Comments by "LancesArmorStriking" (@LancesArmorStriking) on "What Russia Doesn’t Want You to Know About Your History" video.

You're ignoring that the "battered housewife" is running into the arms of someone who'll treat her right— but batter the toxic partner, even when he's "changed his ways" (Yeltsin, democracy). The US is a bad actor, they have no good intent, and shouldn't be trusted with military power. If Iraq and Afghanistan haven't shown you that you're arguing from a privileged position (you happen not to be a fellow large country with natural resources that the US despises), then I don't know what to tell you. Ask Iranians in 1980 how committed to democracy the Americans are. Or ask why they overthrew a dictator backed by the US. The US doesn't like or care about any NATO member states. It only hates Russia, that's all it knows. The Europeans countries are just convenient proxies.
3
@TheLoki7281 I think you're confused. According to the 2024 IMF GDP PPP ranking (this isn't per capita, just country-wide economic growth) Russia is 4th— behind China, the US, and India, in that order.
3
@Blanka1100 Neither was the agreement to withdraw Jupiter missiles from Turkey during the Cuban Missile Crisis, but they kept their word then. Why? Don't play dumb, the US understands perfectly well the weight of unofficial agreements and will honor them if it doesn't think it can screw over the other party.
2
@storylineOfMadness If most of the population didn't think about joining, then why did Kyiv continue to pursue it? The 2008 announcement that they WOULD join, when Ukrainian interest in joining was only about 10%, was what started the mess. Why would a government so something against the will of its people? Aren't you guys supposed to be democratic?
2
@deadbeef-i8b "Friends" is doing a lot of legwork there, bud. Would you consider "let's not shoot each other" the same as "we love each other"?? If you want to start bleating about the trade volume between the two, I suggest you look into the US' willingness to sell them Ford parts and gold. I've never once seen a commenter under a pro-Western video label the US as "friends" with the Germans. Wonder why.
1
Poland (unlike the Baltics) kind of earned it though, let's not pretend that they weren't an empire of their own. They colonized Ruthenia. They weren't a perpetual victim, they just lost the geopolitical game. Apparently they're sore losers, too.
1
@hypotheticalaxolotl The Russian Empire would have had zero reason to partition Poland if they hadn't colonized Russian land. After the people were Polonized, it became Ukraine and Belarus. Don't forget, the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth also attempted to rule Russia with Vladislav Wasa. They're not innocent actors, they just weren't competent enough to keep their country sovereign. Tough but that's how it is.
1
 @Ragnaroz6000 I don't know if you realize that you just implied the Polish guy's comment is shit LOL
1
@dubsrus8071 As I said, sore losers. Ukraine and Belarus don't btch and moan to Poland about having been colonized for 300 years, what gives Poland the nerve to do the same to someone else? They were colonists themselves. They played the game, understood the rules perfectly well— and then they lost. If they're pissed, they should be direct it at their ancestors for being too weak and stupid to keep their state alive.
1
@broken_abi6973 That's kind of a cop-out, Russia inherited the political legacy (and debts) of the USSR. By that logic any country could say to the US "well that agreement we made was with a different administration". The political leadership is completely different, so why not? —Unless you can explain the special significance of it being a different country? Especially since legally binding treaties signed with the USSR were carried onto Russia.
1
But you kind of don't. Your population is tiny, your economy almost completely relies on outside powers— you have no real autonomy. Larger countries can do you the courtesy of offering you an opportunity to make a choice, but if they didn't like your choice, you're easily swayed. Let's say Estonia does something the US doesn't like. They can always kick you out of NATO. You might say "but they're not allowed to!" okay, and if they do it anyway? There's no consequence to them. They control and produce the weapons supply that you depend on. They can order their arms companies to do whatever they want. If they say something, there's always the implicit threat of "if I stop following my self-imposed rules, you don't have the industry to replace what I'm taking away."
