A Political Thread

[Vladimir12]

And you genuinely believe that the Russian people have control over their government on any scale? Putin wasn't even your elected leader, the polls were rigged and he will only cause more and more misery, poverty and death for his people.

How do you know that?

Who tells you about Russia?

Rats sold his country and living in London?

Those who receive your money for his information about Russia?

They say what you want to hear ...

- - - Updated - - -

That's true

It is not true!

Putin supports the vast majority of citizens of Russia and he appreciates it.

I know that Putin will not send Russian war in Afghanistan for American interests and not send immigrants from Africa.

Otherwise, Putin will lose this support!

But Blair went to fight the British in Iraq in spite of the majority of citizens were against it!

In Russia, it is impossible!

 

[McTallshort]

No you just invade Georgia and the Ukraine instead. Then threaten to invade the Baltic states will flying probing recon flights into NATO airspace.

 

[RoosTah]

Russia and the Russian elite hates the West.

We are the only people in the world whom the West could neither subjugate nor destroyed.

I grew up on the books of Sir Walter Scott, James Fenimore Cooper, Arthur Conan Doyle, Jack London, how could I hate you?

Don't forget one Russian Price (Obelonsky I think - name sounds ver similar to a character from Anna Karennina anyway) played rugby for England.

Russia really is caught in the middle in a lot of ways, but I've always felt it's almost been more a relic of the old West than being anything explicitly other.

What is the Russian elites view of China though? Common interests there occasionally, but also clearly an increasingly powerful strategic competitor that isn't aligned in any fixed way to either you or the U.S.

 

[Vladimir12]

No you just invade Georgia and the Ukraine instead. Then threaten to invade the Baltic states will flying probing recon flights into NATO airspace.

Do you ever write about Russia and neighboring countries that do not take into account a lot of things.

In Georgia, where they lived autonomy were Ossetians and Abkhazians. You probably do not know these people at all!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian–Ossetian_conflict_(1918–2 0)

Georgians in 1920 during the civil war in Russia built there genotsid.50 000 Ossetians fled north into Russia.

The Georgians even went to Sochi, is not kicked out of their kicks behind the mountains.

Abkhazians entered into Georgia in the Soviet Union.

In the 90 years of Abkhazians and Ossetians we have decided to secede from Georgia and the war began again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_War_in_Abkhazia_(1992–93)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991–92_South_Ossetia_War

As a result, Russia introduced peacekeepers and between Georgians, Abkhazians and Ossetians peace was concluded.

This lasted until 2008 when the armed Western money Saakashvili attacked Ossetia and Russian peacekeepers.

What was all over, we all remember)))

[video]https://youtu.be/6lRFPSnaeeo[/video]

But we did not bomb Tbilisi and the Georgian infrastructure.

But then Ossetian Georgians expelled from South Ossetia, and Abkhazia did back in the 90's.

This is the Caucasus! They used to cut each other!

In the end why Israel can, and they do not?

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, the Orthodox Ossetians, Abkhazians mostly Muslims.

 

[Vladimir12]

Now about Ukraine.

The term appeared in the Ukrainian .In Austria, Austro-Hungarian Empire was a large minority - Rusyns.

Rusyns and Russian once lived in one state is conventionally called Kievan Rus.

Since they tended to Orthodoxy and Russia, invented a new nationality - Ukrainian, but the faith they had the Greek Catholic.

A disgruntled that died in the concentration camps Terezin and Talerhof.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talerhof

After the revolution, the Bolsheviks did the Republic of Ukraine and introduced Ukrainian nationality.

What is happening in eastern Ukraine is a struggle for the Russian branch of the Austro-Leninist this invention.

When we were one people,



it's as if New Zealand would fight with Australia.



The Ukrainian - Russian is made in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the glorious extermination of civilians Poles and Jews during the Second World War, believes the pope.

It is a feat in Lviv in 1941.

http://foto-history.livejournal.com/2472515.html

This Volyn in 1944.

http://gorozhanin.dp.ua/bez-rubriki/11069-strashnaya-tragediya-volyni-foto-18.html

They are fighting against those who remained Russian and Russian volunteers.

