Comments by "" (@tomk3732) on "Is Russia going to collapse? — Brian Taylor interview part 3" video.

But they themselves DO NOT want to interact with the west - they see west as double faced and treacherous. This is why they did a total break in relationship. There is not will in Russia to deal with the west for decades - they are turning totally in the direction of Asia. And why, do I sense that opinions of around 3% of the world that US makes up should matter? Why should US have a SAY in world matters. And why the west, that under US leadership, making whopping 13% of the planet is there to rule them all?! I say the world needs to unite and put west in its place - and that is not at the helm of the planet. End of colonial era. All people are now free or should be. No more dictating to the word. Finally, US started massive wars - were is the outrage at the measly 3% that is a world dictator? Why US is allowed to exist - why no prison USA?
2
@williamwang9154 I am sure Russia will not mind, they put minefield on their side, just in case anyone scales the wall.
2
And then you wonder why Russia sees the west as an enemy ;)
1
@lp9280 Personally I would start with division of US - they are far bigger threat to world peace then Russia. Besides, Soviet Union was already divided up - so they already passed the division stage. We are more now into "reunification" phase.
1
@lp9280 Who cares about what internal politics US has - what is its external policies? How many wars did US start? How many millions of pp did it kill? Internal policies of Russia are a business of Russians, same as internal stuff of US - its business of Americans. The US is by far the most militaristic nation on Earth, the most aggressive and the one that loves to change borders or dictate terms. Russian culture is mostly that of Asian origin, so I doubt they "destroyed" much there on that part. Their origins are same as that of Ukraine which was broken off from Russian culture around 100 years ago. Lithuania and Baltics overall are about as democratic and free as Stalinist Soviet Union - i.e. in many respects they are not far from North Korea. Belarus is mostly part taken away from Poland, as is Kalingrad as is western Ukraine. Thanks to western polices in 1945 Poland did not get any of that land back - west was not interested in pressuring Stalin so Stalin did not give stuff back. This is why Poland actually lost a lot of land after WWII as one of "victors". Heck, wonderful US did not step in there to help - one has to remember that wonderful US was the one that heavily supported Nazi Germany in 1930s. It does ring a bell with current unconditional support of Ukrainian Nazi. Finally, if US was so fair in their polices they would insist on self determination of nations - i.e. why is it that there were no referendums after fall of Soviet Union as they were after WWI. Even today, a lot could be avoided if US did not play hypocrite in their politics - I mean one cannot have a base 1000 miles from US or WAR, but God forbid Russia wants the same! Or when US created Kosovo based on ethnic division, but God forbid same was to be extended to Crimea or Donbass.
1
@lp9280 Where on earth did you get this "It is just a historic fact that democracies go to wars much less often than dictatorships, and even less often against other democracies." Either it is totally false or US is NOT a democracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_lengths_of_United_States_participation_in_wars Compared to US Russia is a peace loving country. Gendercide against Poles was done by Ukrainians not by Soviets or Russians. There was no gendercide against any ethnics group under Soviet rule - i.e. holdomir was a result of failed policies that did not specifically targeted anyone. The sheer "targeting" of an ethnic group in Soviet Union would be a big no no and would get you death or a long time in Siberia. Since WWII US is the biggest killer of foreign peoples. Prove me wrong on that one. Whom killed more? WHO! "Ruthenia" or Rus is common word that denounces all people to the east of Poland. "Grand Duchy of Lithuania" is a construct that was in union with Poland (same country) from around 500 years ago. I think you going a bit deep there. "So if we talking about "historic fairness" the Poland didn't lose shit, they were just shifted westwards." false - Poland lost vast territories - as per land area. "When union between Poland and Lithuania was created, the Lithuania was the bigger and more populous country. " False. Maybe you need to read more about this ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Lithuanian_Commonwealth and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Duchy_of_Lithuania at time of union with Poland they did not even have 2m people! While Poland (with all fiefs) was 7.5m+ " The ruzzian federation actually traces its existence to the Novgorod Republic, which was province of Kievan Rus, but gained independence once Kievan Rus was occupied by Mongols and later Grand Duchy of Lithuania, followed by Lithuanian-Polish Commonwealth... followed by none other but ruzzian empire. Which makes it very stupid to say that Ukraine "broken off from Russian culture", NO it is a Russian culture, the ruzzian federation is the one which broke off like 800 years ago when Novgorod Republic became it's own entity." LOL. All lands of European "Russia" "Ukraine" "Belarus" etc. were lands occupied by Polish tribes. Then the people from the north came in through the rivers and invaded these tribes and they were the RUS. There was no "Ukraine" or "Ukrainian" people till after around WWI or maybe before that a bit. There are no written documents etc. where there is "Ukraine" mentioned. None. Prove me wrong. Only around 100 years ago did "Ukraine" become a concept. Thus I stand by my assertion to say that Ukraine broken off from Russian culture - they are actually very similar to this day and are quite distinct from Poles (especially the sheer brutality). "So you clearly lacking historic knowledge, don't understand the cultural differences and lack depth in your commentary. " I think the same of you. "I don't know what you mean about "referendum" after soviet Union collapse, all countries that appeared after the collapse already had strong national movements and they elected their democratic national governments.. what are you talking about?" So what - borders were an issue. They should be ethnically divided. There now been many, many wars over this. "Poles or Lithuanians independent from ruzzia" - actually it is Russia that celebrates its independence from Poland ;) " Likewise ruzzian immigrants can't demand Crimea or Donbass to become part of ruzzia. " Umm, depends - remember that in Kosovo a lot of population is quite recent. Also ... Crimea never was Polish, thus it never was Ukrainian, and was seat of Golden Horde. Thus after Russia (Cathrine) won the wars with Turkey it passed on to Russian empire. Thus any Ukrainian population there is immigrants (recent). Why do you not move out from US to your preferred country you came from and let natives alone then if you are so anti immigration? People of Donbass been there before any concept of Ukrainian state. They have God given right to live how they like. I support their right to freedom. Their right to liberty - same as I supported US right to rebel against King. " their national country by the way is already biggest in the world" ah right of freedom cut off by "you too big already" I consider right of pp to be above all else. Freedom shall prevail. Crimea is Russia if people want it to be Russia. Donbass is Russia if people want it to be Russia. If Scots vote to leave UK and join EU that is their free will. If Kosovo becomes part of Albania - so be it. I will never infringe, as you do, on will of the people.
