what happened to the großrossiya thread

[Serb]

And no one here have forgotten about the Lend-Lease, really. The British and American veterans of Northern convoys are welcomed guests in Moscow during our celebrations of our common victory in WW2.

[Serb]

Considering that Stalins policies weren´t so much better than Hitlers (policies towards conquered countries (like poland), Gulags, Stalins Paranoia) it would have been ideal if Stalins and Roosevelts death dates would have been exchanged ... this way the process od destalinization could have begun sooner and Roosevelt would have lived to experience it ... and perhaps gained a more positive attitude towards USSR)

[onodera]

Ты не часть моего народа, ты - часть "малого народа", который существовал всегда параллельно с "большим народом", паразитировал на нем, насмехался над ним, считал себя умнее него, но всегда был "малым", и поэтому всегда бит "большим". И, будет им бит всегда. Холуйствуй дальше перед своими западными кумирами, баран
Ваше племя долбоёбов неистребимо. Вы как чирь на жопе. Это самое подходящее для вас место.

И так и будем вместе в жопе сидеть, пока не поймёшь, что народ один, просто некоторые читать не умеют.

[Proteus_MST]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]177928[/ATTACH]

Ah so you have a positive opinion about Stalin?
Why am I not surprised

[rah]

I was surprised to see the results of surveys that showed that the Russian people were mostly ambivalent in their feelings about Stalin.

The three most scored traits were.

1. He was a great man.
2. He won the great war.
3. He killed and tortured a lot of people.

The first two seem to temper their anger over the third.
Of course this is slightly biased because the survey was later, after he died, where only those that survived his reign were polled and their fear had been lessened due to his death.

[Serb]

И так и будем вместе в жопе сидеть, пока не поймёшь, что народ один, просто некоторые читать не умеют.

Я, в отличие от некоторых, не считаю, что моя страна в жопе. И, в этом вся разница. Для таких как ты Россия всегда будет в жопе, чтобы она не делала, и каких бы высот не достигала.
Да, читай Достоевского, короче. Там все описано давным-давно про вашу братию.

[giblets]

I was surprised to see the results of surveys that showed that the Russian people were mostly ambivalent in their feelings about Stalin.

The three most scored traits were.

1. He was a great man.
2. He won the great war.
3. He killed and tortured a lot of people.

The first two seem to temper their anger over the third.
Of course this is slightly biased because the survey was later, after he died, where only those that survived his reign were polled and their fear had been lessened due to his death.

They should do similar surveys in all of the former Soviet Republics... especially Ukraine

[rah]

If I remember correctly this poll was done before the breakup so it included all the former states. (sometime in the 70's)

[Geronimo]

Look, idiot!

The ISIS didn't even exist before you have invaded Iraq.

YES OR NO?

The ISIS was capturing more and more territory while you have bombed them.

YES OR NO?

Your entire Western coalition air campaign produced ZERO RESULTS! Because the ISIS slaughters MORE people on greater territory then before you have started YOUR campaign.

YES OR NO?

DUMBASS, MOTHERF*CKER!


If you want to know how it's gonna be in the real life, not in your wet dreams injected in your empty brain by your Western media, I can tell you how it's gonna be.

a) Before the January 1 of 2016 the Syrian-Turkey border will be sealed. The Syrian Army will re-capture that strategic piece of its territory to prevent any support from abroad to ISIS (which goes through Turkey).

b) A month after, if not sooner, Russia will continue to push further. The Iraqis government will give its permission for Russian Air Force to bomb targets on its territory.

c) The Syrian and Iranian forces will do the job on ground covered by our planes. In Iraq I mean.

d) ISIS is no more.

e) Syria would probably become a federation.

f) Not really sure about Iraq. Probably so. In any case there will be wide negotiation process for the future of both states.


Any case: the coalition of Russia, Iran, Syria and Iraq will bury the ISIS PERMANENTLY, 'cause no f*cking militias can do anything vs. a regular army in a DESERT, you freaking idiot!

Had you government really wanted to destroy the new Dark Ages menace - they would have done it long time ago. And since they haven't - either ISIS is an American ally or USA is completely incompetent.

Both is true actually.

Get back to this post after six months, ad we'will see who was right.
Brainless parrot.

This is essentially the outcome I would predict starting the first day Russia began to provide direct air support to Assad's government in the civil war.

The reasons the Russian/Assad campaign will succeed in defeating ISIS when a much longer US led campaign has been *much* slower at degrading ISIS are hugely complex but worth exploring a bit here.

First, the US led effort has had no reliable large professional ground force partner on the ground. The Kurds can't step into this role because they are continually undermined (even bombed) by the Turks, through whom all of their support must be filtered. The rest of the vast anti-Assad coalition is far too disorganized and fractious at every military level to meaningfully cooperate tactically with the US-led Air campaign. This vacuum of potential ground partners is why the US was desperate enough to try selecting and training up an armed Syrian force of its own despite the terrible track record of such efforts going all the way back to the bay of pigs. For success the US led effort needed a reliable ground component to the campaign and finally settled on the "moderate opposition" as its best hope for a partner on the ground that all coalition partners could tolerate. The sad reality is that the "moderate opposition" was never going to be able to hold its own against Assad, let alone both ISIS and Assad without overtly allying with the radical opposition and as a result sadly what passes for "moderate opposition" in Syria these days is in fact a grand coalition of everyone opposed to Assad and ISIS owing to its unofficial but obvious cooperation with the al-Nusra front and its own colorful assortment of Islamist revolutionaries. The presence of such unsavory cooperation has severely limited the kind of military aid the US-led coalition members can bring themselves to entrust the "moderate opposition" with. The same distrust fatally undermines all communication and cooperation between the US-led effort and the "moderate opposition".

