SalarHaqq
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2019
- Messages
- 4,569
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
But that's not what Russia is commemorating nor celebrating about the USSR. Only the victory over German Nazis is. Stop putting a spin on reality to suit the russophobic NATO narrative.
All I did was to highlight how baseless it is to treat the presence of Soviet flags as supposed proof thereof, seeing how these flags are merely flown in reference to the defeat of Germany at the hands of the USSR during WW2, and nothing else.
Your allegations about President Putin seeking to restore the borders of the USSR are propaganda, as the Kremlin never declared to be pursuing this goal.
Of course I did, and let me reiterate my insistence of the veracity of this statement.
First of all, the KGB was the main intelligence service of the USSR, tasked among other things with foreign intelligence and counter-espionage, unlike the Gestapo. And as a matter of fact, Vladimir Putin was working for the foreign intelligence branch of the KGB (based in Dresden for some time), as you perfectly know.
Secondly, this is how the discussion thread developed:
- Me: you are attributing Soviet policies to Russia, by that token you may also hold the current German regime accountable for the horrendous consequences of the Third Reich's invasion of the USSR.
- You: is Scholz proud of the Third Reich? Does he want to emulate its policies? Was he a former member of the Gestapo? Because Putin used to be a KGB officer.
- Me: the current German regime took in many Nazis, including a leading military intelligence officer, Reinhard Gehlen, who presided over "democratic" Germany's foreign intelligence service until 1968.
Bottom line is this: if you're going to use Putin's KGB history as "evidence" for the notion that there's a continuity between the policies of the USSR and those of the Russian Federation, then the fact that a former Nazi intelligence bigwig like Gehlen (who was responsible for the one front where German forces committed most of their atrocities) headed the BND for over twenty years, would have to be considered as evidence that the Federal Republic of Germany is prolonging Nazi policy.
Simple as that, and there's no flaw in this logical equivalence. So if Putin having worked for the KGB's foreign intelligence department is "proof" that present day Russia is trying to revive the USSR, then Gehlen having led the BND for several decades is proof that Berlin is hoping to repeat the Nazi aggression and crimes against the USSR. You can't have it both ways, nor attempt to wiggle your way out with some irrelevant cross-reference to the Gestapo.
Source: a regime which has been suppressing its Russian-speaking community i.e. close to half the population for eight full years. Which has been shelling Russian towns in the Donbas, nabbing, detaining and torturing countless local Russians in contravention of basic rights and rule of the law.
What? Read again, and kindly refrain from inverting the meaning of my statements next time.
And you know what's really a cause for concern? When a state whose foreign intelligence service happens to have been founded and presided over by a Nazi implicated up to the neck in a genocidal and criminal military campaign against the Soviet Union, is now trying to encroach itself on former Soviet territory, openly taking aim at Russia with the help of local nationalists who are considering the main native collaborator of Nazi Germany as a source of inspiration.
Show me where "hundreds of thousands of civilians" were killed by Russian forces in Ukraine, then we can talk.
Ukraine is a state dominated by people who hold in esteem a collaborator of the Third Reich, and who were suppressing a local Russian community. Were allowing the US regime to run secret bio-labs on their soil. Were seeking to join an anti-Russian military alliance encircling Russia on its western flank.
But since "defensive war" in your book would rather apply to the methodical destructions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Sudan and so on at the hands of NATO regimes, I'd recommend familiarizing yourself with the definition of the concept prior to making use of it.
Pointing to the fact that Russia can't be held to account for crimes allegedly committed by the USSR.
President Putin wishing to "reinstate" the USSR is a NATO propaganda theme. Not grounded in reality whatsoever.
No, when Russia was weak NATO started moving towards its borders. Interfering in its internal affairs. Sponsoring head-cutting, "I"SIS style terrorists to lead separatist campaigns across Russia's Caucasus region. As we're very much used to from western regimes.
Show me that "internal criticism". "Who knows" isn't an argument.
There seems to a be reading comprehension issue on your part, because I don't remember making that statement.
Azov's a neo-Nazi group, plain and simple.
According to the regime which has zero problems with the municipal council of its capital city chanting praises of Stepan Bandera while at the same time claiming to be a champion of liberal "democracy", you mean. Nah sorry, you can go discuss figures published by such a regime with fellow NATO sympathizers susceptible of falling for the hoax. Objective, serious observers don't usually take statements by such regimes at face value.
Arresting and mistreating people for expressing sympathy towards a neighboring country (which I pointed to) is "genocide"? If you say so, why not.
This said the Associated Press, a US news agency, made a video report about Ukrainian citizens getting arrested by the military for harmless actions such as commenting favorably about President Putin on "social media". This was posted here in this thread as well.
As explained, in the Donbas region Ukrainian forces established their main defensive lines, heavily fortified and manned by close to a hundred thousand troops including the bulk of their die hard fanatic neo-Nazis. Has nothing to do with local public opinion. This is why the speed of Russia's progress in the south of Ukraine was much faster.
I'm familiar with the way in which regimes like the one in Kiev, or organisations with links to it conduct sub-standard "polls".
We weren't talking about "many wars" at this specific juncture of the discussion but about Ukraine. And the only thing that's been documented, is NATO's heavy handed approach when compared to Russia's conduct of operations in the present conflict.
Since you don't appear to have paid attention to and/or didn't read what was said, repetition should be in order:
1) Russia unlike NATO isn't simply bombing everything to smithereens in its Ukrainian campaign.