1
@lp9280 Ah, so apart from US is they keyword. So you fully agree that US is a huge risk to the planet and it is the main risk. Yet you also say they are democracy. So there exists a democracy that is a huge risk to the planet. US is far and wide bigger risk than Russia or China. Then you give examples of "barely democratic" which is a very loose term - is US barely democratic then? If Ukraine was not pushed by US we would not have this war. Your definition of "democracy" is also very well turned to make sure at least nominally US qualifies. To bad Soviets and most communist countries also qualify ;) -- at least two parties - check -- assembly and executive - check -- 50% voting - check -- fairness of elections is established by transfer of power that is peaceful - sure ALL transfers of power in Soviet Union were quite peaceful ;) Note there were transfers as no one lives forever. and they were elected as well, usually every 5 years. "Same say for Lithuanian-Polish war, Poland at the time was good example of anocracy, Lithuania just became independent a year before." another example of a mini war that would have been easily solved if there was a referendum based on ethnicity. For some reason rules were applied (loosely) between Poland and German but not here. Poland took over territories that were ethnically Polish for 100s of years and never hand any Baltic country population in majority (throughout history). Incidentally Poland took over control of land to the east only where it had absolute majority - i.e. no greed at all. Later on Soviets stole all that land from Poland and incorporated it into different republics. Without any western pressure borders stayed as they are to this day. This is why Ukraine today is much, much, much bigger then ethnic lands of Rus population that later claimed to be Ukrainians. I.e. thanks to Soviets Ukraine is so big & their need to steal. Now Russians are taking back their own land.
1
This is the same BS that Germans talked about in 1941. That Soviets are weak, that Stalin will fall, that all it takes is ONE kick. Blah Blah Blah. Putin will not last forever. But his replacement will continue similar policies as they are good for Russia as a country. No one, that is a true Russian, a patriot, will simply let Russia disintegrate or disappear from the map. Personally I think Putin is going to be seen as one of the greatest leaders Russia had.
1
LOL, not at all. SA does not have much of any educated society. If Russia did not have good scientists they would not compete with US in technology ;)
1
@buck4490 Mostly military stuff - at least that is most famous. Certainly their stuff is not bad if US has to sanction its purchase to gain competitive advantage.
1
@buck4490 Its not just Turkey - US would sanction anyone whom ever thinks of buying S400. It does not matter if they are in NATO or not. The F35 is just a total joke and excuse - it is simple sanction and punishment for Turkey for getting S400, has nothing to do with eavesdropping or spying etc. That is total BS. A lot of NATO members use non NATO stuff - I do not see a problem there. Russia is not at all close to SA. SA has only raw materials and noting else of note in addition to being absolute monarchy. Russia is 2nd largest exporter of weapons on Earth and is over 50% more then 3rd (France). As for high tech, Russia is ranked 10th on Earth, so not bad, not great either. Hardly "none". It would be better if not for very heavy brain drain of talented workers ( I briefly worked in US where half of all programmers were from former Soviet Union).
1
Spot on. They have like zero feeling and are approaching it from "western view".
1
@HenningJohansen Well, same response as by someone 200 years ago claiming end of slavery in US is too silly to discuss.
1
Not much truth to it. There are plenty of resources in Donbass. Crimea is mostly a drag on Russian economy - it was taken b/c of the base and b/c 95% of Russians say its Russia - some say poison pill for any "western oriented" leader - i.e. no one in Russia without facing public overthrow can give up Crimea. So Donbass yes, resources, but Crimea, no.
1
Russia does not care about using any power to do any influence in the west ;)
1