Zone1 Greetings from Moscow

[Zavulon]

Do Russians read other sources of information other than what is provided by The State?

Yes, of course.

 

[Zavulon]

No, not millions "yet".

It's still a war.

Oh right, so Russian logic is "Russia invades, so if you fight back you're committing suicide"?

Russia's been talking to China too much.

The Russians are social animal, just like all other human beings. "An attack against one of us is the attack against all of us". And an attack against vital interests of nuclear superpower is suicidal. "

We know it, Ukrainian people and decision-makers know it. They know, that they can't win - and they just sell their compatriots as a cannon fodder.

 

[Zavulon]

You know, the term Russian world barely has any meaning. Because the Russian world of today isn't the same the 'Rus world' of then. And extrapolation it to those 'old' times is meaningless, especially in the term of language, ethnicity and the like. I hope you don't think that old 'Russian' language and the modern one are the same, do you?

Actually Russian language (as all Slavic languages) is quite archaic, that's why children in schools can read The Tale of Igor's campaign (12 century) almost without additional adaptation.
But I don't say that GDM is a part of the Modern Russian world. It doesn't exists now, you know.
I say, that both GDL and GDM (as well as other Russian-speaking states or non-state organisations like Cossacks) were the part of the same cultural and linguistical space. "Medieval Russian world", if you wish. (For fifteenth century " Russia" is quite common term).

Claims about the Orthodox Church is even more baseless, because primacy in that should have the Byzantine Church, but not the Russian one.

Just the marker of the difference between Eastern and Western Slavic people. All Slavic languages are quite archaic and, therefore, close to each other, so, the border between western Russian dialects and Eastern Polish dialects is quite arbitrary.

In political terms, these two entities - the GDL and GDM - are even more distant. While the GDL really followed the Rus tradition of 'democracy' with a strong 'parliament' and local autonomy, the GDM embraced the Oriental model of autocratic power.

We can discuss who exactly was "the true heir" of Old Russia - Moscow, Novgorod, Lithuania, Cossacks or, say, Tver. We can discuss what is better - almost absolute freedom for noblemen (and therefore - terrible suppression of ordinary peasants) or terrible terror against noblemen (and therefore - relative freedom and good chances for small people).

I'm a practical man. I believe that the true heir - is survived one. I don't care where exactly will be a capital of my state - in Moscow, in Saint-Peterbourg, in Kiev or Vilno. I simply want wealth and safety. And, it seems to me, that the only practical way to achieve it to defeat Kievan regime and kill all those people who think that they can kill Russians.
Nothing personal, of course.

Basically, it was the GDL that was the centre of the 'Russian world'; while the GDM just grabbed a falling banner.

GDL lost, GDM won.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The Russians are social animal, just like all other human beings. "An attack against one of us is the attack against all of us". And an attack against vital interests of nuclear superpower is suicidal. "

We know it, Ukrainian people and decision-makers know it. They know, that they can't win - and they just sell their compatriots as a cannon fodder.

Your logic is so fucked up, it's incredible.

You're attacking the Ukraine for defending itself, as if the Ukraine is super bad for doing so.

So if the US attacks Russia, Russia will just give up and hand the country to the Americans?

That's your "logic".

 

[ESay]

Actually Russian language (as all Slavic languages) is quite archaic, that's why children in schools can read The Tale of Igor's campaign (12 century) almost without additional adaptation.
But I don't say that GDM is a part of the Modern Russian world. It doesn't exists now, you know.
I say, that both GDL and GDM (as well as other Russian-speaking states or non-state organisations like Cossacks) were the part of the same cultural and linguistical space. "Medieval Russian world", if you wish. (For fifteenth century " Russia" is quite common term).


Just the marker of the difference between Eastern and Western Slavic people. All Slavic languages are quite archaic and, therefore, close to each other, so, the border between western Russian dialects and Eastern Polish dialects is quite arbitrary.


We can discuss who exactly was "the true heir" of Old Russia - Moscow, Novgorod, Lithuania, Cossacks or, say, Tver. We can discuss what is better - almost absolute freedom for noblemen (and therefore - terrible suppression of ordinary peasants) or terrible terror against noblemen (and therefore - relative freedom and good chances for small people).