That leads to the second very important and related reason the US led effort has been so underwhelming in defeating ISIS. In Syria the US-led coalition finds 2 factions implacably opposed to its chosen faction. The "moderate opposition" (and its Al-Nusra de-facto ally) are aggressively and decisively attacked by both Assad's faction and ISIS while Assad has very obviously avoided any large offensives against ISIS while ISIS finds itself free to expand at the expense of all factions around it. So long as Assad (for political reasons) refuses to combat ISIS while ISIS attacks everybody, ISIS was not going to be defeated by another Syrian faction even with extensive air support to those factions because none of them faces ISIS as its only - or even as its primary - enemy. ISIS can thrive on the conflict between its enemies. If the US-led coalition was to defeat ISIS they would need to pick a faction and support it against all of its enemies but of course they were completely unwilling to expand the conflict to providing air support for attacks on Assad so its chosen champions will remain sandwiched and paralyzed for the most part. If the US-led coalition had expanded operations to support operations against Assad as well as ISIS then a capable partner might have been realized as Assad's faction finally dissolved away as a viable player - but only if they didn't subsequently turn on each other with as much enthusiasm as they would offer against ISIS.

Russia will cut the Gordian knot of the Syrian civil war in exactly this way. It will pick a unified side and make sure it wins - against all opposition. At first Russia's intervention will decisively degrade only the "moderate opposition" because that is all that Assad will act against, but as the only faction with defacto-air superiority Assad's faction should rapidly expand its control in Syria until in surprisingly short order it faces only ISIS as an organized opponent. At that point ISIS will unravel about as fast the moderate opposition did and for much the same reason - no viable air support vs. an organized unified enemy with excellent air support.

Backing a unified faction against all enemies will prove far more effective at defeating ISIS than backing a deeply divided faction against ISIS while ignoring a secondary enemy that was acting solely against the deeply divided faction has proven to be.

Now I suppose some will take issue with my characterization of Assad largely ignoring ISIS as a laughable example of gullibility to "Western" propaganda given the demonstrated belligerence and aggressive military operations of ISIS against Assad (as in Palmyra) but the real reason I accept the reality of Assad's active avoidance of aggression against ISIS isn't some delusion that Assad is so evil that he can't stand to oppose something as evil as ISIS but rather my assumption that Assad understands the huge pragmatic value that the survival of ISIS (as a real enemy) has on the survival of his regime because he understand that he has no hope - alone - of defeating all of his enemies in Syria. If he chose ISIS as a primary target of his offenses not only would his implacable "moderate opposition" foes gain more ground at his expense but when ISIS was ultimately defeated he would likely face the remaining - now strengthened at his expense - opposition quite alone. Focusing on the "moderate opposition" was, paradoxically, the most likely road to eventually gaining support.

The world cannot realistically defeat ISIS through air power without a unified ground force to oppose them and so long as the Kurds are opposed by Turkey, and the "moderate opposition" are opposed by Assad and ISIS (and eventually probably their own internal divisions as well) and so long as Assad did little to oppose ISIS, the only factions one could hope to quickly see through to victory through air support are Assad or ISIS.

Serbs predictions are probably spot on.

In any event see Libya or Iraq for a look at how Western supported revolutions can eventually pan out. I'm not sure a "moderate opposition" victory would have felt like a real "victory" for its Western backers when the dust settled anyway.

[rah]

But if Assad gets continued support from the Russians, I don't see him allowing the country to move to a Federation. He only allows that if there is credible opposition. With the Russians help, he can eliminate it. Those six support troops the Americans trained are not enough to form a credible opposition.

[Geronimo]

But if Assad gets continued support from the Russians, I don't see him allowing the country to move to a Federation. He only allows that if there is credible opposition. With the Russians help, he can eliminate it. Those six support troops the Americans trained are not enough to form a credible opposition.

Yes. I did think about that. The federation comment will, surprisingly, probably turn out to be the least accurate detail of Serb's prediction. The actual outcome will be a far more decisive victory on Assad's part than a federation outcome. I don't think Serb will feel less vindicated in his prediction when Assad re assumes almost complete control over Syria rather than settling for a federation.

[Dinner]

Brink of collapse in 1942 and only took three more years of total war with the rest of the world doing most of the work? Serb, you are one in a million!

[Geronimo]

Brink of collapse in 1942 and only took three more years of total war with the rest of the world doing most of the work? Serb, you are one in a million!

I'm confused. In what world exactly did "the rest of the world" do "most of the work" of defeating the Nazis?

[Geronimo]

Dp

[Dinner]

The way Serb vigorously sucks on Putin's **** yet claims he is not a Putin supporter, it reminds me of the love hate relationship these women had with their husbands.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qrrz54UtkCc

Then again, Serb, is likely gay but in denial. Just like Putin.