[video]https://youtu.be/NyCD3LqfbJ8[/video]

[video]https://youtu.be/Wkbsoxzfssk[/video]

It's not the same thing happened with both the Jews and the Poles ...

- - - Updated - - -

The militia is fighting even one American.

Callsign - Texas.

https://www.youtube.com/results?sea...%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%B0 %D1%81&spfreload=10

And there are Spaniards, many Germans, Brazilian, Afghan ...

- - - Updated - - -

No such thing, "the airspace of NATO."

There are "international airspace."

Where Russian military aircraft and fly without flying into the airspace of NATO countries.

And in the Baltic countries send diapers, they are afraid that the Russian, which are treated as second-class citizens an uprising.

But the young Russian went out almost everything, so there is no one to fight.

But the fact that the EU is turning a blind eye to the oppression of Russian speaks volumes ...

- - - Updated - - -

Don't forget one Russian Price (Obelonsky I think - name sounds ver similar to a character from Anna Karennina anyway) played rugby for England.

Russia really is caught in the middle in a lot of ways, but I've always felt it's almost been more a relic of the old West than being anything explicitly other.

What is the Russian elites view of China though? Common interests there occasionally, but also clearly an increasingly powerful strategic competitor that isn't aligned in any fixed way to either you or the U.S.

We would Prince Obolensky Russian team would be useful)))

In general, in Russia there is a comic online group - Harristy.

I am also one of them.

We want to be that Prince Harry has become our new king.

He came up to us!

A thick Hohenzollern which we sometimes hanging around in Moscow, we have kicked a kick in the ass!

And the Chinese to us do not go to the north, they go to you and to the United States and Europe.

The Chinese want to live where it's warm.

We do not fear.

 

[McTallshort]

Do you honestly believe what you write?

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Okay I want to go to Moscow sometime how will I find it?

Will I be fine?

 

[Vladimir12]

Do you honestly believe what you write?

I have said many times, the West and Russia are on different planets, and we understand each other is impossible.

And you're proof of that.

But you can at least do not kill each other ...

 

[McTallshort]

Very true comrade although we do agree rugby is the world's superior sport

 

[Vladimir12]

Okay I want to go to Moscow sometime how will I find it?

Will I be fine?

You have a much better chance to survive after visiting Moscow or St. Petersburg than New York .

At least you do not shoot Russian police.

We do not have hazardous areas where it is better not to appear, all areas are the same.

We even black from the rest of the world are different)))

[video]https://youtu.be/fI8Inwjc9tc[/video]

There are different areas of welfare, but all are equally safe.

About the "Russian mafia", refer to Hollywood, where they know about it better than I do.

I it is only seen in the movies.

The main problem - very few people know English, you can stand for an hour in the street and nobody can say anything to you.

The easiest way to fly to Russia with soccer fans in the Champions League or the UEFA Cup.

You can fly to Sochi for the match, "Yenisei" with "Newcastle " in the Challenge Cup.

Can you wait a bit and go to Russia in the footbal World Cup!

I'll put a few spots of Russian towns or places to visit.

You can go to where the nearest sales person will be on you for hundreds of kilometers.

It depends on what you need.

Moscow. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXKPb6uQnF8&spfreload=10

Saint Petersburg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjRr5oRbwpk&spfreload=10

Lake Baikal http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3KtkBNDu1Y&spfreload=10

The Kamchatka Peninsula. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EutjXrR6iCE&spfreload=10

Sheregesh Ski Resort. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B40KH4G2Mo&spfreload=10

Altai. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ8MYztKz-Q&spfreload=10

Sochi. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jft77UOAf0&spfreload=10

You can even go to Chechnya in Grozny.

It now looks much better than 15 years ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvKqWV8a8iE&spfreload=10

Choose!

- - - Updated - - -

Very true comrade although we do agree rugby is the world's superior sport

But Georgia, certainly we have to declare war, because we have not won them in 1993!