I'm a practical man. I believe that the true heir - is survived one. I don't care where exactly will be a capital of my state - in Moscow, in Saint-Peterbourg, in Kiev or Vilno. I simply want wealth and safety. And, it seems to me, that the only practical way to achieve it to defeat Kievan regime and kill all those people who think that they can kill Russians.
Nothing personal, of course.


GDL lost, GDM won.

Well, yeah, I understand that it is possible to write pages about these historical disputes and all will be in vain, because no one is going to change their point of view.

About practical terms, and your desire to live in wealth and safety. You know, this your desire is undermined by your promotion of so called Russian world. Because no one really knows what that means, including you Russians themselves. Russia is a relatively young state. The history of 'Russia' itself starts on since the 17th century when the Romanov dynasty came along, or more correctly since the Peter's years. When he made attempts to deeply transform that area into a modern state of that time. Since then, you are constantly trying to grasp what your 'national idea' is and why you need it at all.

For now, this search came to some imagined 'Russian world'. But, as I said above, the main problem is that no one knows what that means. And I am talking not only about some ideals it should be based upon, but mainly about territories it should encompass. Is Narva the Russian world? Or Vilnius, or Lvov, or Tiraspol, or half of Kazakhstan? What to do with Polish and Finnish territories that once were also 'Russian'?

What I want to say. The very idea of the Russian world is expansionist in nature. And that one who promotes it should put 'safety and wealth' aside. Because it your national idea is expansion, be ready that those who don't want to live in your made-up 'world' will try their best to make sure you don't have means for this expansion.

 

[AntonToo]

Don't be that naive.

Naive?

Who in America got arrested for public political opinions?

What are you talking about?

 

[Zavulon]

Your logic is so fucked up, it's incredible.

Sorry. I love English language and American culture, but it seems that my explanation skills aren't good enough.
It's all my fault. I beg for your pation.

You're attacking the Ukraine for defending itself, as if the Ukraine is super bad for doing so.

We are not attacking Ukraine for defending itself. We are attacking Ukraine for their discrimination and mass murders of the Russians, and for Kievan regime's wish to join NATO. I do not say that it is bad to join NATO. I do say that the further expansion of NATO is unacceptable for us. Kievan regime made it's solution and this solution is going to be fatal for them.

So if the US attacks Russia, Russia will just give up and hand the country to the Americans?

It depends. I can imagine a situation in which invitation of US Forces in Russia will be lesser evil.

That's your "logic".

Normally, fighting against the USA (even large-scale war) isn't suicidal. Russia still have good chances to win that war.

 

[AntonToo]

We are attacking Ukraine for their discrimination and mass murders of the Russians,

What mass murders of Russians???

You sound completely deranged and brainwashed. 20% of Kiev are ethnic Russians. What mass murders?

About same ratio are serving in Ukrainian army right now, getting killed everyday by Rushist invaders.

ITS YOU RUSHISTS THAT ARE KILLING RUSSIANS EN MASS. With this barbaric war to grab some land you are killing your own people and ethnic Russians in Ukraine. Thousands every week.

When the hell are you going to wake up and see what’s going on right in front of you? When they will come and drag your ass to die at the front line? Maybe then you’ll get a real taste of what “Russian world” is about.

 

[AntonToo]

for Kievan regime's wish to join NATO.

Ukraine never wanted to join NATO before Russian invasions. It now has NO CHOICE but to join NATO to have security guarantees because they know, any cease-fire agreement with Russians is not worth the paper it’s written on.

Like in Chechnya, Russia will comeback and wage yet another bloody war as soon as it feels the time is right.

100 miles from St.Petersburg is Finland who joined NATO along with Sweden as a DIRECT RESULT OF YOUR INVASION.

Not acceptable? STOP INVADING COUNTRIES.

 

[AntonToo]

Yeah, and the other one shits his pants in public and raped his 11-year old daughter in the shower (where was mommy??).

I had no idea you're a Putin fan.

You are up to your ears in crazy, stupid nonsense.

Where the hell did you get your “raped 11year old daughter” story from?

 

[AntonToo]

I know what the external view of Russian opinion is, I'm asking someone who is purportedly a Russian for his opinion.

his opinion is exactly what I explained to you about his opinion.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Sorry. I love English language and American culture, but it seems that my explanation skills aren't good enough.
It's all my fault. I beg for your pation.

We are not attacking Ukraine for defending itself. We are attacking Ukraine for their discrimination and mass murders of the Russians, and for Kievan regime's wish to join NATO. I do not say that it is bad to join NATO. I do say that the further expansion of NATO is unacceptable for us. Kievan regime made it's solution and this solution is going to be fatal for them.



