Have you didn't attack Soviets in 1920, this attack of 1939 would never happen. You did your best to ruin all relations with USSR. YOU WERE GODDAMN HOSTILE FREAKS.

Hostile? Poland got what it wanted and didn't have to be hostile. Invading a country, that I call hostility.
Don't You agree that USSR has taken lands up to Warsaw? Should I post a proper map?
Poland "attacked" USSR in 1920 because it wanted to crush Poland to move its way to German revolution.
"A way to world revolution goes through dead body of bourgeois Poland" etc

a) Poland had no balls, to destroy Czechoslovakia alone. Poland acted as greedy hyena (remeber Churchill). Hyenas never attack and never hunt themselves, they eat sh!t what lions left them. They are sh!t-eaters. Seeing that Czechs are too strong for glorious Polish Crusadres, they waited (and actually encouraged him) till lion (Germany) kill its victim (Czechoslovakia) and then go eat (grab parts of Czechoslovakia).

Serb, Poland got Zaolzie BEFORE Muenchen.

b) As for "USSR did intend to destroy Poland",
your problem is your knowledge of WW2 (as many of other westerners here) is so limited, so basic, so wrong. I did believe the same bullsh!t ten years ago, till I dig deeper.
Take my advise and read some memouirs of German generals, like Halder for example. Even Hitler himself had no intention to destroy Poland. He simply wasn't in aware that such thing is possible. Nobody knew that German blitzkreige will be a revolution in a warfare, that allow complete destruction of such state as Poland. Halder wrote in his diary after two weeks of combat - "the success of our forces is indescribable". Now you tries to convince me that Stalin knew more about the revolutionary German strategy more than Hitler himself?

Perhaps because Germans and USSR planned division of Poland before invasion?
Are these memoirs published during USSR regime?

And it was absolutely clear that Poland is doomed and if USSR wouldn't take lands that rightfully belong to it,
Germans will do it (notwithstanding the pact USSR and Germany signed). BTW, you still didn't show to me where in Molotov-Ribbentrop pact uis the part about division of Poland, where is the part about joint military operations. There are no such parts.

There are.
And Polish gouverment still existed, it just decided to continue the fight from behind the boarder (in fact, Polish gouverment in exile in London lasted up to the end of communism).
Who did You the "right" to these lands? And are Lublin and Bialystok "rightful Soviet posession" as well?
Soon USSR has taken Eastonia, latvia, Lithuania, and part of Romania - these are "rightful Soviet posessions" as well, I presume?

Bullsh!t.
Poland DID cooperated with Germany.
If Germany and USSR cooperated so closely, then why USSR entered Poland only at Sept. 18 when Poland was doomed already

Because He was coward

Not at all. USSR returned the territory Poland took from Soviets 18 years ago.

Did Lwow belong to Soviets before Poland regained it?
Did anything belong to USSR at all? It just came into existance.

Poland did the same one year earlier with Czechoslovakia

If it was the same, why didn't USSR return it to Poland after ww2? And why do You say it was wrong, if it was the same?

, YES, GODDAMNIT USSR, FRANCE and CZHECHOSLOVAKIA WERE ALLIES,

Grobachev was competent only in one feild- destruction (any idiot is an expert in this feild). In any other fields, he is an absolute moron.

Interesting. One moron and USSR was doomed.
How did that moron became the leader of it in the first place?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Serb, can you at least admite that spending 40% of GDP on the military in order to match the US wasn't sustainable? The Soviets should have accepted second place militarially and cut back military spending.

Just because they've spend so much they were "the number one in military science'(c.)Civ2. We still (after nearly 20 years) posses technologies you are light years behind. We've lost the Cold war not because your military was better, but because our elite has degrodated, )(basically they were just bunch of suckers, f*cking imbiciles), because they had no balls to stand-up your bluff about SDI and the same crap (they had all tools to fight this mythical threat), because you've convinced (fooled actually) that your way of life is better than the Soviet one. You've won an ideologiacal victory, not the military victory.
As for spending 0f 40% of GDP, it wasn't to match the US. The whole goal was to be better than US. Because US threaten to destroy the USSR. That's why SU couldn't be like modern China. You don't threaten to destroy them now, as you've threathen to destroy SU. They are capitalists now and one of your main trade partners. The USSR was the absolutely different case.

[Serb]

Heresson, I can't hear you anyway.
p.s. And do yourself a favour - learn something about Soviet-Czechoslovakian-French defensive alliance of 1935. I don't want to waste my time on such an uneducated person as you are.

p.s. sucker.

[Saras]

Originally posted by Serb
We've lost the Cold war not because your military was better, but because our elite has degrodated,

Yea dude, stabbed in teh BACK BY TEH EVIL JOOOS!!!11!!1

[Heresson]

I may be wrong in that part, Serb, I don't know, but I'm a hyperintelectual compared to You.
Which doesn't mean I'm too clever, that's true.