:diablo:

 

[Vladimir12]

I would like to explain two things to you that you find it hard to believe.

Why Georgia attacked Russia in fact, it's actually a suicide, and why the Ukrainian army called a Nazi in the Donbas.

South Ossetia and Russia connects only two-lane tunnel Roksky hewn in the mountains 4 kilometers long.

3-4 days Saakashvili planned to block the neck, after which the matter had to start his Western friends with offers of peace.

What he was hoping I would not know, because in the morning the next day after the attack on the Russian peacekeepers through the tunnel passed the first part of the 58th Army.

You know what the Ukraine after Russian mass take up arms?

Have you seen these photos of events in Odessa when burned Russian activists advocating for making Russian a state language on a par with Ukrainian and federalization?

http://trinixy.ru/100940-pozhar-i-ubiystva-v-dome-profsoyuzov-v-odesse-24-foto-video.html

Have you seen these pictures attacks on unarmed activists from the Crimea?

[video]https://youtu.be/8S9mODhVNeM[/video]

You've seen the consequences of firing shots Lugansk?

[video]https://youtu.be/aXa6aPjmnyc[/video]

Have you seen "Gorlovskaya Madonna" killed Ukrainian army?

http://www.go2life.net/disasters-tragedy/595-gorlovka-tragedy-woman-child-killed.html

You do at least something you can see?

Do you think the Russian will listen to what he would say the OSCE and the European Union with the United States?

Well, you do not care for Russian, but you need it yourself?

Edward Snowden spoke about injustice, about what you eavesdrop and spy on you.

For that the US wanted to put him in jail for life.

He wanted no one to shelter your country would give it to the US massacre.

Even China has not given him refuge, because it trades with the United States!

Only Russia defended him, despite the fact that the US strongly pressured and threatened us.

Let each of us goes his own way In accordance with his conscience ...

 

[j'nuh]

The Labour party makes me want to scream at times.

Since when did they drift so far right that there even needs to be a discussion about whether to reject the Tories' welfare bill? If you can't reject it out-of-hand, you fail on the most basic of principles that a Labour MP should have.

As for Tony Blair (amongst others) saying that Corbyn would push Labour into the electoral wilderness... I suppose he didn't notice that Labour has just entirely lost Scotland to a party more left-wing than his? Tories have thrived due to the recession as they simply have to play the scapegoat game. Politics of blame thrives in such times, as we have seen entirely across Europe. But austerity is unpopular and, as seen by Syriza, pushing people too far gives the left a chance to sweep in. A progressive alliance can win future elections, because it gives a sense of hope. But Labour can't out-Tory the Tories whilst winning back parts of Scotland, continuing to take for granted the support of the working and low-middle classes andkeep the backing of the unions. There may be a place for right-wing politics in Labour, but anti-welfare, anti-migrants, pro-austerity? What a way to peeve off their core support.

They must consider that whilst the Lib Dems are wounded, they have a very popular leader in place that is to the left of all but Corbyn. If Labour chase austerity leaving the Lib Dems to take up the anti-austerity platform, there is no doubt that they will lose some of their support to the Lib Dems. (Not enough that the Lib Dems have any chance of major success, but enough to split the Labour vote more than it has to.)

 

[Peat]

The Labour party makes me want to scream at times.

Since when did they drift so far right that there even needs to be a discussion about whether to reject the Tories' welfare bill? If you can't reject it out-of-hand, you fail on the most basic of principles that a Labour MP should have.

As for Tony Blair (amongst others) saying that Corbyn would push Labour into the electoral wilderness... I suppose he didn't notice that Labour has just entirely lost Scotland to a party more left-wing than his? Tories have thrived due to the recession as they simply have to play the scapegoat game. Politics of blame thrives in such times, as we have seen entirely across Europe. But austerity is unpopular and, as seen by Syriza, pushing people too far gives the left a chance to sweep in. A progressive alliance can win future elections, because it gives a sense of hope. But Labour can't out-Tory the Tories whilst winning back parts of Scotland, continuing to take for granted the support of the working and low-middle classes andkeep the backing of the unions. There may be a place for right-wing politics in Labour, but anti-welfare, anti-migrants, pro-austerity? What a way to peeve off their core support.