It depends. I can imagine a situation in which invitation of US Forces in Russia will be lesser evil.

Normally, fighting against the USA (even large-scale war) isn't suicidal. Russia still have good chances to win that war.

No, Russia isn't attacking the Ukraine for "discrimination and mass murder of Russians".

That's a Putin lie.

Saying that Russia gets to dictate Ukrainian foreign policy is also a little arrogant, don't you think?

But the Ukraine wasn't anywhere close to joining NATO. So, again, more Putin lies.

Shall I tell you why Putin wants the Ukraine?

1) Grain and other agricultural products.

In 2010-2011 Russia and the Ukraine had a bit of a drought. Their exports of things like grain and wheat dropped massively.

What happened? The Arab Spring happened.

Imagine if you could control oil countries by controlling their food.

FAOSTAT

www.fao.org

You can see here, 2010-2011 about 4 million tons for Ukraine, down from 12 million the previous year. Russia down to 11 million tons of exports compared to 16 million the previous year.

2) Military ports. They want a permanent base on the Black Sea.

3) Putin has actually gone after the Ukraine ever since he got the top job in 1999.

In 2003 Russia wanted the Ukraine to join a Eurasian Economic Space. Up to this point in time from the end of 1999 Putin had been on a charm offensive with the Ukraine.

However Putin was trying to influence Ukrainian politics by getting rid of politicians he didn't like, in typical Putin fashion he poisoned Yushchenko and Yushchenko won the election and was president for five years, meaning Putin turned against the Ukraine.

The Ukraine moved towards Europe. I mean, what else would a president and a country with a presidential candidate that Putin poisoned do? It's pretty obvious that Putin posed a threat to the Ukraine in 2005.

Putin merely built up to this over time, weakening the Ukraine and the west didn't really care that much.

4) We can see where Putin interferes the most, and it's with former USSR countries. He wants to bring them all back under Russian control.


Russia has NO CHANCE of winning a war against the US. It's just a matter of how many casualties they could inflict.

Nobody would come to Russia's aid. Iran isn't strong enough to do it, and it's sphere of influence is Muslim countries. China wouldn't, it has way to much to lose, and that's about it for decent allies.

If the US went to war, the UK would follow with a Tory govt, France would be there quicker than the US, Poland would be there.... That's already a military force that would overwhelm. If Japan got involved, very likely, seeing how they want their former lands back, Russia would be fighting two fronts they couldn't hope to keep up. Putin knows it, which is why he bluffs so much.

 

[Zavulon]

Well, yeah, I understand that it is possible to write pages about these historical disputes and all will be in vain, because no one is going to change their point of view.

About practical terms, and your desire to live in wealth and safety. You know, this your desire is undermined by your promotion of so called Russian world. Because no one really knows what that means, including you Russians themselves. Russia is a relatively young state. The history of 'Russia' itself starts on since the 17th century when the Romanov dynasty came along, or more correctly since the Peter's years. When he made attempts to deeply transform that area into a modern state of that time. Since then, you are constantly trying to grasp what your 'national idea' is and why you need it at all.

For now, this search came to some imagined 'Russian world'. But, as I said above, the main problem is that no one knows what that means. And I am talking not only about some ideals it should be based upon, but mainly about territories it should encompass. Is Narva the Russian world? Or Vilnius, or Lvov, or Tiraspol, or half of Kazakhstan? What to do with Polish and Finnish territories that once were also 'Russian'?

What I want to say. The very idea of the Russian world is expansionist in nature. And that one who promotes it should put 'safety and wealth' aside. Because it your national idea is expansion, be ready that those who don't want to live in your made-up 'world' will try their best to make sure you don't have means for this expansion.

"Russian world" is a simple and natural idea. If you can speak or read Russian - you are a part of it. Doesn't really matter where do you live - Kiev, Narva, Moscow, New York. If we can talk - we should talk, mostly to help each other or to prevent conflicts and violence. This thing is simply exists.

Another, but close conception is "The gathering of the Russian lands". It is a meta-strategy. When we divided - we are weak. When we united - we are strong. Of course, it depends on the term of said cooperation and how good is this state for its people.

If Russian people of Narva, Estonia feel themselves ok with their status in Estonia, we are ok about it too. But if they see situation as unacceptable (for example, if Estonians decided to genocide them), and fight for their lives we, of course, will help them. They are part of us, and we have right for self-defense.