1
@eiko4252 Okay— 1) The Middle East is across an ocean. The US goes out of its way to project influence there, Russia can't just leave Eastern Europe, that's where the country is. 2) Even if I granted you that comparison, why hasn't the US been punished then for Iraq and Afghanistan? Why didn't the democracy-loving EU sanction them? Do they only sanction when it's a country they don't personally like? On the other side of the equation— why was Russia punished? If the West is clearly fine with atrocities like Iraq. About Yeltsin— 1) That was a domestic action, so it doesn't threaten NATO anyway. My question still remains, why did it keep existing and accepting new members (it doesn't have to) even with a pro-US Russian President? 2) The US supported the Parliament-dissolving President! So much for loving democracy!! If they're fine supporting someone like that, then why do they hate Putin, who at least pretends to hold the elections?? Why the double standard?? Most importantly— the US helped to rig the 1996 elections in Yeltsin's favor. Again, so much for supporting Ukraine because it cares about democracy "everywhere"! They literally paid off TV stations to help get him elected with a 6% approval rating, and then he went on to get involved in Georgia. The US didn't do anything then, so they don't even care about Russia invading another country. So why now? I'll tell you why. It's because the US doesn't care about democracy, or human rights, or freedom. They care about natural resources. Yeltsin privatized state assets and sold Russian minerals and timber to the West for cheap. Ukraine was ready to do the same. It's all about money.
1
@snuffeldjuret Yes it is. Did you forget how it knowingly lied about Iraq? They do things with bad intentions. It wasn't a mistake, they wanted to conquer and destroy another country.
1
I think someone's projecting, you paint a very vivid picture of an entire society that you apparently have no ties to. I don't think Russia cares much about what the rest of the world does, they want two things— to politically be left alone, and to not be surrounded by weapons. Is that too much to ask? Especially after the USSR fell? Did the US really need to send Chechens into southern Russia in 1999 and try to Balkanize the entire country? Is that what you consider "better"??
1
 @mykolapovazhyk3207 Agree— Texas should be returned.
1
@kacperolkusz3985 You didn't just say that Poland and Russia are different and distant from each other— you ascribed ill-intention to Russian society as a whole. You called it purely hateful and purely spiteful. Again, despite the fact that you apparently don't have any connection to the country. It's especially shameful if you've taken time to study the culture, and come away with nothing but hatred yourself. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, I've seen the glee that lights up some Polaks' eyes when they describe almost controlling Russia under Władysław III Waza. Your country doesn't want a peaceful existence, they want power and revenge, ironically a very spiteful thing. Multiple Polaks I've spoken to hold similar views— that Russians are sub-human, Asiatic, unable to form a society. No, I'm not lying. Sabotage isn't unique to Russia; if you think that your allies (and Poland itself) doesn't engage in it, then you're too naive to have this conversation. I don't know why you brought that up, so I'd like an explanation. The framing of Russia as uniquely ill-intentioned is simply incorrect. As for the Chechen War— I'm talking about the Second one. Several thousand Chechen troops invaded Dagestan in August 1999, and declared a jihad on Moscow. That's how the war started. Given how anti-Islam Polish people are, I'd at least expect you to sympathize with that. But I suspect you hate Russia even more than you hate threats to Christianity. Anyways— the first Chechen War was largely unprovoked, although mass ethnic cleansing of Russians isn't exactly something to sit by and let happen either. Regardless of whether or not you think it's justified, it warranted a response. The Chechens won the first war, and they could have kept to themselves. But no, they had to invade Russia. The Dagestanis weren't interested in joining their Transcaucasian Caliphate, and they were reabsorbed into Russia as punishment for trying to establish an Islamic State.
1
 @nashbridges-cu6dy Because NGOs and the liberal-minded minority are being galvanized to protest against the current government. I'm sure that the Revolution will be completely democratic...
1
@Joel-bi9np All you've done is put a target on your back. Russia acts aggressively to countries after they show intention to join NATO, not before. I hope you understand that your government will now be obliged to buy American weapons, to ensure inter-operability. Your foreign policy is no longer yours. It's Washington's.
1
@matejlieskovsky9625 I do. I was only explaining why the original person brought up "4th largest GDP" to begin with. Just to be clear, GDP per capita adjusted for PPP puts Romania and Russia literally right next to each other. So the claim that Russia is a failed state with inane poverty is an egg-on-face for person praising Romania. And anyways, the original poster is just dumb— there are many different ways to measure quality of life. I'd say Romania doesn't have much room to criticize Russia since it's had one of Europe's most severe brain drains, is facing a demographic crisis worse than Russia's, is also massively corrupt, and despite economic growth (1.4%, nothing to write home about) its industry has shrunk over the last few years. If anything it's Romania that needs to take care of its failed state and insane poverty outside of Bucharest.
1
@Romulu5 If there's been such tremendous progress, why are so many Romanians still emigrating? You lost more Romanians than you gained immigrants in 2023. Even with open borders, you're unable to increase your population. Romanians have voted with their feet, and most disagree with you: After 30 years under European guidance, Romania is still a shithole.
1