They must consider that whilst the Lib Dems are wounded, they have a very popular leader in place that is to the left of all but Corbyn. If Labour chase austerity leaving the Lib Dems to take up the anti-austerity platform, there is no doubt that they will lose some of their support to the Lib Dems. (Not enough that the Lib Dems have any chance of major success, but enough to split the Labour vote more than it has to.)

I keep trying to read a long eloquent post on this but I'm tired, I'm also trying to talk to my girlfriend, and this post makes me want to slam my head into a wall, so I'm just going to bullet point it -

- Have you not noticed that Labour lost the whole sodding UK to a party more right-wing than them? And the last one and, barring three elections under a man whose opinion you could not be quicker to dismiss, every single bloody one since 1979? If the logic is 'Follow the leader', then Labour need to go right.
- Besides, the SNP aren't actually more left wing than Labour. Their manifesto was mostly in line with Labour's, their voters self-describe as being less left-wing than Labour. The latest research found that the Scots want policies that don't diverge much from the rest of the UK.
- If you haven't read about or heard from the core Labour supporters who are anti-migrant, who believe that migrants are ruining their communities and childrens' futures, you've been living under a rock. A really big one with sound insulation and everything.
- To a lesser extent, ditto anti-welfare. There's no shortage of working class folk who are tired of looking at their neighbours and thinking "Not working > Working". Now, sure, there's more to welfare than that, but enjoy explaining it to them. Ditto immigrants really. I hate how this country is on immigrants, because it's dumber than man using a colander to mix his paint, but it's even dumber pretending it's not a big toxic issue all across the spectrum.
- Talk of a progressive alliance ignores the fact that one of the key drives in the Tory vote was distaste for the idea of Labour and the SNP working together. It's genuinely toxic to lots of English voters. You can read about all three of the last in media from every single angle of the British national press; there's plenty of it on the Guardian right now.

The foremost principle of any member of the Labour party should be to acquire power so they can help people. If they don't have the power, someone else will have it, and they'll cheerfully trample all over Labour's principles as and when it suits them. The belief shown on some parts of the Left that it's a religion, that it's better to be a pure martyr on the opposition's benches than to go in and get your hands dirty and try to make a difference, it vexes me beyond belief. Oh no, how dare a politician take some notice of the democratically declared preferences of the people and try and come up with something they'll like! Quick, quick, to the pulpit.

I am, frankly, at a loss as to how anyone possessed of enough of their mental faculties to function in the day to day world cannot see how Labour's threatened push back left doesn't seriously threaten the wasteland. Labour need a 100 seats. They're not going to get them without winning back voters in the centre. All those marginals that Labour targeted but ended up losing to the Tories? The Tories didn't win those because Labour were insufficiently left-wing. They're not filled with hard-suffering people crying for a leader to lead them in the revolution.

Truth told, I don't get how Labour get back in. They've been beaten at every single edge of their political compass and they need to simultaneously appeal on every side of that. That's hard and for some strange reason, Labour's most talented young MPs have felt the need to remove themselves from the running. But it pretty much has to start with someone who'd agree that it's a good thing to appeal to all sides. That's not Corbyn.

I need to sleep now. But, basically, this is not a left-wing country disguised as a right-wing country. Corbyn is a real menace.

 

[ncurd]

Sorry Peat going to have to disagree with you someone should stand for their political beliefs regardless of how inconvenient it is.

As a LiB Dem member not doing that has just wrecked the party in the general election. By entering a coalition with Tories many saw us as running away from our selves and duly punished for that no matter if a agree with the decision we took that's the reality of what happened.

So yes we have looked to the left (as many labour supporters are now) for a new leader as many of us feel that's how people see us politically even if were not as most see Liberalism as a politics of the left. And trying to win back those who supported us before.

