Comments by "LancesArmorStriking" (@LancesArmorStriking) on "NFKRZ"
channel.
-
254
-
27
-
26
-
25
-
22
-
20
-
16
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
9
-
9
-
This is my issue with your thinking: we already tried a Russia without 'Putler' in the form of Yeltsin, and it failed spectacularly.
It's this liberal idea (which I feel Gorbachev had in his mind) that if the people have freedom, everything will magically work itself out!
It didn't, and with Putin gone, it won't. Democracy and economic neoliberalism is not the creator of prosperity, but rather a symptom of it.
Like it or not, there need to be strong national policies to build domestic industry and genuinely raise quality of life. You could open yourself up to the West completely with a few IMF loans, but all that does is kill your own companies and allow the foreign ones to dominate your market and- attempt to, recently- dictate your politics
(even though the Ukraine conflict is not justified, the fact remains that Western companies are an extension of Western political power, and that is rarely good for developing nations).
England developed the first industrial capacity in the world- textiles- by banning all imports from India.
Now they advocate for the exact opposite, achieve the growth that they got.
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
@MiStuSia16
Seems like nobody can answer my point. The person I originally commented on has fallen silent...
Again: Was Stalin supposed to just let the Germans steamroll Poland and get right up to his border?
Or was it smarter for him to give the USSR as big of an advantage as possible? Please answer my question.
My point, by the way, wasn't about the brutality of Russian soldiers, but of the need to "ally" with the Germans, knowing they would destroy Poland either way.
And it is rich that you're trying to make the Germans out to be better than the Soviets. They were nice to Russian civilians, too--- there is even a photo of a soldier sharing his last ration with a civilian woman.
What you Poles consistently fail to comprehend that the Soviets were, in fact, better for the Poles than the Germans.
Would you prefer an alternate history where they kept Poland?
Sure, they would genocide the Poles out of existence forever.... but at least they had "class" and could run a country, unlike those Soviets! At least they kept their streets clean, all the easier to transport you to the chambers!
Who cares if they turn Poland into Germany, at least they were polite!
Your country's view of history is coloured so heavily by emotion that you honestly believe a regime set on wiping you from the face of the Earth for Lebensraum is somehow better than living under Russian rule.
The only reason you're alive to bitch and moan about it too, is because the Russians weren't as brutal as the Germans.
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@DailyMusic
It being "madness" doesn't discredit the Crimean people's genuine wishes at the time.
Independence from Ukraine being impractical doesn't therefore mean it's okay to send a post-Soviet branch of the KGB in to silence people.
To that extent, though, remember that the "cutting off" (I assume you mean the Dnipro Canal) applies to Ukraine just as much as it does to Crimea. The Dnipro starts in Russia, passes through Belarus, then Ukraine, and flows into the Black Sea.
Would you make the same argument for Ukraine being "mad" to oppose Russia because Russia could divert or dam the river and permanently ecologically destroy Ukraine?
That's the language of appeasement and I'm frankly shocked that you're willing to use it after all that's happened since 2022. I guess it doesn't matter when it's your guys...
Anyways, the autonomy thing was never considered by Ukraine to dispel Crimean fears of Ukrainianization.
And frankly, the Ukrainian Parliament disregarding the 1991 election vote where most voted to leave Ukraine and sending soldiers in to take Crimea by force (never mind the later referendum in 1994) dampens the idea that they defended their borders for the sake of democracy.
The Crimeans weren't allowed the right to self-determination. The Rada (a few days before the annexation, on the 23rd) repealed the 2012 law that gave Russian legal status as a regional language within Crimea.
Were it not for Turchynov's veto, Crimeans would be forced to learn only Ukrainian in schools, and all legal documents and bureaucratic matters would have to handled in a lanuage they didn't even speak. And the law was repealed in October of that year anyway, but the Rada showed its intentions even without the annexation as a justification.
I'm not saying that the annexation was correct, but surely Ukraine could have done anything to even pretend that they didn't want to turn Crimea into ethnically Ukrainian land, despite supposedly being a democracy that respects multiculturalism.
About the UN— it isn't very good at its job. Somaliland should be separate, Basque shouldn't be part of Spain, yet the UN didn't do anything to endorse or propose a referendum.
In either case, Somalia and Spain quickly shut it down. Leaving elections up to a legal body that isn't capable of organizing them isn't a good solution.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@mikicerise6250
I find that distinction laughable- the economic engines of the EU (France, UK, indirectly Germany)
and the most anti-Soviet countries (Poland, Baltics) all took part in the crusades you are trying to distance them from.
They only reconciled after the damage had been done. An empty gesture.
In fact, it was precisely because Russia, at the time of Putin, seemed to be moving to democracy, that Germany in particular (if you'll remember the speech in Munich in 2008) was so willing to invest in Russia.
Not sure what you mean about glorious empires, even Putin acquiesced to the idea of Ukraine being independent, in his recent nationalist writings.
He simply views the two as so intertwined that it only makes sense for their politics to be closely aligned. As America and Canada, he put it.
If Ukraine had followed Minsk II, a good deal of this could have been avoided. I don't think Putin's stated reasons were why he invaded, but I do think the real reasons could have been averted.
3
-
@cgt3704
You described Romania to me. I now have to ask: what has it achieved? It sounds like you have all the same issues, just with a different political alliance.
You said it yourself- you have massive brain drain (especially to UK), corruption, bad infrastructure,, etc. So was aligning with the West, and opening up your market right away, even worth it?
What do you have to show for it, Pizza Hut?
I am not saying you should "give up", but I think your strategy is bad, Greece is still worse now than it was before joining the EU. Will you tell them to "never give up!"?
You seem to put a lot of faith in this idea, that being with the West will eventually make things better, with basically no evidence to show for it.
Poland and Baltics are really all that come to mind, but this comes from their smoother transition to capitalism and technology transfer.
There was a political motivation to get them away from Russia, so the countries with money and colonial legacies made sure they succeeded.
Not sure what to tell you about Putin, literally anyone was better than Yeltsin, you have no position to lecture others about ideals and values when we were starving to death.
He is not perfect, but he is much better (even now) than the results we got under the Western-supported leader.
And none of what happened in 2000s, stabilizing the country and economy, was "easy". We are sacrificing the political process, yes, but if we put all our efforts into one goal and fail, there will be nothing left. Better to stabilize the economy first, then transition to more democratic.
We tried what you are suggesting (Glastnost first, than Perestroika). It failed
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
@ravencadd
Like it or not, diplomacy will be the final stage in this war.
Even if (in a Western wet dream) Putin is ousted, it is unlikely that any version of Russia will accept (potentially indefinite) American military presence so close to its borders.
So even in the unlikely case where Putin is ousted, the war will probably stall, then continue.
Ultimately, something will need to be proposed.
And, since your ideal version is off the table (Russia incapacitates itself by withdrawing, gives back all territories, allows Ukraine into NATO, etc), a compromise must be reached.
I think that leaving Ukraine out of NATO, but able to ally with individual Western countries- like Finland currently- is the best way out of the conflict.
Do you have any alternative ideas that don't risk re-escalating an eventual ceasefire??
2