That's the way how people defend their lives and their property. We stick together and help each other.

 

[Zavulon]

What mass murders of Russians???

For example Odessa massacre and Donbass shelling, and witch-hunt in Kharkov, Dnipropetrovsk and other places.

I think it is more than enough.

Attack against one of us means attack against all of us. That's what we call "collective self-defense".

 

[Zavulon]

Naive?

Who in America got arrested for public political opinions?

What are you talking about?

Are you banned in Google?

For example:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/21/us/iowa-man-burns-lgbt-flag-church-trnd/index.html

 

[AntonToo]

Are you banned in Google?

For example:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/21/us/iowa-man-burns-lgbt-flag-church-trnd/index.html

The man clearly committed a crime when he stole and burned someone’s flag. Aggravating the crime was the fact that it hateful.

If it was his own flag his hate speech would be protected.

 

[Zavulon]

Ukraine never wanted to join NATO before Russian invasions.

Simple and plain lie.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm

 

[Zavulon]

The man clearly committed a crime when he stole and burned someone’s flag. Aggravating the crime was the fact that it hateful.

If it was his own flag his hate speech would be protected.

Fifteen years of prison for a rag? You can't really be that silly. There are options in the USA that should not be publically expressed (as in any other country). It's ok. I respect your right to establish any rules you want. Just don't try to lie about absolutely free speech.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Sixteen years because many aggravating circumstances. Obviously an excessive sentence normally. Then again, he wanted to be an anti-PRIDE hate cult martyr.

 

[ESay]

No, Russia isn't attacking the Ukraine for "discrimination and mass murder of Russians".

That's a Putin lie.

Saying that Russia gets to dictate Ukrainian foreign policy is also a little arrogant, don't you think?

But the Ukraine wasn't anywhere close to joining NATO. So, again, more Putin lies.

Shall I tell you why Putin wants the Ukraine?

1) Grain and other agricultural products.

In 2010-2011 Russia and the Ukraine had a bit of a drought. Their exports of things like grain and wheat dropped massively.

What happened? The Arab Spring happened.

Imagine if you could control oil countries by controlling their food.

FAOSTAT

www.fao.org

You can see here, 2010-2011 about 4 million tons for Ukraine, down from 12 million the previous year. Russia down to 11 million tons of exports compared to 16 million the previous year.

2) Military ports. They want a permanent base on the Black Sea.

3) Putin has actually gone after the Ukraine ever since he got the top job in 1999.

In 2003 Russia wanted the Ukraine to join a Eurasian Economic Space. Up to this point in time from the end of 1999 Putin had been on a charm offensive with the Ukraine.

However Putin was trying to influence Ukrainian politics by getting rid of politicians he didn't like, in typical Putin fashion he poisoned Yushchenko and Yushchenko won the election and was president for five years, meaning Putin turned against the Ukraine.

The Ukraine moved towards Europe. I mean, what else would a president and a country with a presidential candidate that Putin poisoned do? It's pretty obvious that Putin posed a threat to the Ukraine in 2005.

Putin merely built up to this over time, weakening the Ukraine and the west didn't really care that much.

4) We can see where Putin interferes the most, and it's with former USSR countries. He wants to bring them all back under Russian control.


Russia has NO CHANCE of winning a war against the US. It's just a matter of how many casualties they could inflict.

Nobody would come to Russia's aid. Iran isn't strong enough to do it, and it's sphere of influence is Muslim countries. China wouldn't, it has way to much to lose, and that's about it for decent allies.

If the US went to war, the UK would follow with a Tory govt, France would be there quicker than the US, Poland would be there.... That's already a military force that would overwhelm. If Japan got involved, very likely, seeing how they want their former lands back, Russia would be fighting two fronts they couldn't hope to keep up. Putin knows it, which is why he bluffs so much.

See, that is what I was talking about. An expansionist foreign policy. No matter how you call it, and on what ground you will base it - expanding of NATO, discrimination of Russian-speaking community, genocide, denazification, historical justice etc. That all can vary.

But if you embrace this policy, you shouldn't be surprised that your neighbours join or want to join military alliances aimed against Russia, for their own protection. That is also a quite natural process.

The only strange thing here is you expecting wealth and safety out of that. No, military economy and militarization of the society is more likely bet.