TBH I was genuinely surprised by the election result but I think most people didn't predict the rise of the SNP and the divide and conquer mentality due it the Tories were able to muster. I honestly thought and still think we will end up more coalition goverments as I think through comprmise rather than one big party we end up with a goverment that rules for all rather than the few.


At the end of the day I feel labour is supposed to represent the common working person (for what they actually need not what they want) in Westminster just like the Lib-Dems are suppose to represent Liberalism. You need to hold on to your ideals and win out through reasoned arguement yeah it's easy to run after power and saying whatever is nessary but in the end that only gives the least worst option. I'd rather vote for a principaled man than a guy just trying to get votes say what you like about Corbyn but at least he belives.

 

[TheSaffycen]

I don't know if it has been talked about but Donald Trump is a genuine candidate for the US election.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-trump-surges-to-big-lead-in-gop-presidential-race/2015/07/20/efd2e0d0-2ef8-11e5-8f36-18d1d501920d_story.html

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Lol Merida fun yeah.

Wish Trump had bright better hair.


OMG him and Boris Johnson in the same room as heads of there states that would make an amazing reality show.

 

[j'nuh]

- Have you not noticed that Labour lost the whole sodding UK to a party more right-wing than them? And the last one and, barring three elections under a man whose opinion you could not be quicker to dismiss, every single bloody one since 1979? If the logic is 'Follow the leader', then Labour need to go right.

It's not exactly shocking that a right wing party wins an election in the aftermath of a recession. It's happened entirely across Europe. Why? Because reducing the recession down to the basics, spending = bad, and picking out scapegoats (those on welfare, immigrants), is much easier to explain to the public than the more complex narrative that the left has to use. Getting scared about leftist politics in this economic climate is ridiculous.

- Besides, the SNP aren't actually more left wing than Labour. Their manifesto was mostly in line with Labour's, their voters self-describe as being less left-wing than Labour. The latest research found that the Scots want policies that don't diverge much from the rest of the UK.

Unlike the major parties, SNP argued an anti-austerity platform, and put forward no spending cuts in their manifesto (apart from abolishing Trident)...

- If you haven't read about or heard from the core Labour supporters who are anti-migrant, who believe that migrants are ruining their communities and childrens' futures, you've been living under a rock. A really big one with sound insulation and everything.

Given that, of the UKIP voters, only 7% voted Labour in 2010 (compared to 60% Tories and 15% Lib Dems), I think it's fair to say that this isn't true.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/03/05/analysis-ukip-voters/

- To a lesser extent, ditto anti-welfare. There's no shortage of working class folk who are tired of looking at their neighbours and thinking "Not working > Working". Now, sure, there's more to welfare than that, but enjoy explaining it to them. Ditto immigrants really. I hate how this country is on immigrants, because it's dumber than man using a colander to mix his paint, but it's even dumber pretending it's not a big toxic issue all across the spectrum.

In a recession, predictable. Not a reason to abandon these people.

- Talk of a progressive alliance ignores the fact that one of the key drives in the Tory vote was distaste for the idea of Labour and the SNP working together. It's genuinely toxic to lots of English voters. You can read about all three of the last in media from every single angle of the British national press; there's plenty of it on the Guardian right now.

True, which is why Labour needs to start winning back parts of Scotland (won't be done from the right).

The foremost principle of any member of the Labour party should be to acquire power so they can help people. If they don't have the power, someone else will have it, and they'll cheerfully trample all over Labour's principles as and when it suits them. The belief shown on some parts of the Left that it's a religion, that it's better to be a pure martyr on the opposition's benches than to go in and get your hands dirty and try to make a difference, it vexes me beyond belief. Oh no, how dare a politician take some notice of the democratically declared preferences of the people and try and come up with something they'll like! Quick, quick, to the pulpit.

You're ignoring that the political beliefs of the undecided voter is incredibly circumstantial. See how so many in Greece followed Syriza after the unpopularity of austerity. See how so many voted for the Nazi party following so much dislike towards the Treaty of Versailles. See how across Europe, voters flocked to austerity-led parties after a recession. We'll come out of the recession and have a new battleground to fight. Being pro-welfare won't kill off Labour. In fact, it may help them when austerity really starts to bite.

I am, frankly, at a loss as to how anyone possessed of enough of their mental faculties to function in the day to day world cannot see how Labour's threatened push back left doesn't seriously threaten the wasteland. Labour need a 100 seats. They're not going to get them without winning back voters in the centre. All those marginals that Labour targeted but ended up losing to the Tories? The Tories didn't win those because Labour were insufficiently left-wing. They're not filled with hard-suffering people crying for a leader to lead them in the revolution.

Do you actually consider Corbyn to be a revolutionary?

Truth told, I don't get how Labour get back in. They've been beaten at every single edge of their political compass and they need to simultaneously appeal on every side of that. That's hard and for some strange reason, Labour's most talented young MPs have felt the need to remove themselves from the running. But it pretty much has to start with someone who'd agree that it's a good thing to appeal to all sides. That's not Corbyn.

I need to sleep now. But, basically, this is not a left-wing country disguised as a right-wing country. Corbyn is a real menace.

And yet so many agree with the politics of Corbyn:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...most-people-actually-agree-with-10407148.html

 

[Vladimir12]

Okay I want to go to Moscow sometime how will I find it?

Will I be fine?

You know brother.

Today I read a study "The Institute for Economics and Peace" on the most dangerous country to live.

Russia ranks 152 out of 161.

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/#page/indexes/global-peace-index/2015

Our neighbors on the rating of Libya, Yemen and North Korea.

I do not know who to believe me.

His eyes or "The Institute for Economics and Peace".

 

[McTallshort]

It's not exactly shocking that a right wing party wins an election in the aftermath of a recession. It's happened entirely across Europe. Why? Because reducing the recession down to the basics, spending = bad, and picking out scapegoats (those on welfare, immigrants), is much easier to explain to the public than the more complex narrative that the left has to use. Getting scared about leftist politics in this economic climate is ridiculous.


Unlike the major parties, SNP argued an anti-austerity platform, and put forward no spending cuts in their manifesto (apart from abolishing Trident)...


Given that, of the UKIP voters, only 7% voted Labour in 2010 (compared to 60% Tories and 15% Lib Dems), I think it's fair to say that this isn't true.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/03/05/analysis-ukip-voters/


In a recession, predictable. Not a reason to abandon these people.


True, which is why Labour needs to start winning back parts of Scotland (won't be done from the right).


You're ignoring that the political beliefs of the undecided voter is incredibly circumstantial. See how so many in Greece followed Syriza after the unpopularity of austerity. See how so many voted for the Nazi party following so much dislike towards the Treaty of Versailles. See how across Europe, voters flocked to austerity-led parties after a recession. We'll come out of the recession and have a new battleground to fight. Being pro-welfare won't kill off Labour. In fact, it may help them when austerity really starts to bite.


Do you actually consider Corbyn to be a revolutionary?


And yet so many agree with the politics of Corbyn:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...most-people-actually-agree-with-10407148.html

Are these the same opinion polls that got the election so wrong? Most people don't agree with him that's why Labour have only made it into power under Blairs New Labour. People want a chance to work,earn money and have nice things in life it really is that simple. Banging on about the NHS and anti austerity etc might mean something if you work in the health service or are claiming some type of benefit but most people don't so in reality they don't care.

 

[j'nuh]

Are these the same opinion polls that got the election so wrong? Most people don't agree with him that's why Labour have only made it into power under Blairs New Labour. People want a chance to work,earn money and have nice things in life it really is that simple. Banging on about the NHS and anti austerity etc might mean something if you work in the health service or are claiming some type of benefit but most people don't so in reality they don't care.

The NHS should mean something to anyone who uses the NHS, i.e. the vast majority of the country.
64% of all families claim some kind of benefit, including most of the elderly claiming the state pension, and many families claiming tax credits. Nearly everyone will claim a benefit at some point in their lives.