2) The basic warfighting capability of Ukrainian armed forces is far superior to Afghanistan or the Iraq of the early 2000's.
3) Over-represented neo-Nazis and other far right extremists, high on captagon and morphine are engaging in a nihilistic and hopeless stand which achieves to delay Russian advances even though it fails at averting them.
4) The Donbas is home to the heaviest and most fortified Ukrainian defensive lines.
5) If morale among many regular units of the Ukrainian military wasn't particularly low, they wouldn't release this many videos to voice their desperation, despite the extreme punishments they risk.
6) Now desertions need to be added to the mix, as acknowledged even by western propaganda media:
Cases of desertion are growing among Ukrainian forces suffering significant losses in Russia's artillery onslaught, report says
An intelligence report reveals Ukraine is suffering thousands of casualties and are outgunned by Putin's forces in the Donbas, says The Independent.
Russian action is a direct response to hostile US encroachment on its borders.
Not my problem if you fail to apprehend the content of what you're (presumably) reading.
Addressed already.
For millions of dead civilians, look no further than Iraq under the US boot.
Nobody cares about the Soviets in this context.
No need, but what a pity you weren't born earlier so as to convey your wisdom to Germans in 1933 and prevent them from voting the NSDAP into power. This way, you may have sounded a tad more credible trying to put across the idea that people aren't susceptible to manipulation, that they always have a perfect grasp of political realities and of what the ideal choice for them is.
The Gorbachev Foundation for Socio-Economic and Political Studies begs to differ.
___
Gorbachev blasts NATO eastward expansion
Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev has criticized NATO's eastward expansion and the failure by Western powers to keep their promise not to deploy military bases near Russia's borders.
Gorbachev said in an interview with Germany's Bild newspaper published on Thursday that Western Germany, the United States and other powers had pledged after Germany's reunification in 1990 that "NATO would not move a centimeter to the east."
Gorbachev said the Americans had failed to fulfill the promise and the Germans had also turned a blind eye.
"They probably rubbed their hands rejoicing at having played a trick on the Russians," the former Soviet leader told the paper, adding that this had led to Russia's disillusionment with post-Cold War relations with the West.
NATO has enlarged since 1999, admitting three ex-Soviet Baltic republics and four Communist-bloc states in Eastern Europe. The membership was more recently increased on Wednesday, when Albania and Croatia formally joined the alliance.
The expansion has strained relations between the West and Russia, which is concerned by the new military bases emerging along its borders.
Last December, European NATO members led by Germany blocked U.S.-backed bids by Ukraine and Georgia to join programs leading to membership in the military alliance, but the ex-Soviet states were told they would eventually be allowed to join.
Nobel Peace Prize winner Gorbachev is respected in the United States and Europe for his role in ending the Cold War, but criticized by some in Russia for the reforms that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and the ensuing chaos.
The pledge made by the USA and German regimes is one which concerns the elementary security of the Russian Federation. It's not as if preset day Russia is immune to imperialist NATO mischief and aggression by virtue of some derogatory supernatural instance.
Now Russia passively stood by as NATO expansionists moved closer and closer to her borders. Watched as they began increasingly threatening her security and territorial integrity. This went on for nearly two decades. In parallel, Moscow tried to have its legitimate concerns recognized through peaceful diplomatic means, through talks and negotiations. To no avail. Now it's pushback time, because no power in this world, especially those wielding their might in a particularly irresponsible manner, can get away with everything all the time.
Gratuitous contention.
Facts. Cold hard facts.
I stand corrected: close to 14000 slaughtered in the Donbas, among which 3300 civilians as a result of the Kiev regime's violation of the Minsk agreements and its decision to restart the war. Not that much less tragic.
You're the one who brought up this gibberish about non-Europeans and their acquaintance with European history in the first place. Then you keep referencing my nationality in a repeated ad hominem manner, portraying it as sort of a prohibitive factor when it comes to commenting on European affairs.
And now you're rambling on about whether or not I know European history "better than Europeans" themselves, with "Europeans" being employed as a generic term. What's this even supposed to mean? I made no such claim, for I tend to avoid funny generalizations. There being several hundreds of millions of Europeans, some are bound to be more knowledgeable than I, while others won't. Because I studied European history for long enough to be familiar with relevant data you outright assumed I cannot be.
What this shows though, is that you're obviously having issues with the very fact that a non-European is commenting on the history of the continent. Which may possibly betray a xenophobic sentiment, but guess what, you'll have to get used to it.
Now as for your statement that the NSDAP never received a majority vote, you're twisting my words. I stated the Nazi party was voted into power, meaning that it was thanks to the plurality of votes they received at the March 1933 Reichstag election that they managed to get in control of the government. To claim otherwise would be like pretending that the current coalition administration in Berlin wasn't voted into office by the German people because no single one of its participants obtained more than 50% of votes.
Voices of truth aren't going anywhere. No matter how many more hours you're willing to spend on this discussion, facts debunking NATO propaganda will keep being added to this thread and not just by me.
All of which was known to the US, yet Washington would refrain from loosening sanctions accordingly, even in a targeted manner. The so-called "food for oil" program imposed on Iraq under US directives was supposed to prevent just that. The US Secretary of State is on the record for endorsing the toll among Iraqi infants. They saw what was going on, had the power to remedy the situation but being the criminals they are, they were fine with it.
Again, failure to address what you're responding to.
Last edited:
