DeltaMD90 wrote:Scorpius wrote:DeltaMD90 wrote:I miss having a Russian perspective, but really? I honestly thought you were trolling until I saw a few posts from you. Is this what average Russians think? That all China needs for explosive growth is the privilege of more coveted Russian gas? And nukes in Cuba and Venezuela!?
The main thing I'm saying here is that the West lies too much about Russia.
You and the others grew up in the conditions of total propaganda about bad Russians who want to take something there. In reality, Russia's actions are just a response to certain steps on the part of the West. You threaten us-we respond to these threats. You are moving NATO to our borders-we are taking reciprocal steps to ensure our security. About nuclear missiles in Venezuela and Cuba - this is just one of the options of response that Russia can implement in response to the aggressive policy of the West. That is, you do not understand the meaning of my comment - and again began to invent something in the paradigm of their perception of the world through the filter of Western propaganda.
I will try to write even easier:
1. Since the collapse of the USSR, the West has taken a number of steps that Russia regards as extremely hostile.
2. Russia currently saw that the West's inability and acts in the interest of preserving its security and sovereignty.
3. The West continues to take unquestionably hostile steps towards Russia.
4. Russia is tightening its response.
…
XX. Total nuclear war.
In the interval between (4) and (XX) Russia can, using non-military methods, significantly complicate the life of Western countries. For example, to strengthen opponents of the West: both China and Iran. In Russia there is everything necessary for this - a huge amount of resources, developed scientific and industrial base, developed science. The actions of Western politicians will eventually lead to the fact that Russia will turn away from the West. And strengthen the opponents of the West.
And once again, all Russia's actions are just a response to the aggressive policy of the West.
Your politicians are trying to put out the fire by pouring gasoline on it.
I'll actually agree with you on one point... I don't think we have a good understanding of Russia and sometimes our media can be dismissive of Russia. We over here think nothing of it, but to Russians, it's enraging.
To an extent.
That's about where our agreement ends. I find it ironic you accuse us of blindly swallowing Western propaganda then shamelessly throw out every pro Russian argument/propaganda you can think of.
You should pick your battles better. I'm sure if you lowered your defenses a bit and we talked out some details, you'd admit Russia often screws things up, just like the West does at times/often. Acknowledge where you do it wrong and stand up for the arguments you actually have solid footing on. You'd go a lot further and might actually change some minds.
Because currently, most of your arguments are pretty out there. You act like Russia is this technological marvel that can do no wrong. Be honest with us otherwise this is gonna be a super unproductive argument
Let's first clarify the position:
1.
You act like Russia is this technological marvel that can do no wrong.
This statement is wrong. I've never written anything like this. I argue that Russia has its own national interests, which the West does not take into account. Not to take into account the interests of Russia over the past years - it was stupid. And if before the West could not reckon with our opinion simply because we were on the verge of extinction-now you get a backlash.
My claims to the leadership of Russia are more in the sphere of domestic policy - but this is a question on which we are unlikely to reach an understanding, because I firmly believe that capitalism is a vicious system that must be eradicated. Only a Communist society is viable. And I note - really Communist society, as he understood, for example, Ivan Efremov - Soviet cosmist, writer and scientist. What is called communism in the West-in fact, communism has never been, but was socialism-a crooked type of transition from capitalism to communism. And even this curve was significantly influenced by the world War II, and the Cold war that followed.
If we consider the foreign policy of Russia-then personally in my opinion, the Russian leadership is acting exclusively powerless. With the West it is possible to speak only one language - the language of power. Otherwise, your politicians are not capable of negotiations. Only the threat of an immediate and brutal strike on any EU or NATO country can make you finally realize that you have no moral or real superiority over Russia or any other country.
And these are my arguments-a consequence of the experience that Russia has received, making concessions on the results of the Cold war. After all, what do we see? All the countries from which we withdrew our troops are now our enemies and support our enemies. Of the Republic, to whom we have given independence - are now our enemies. The Baltic States, which only as part of Russia has gained its statehood - our enemy. Ukraine is our enemy. Georgia is our enemy. Hence the conclusion-to give them independence was a mistake. And even the fact that they became our enemies is understandable. It's very simple-the local elites, who seized power there, can hold this power only in one way - if their policy is based on the confrontation of Russia. Because otherwise, the very centripetal processes that previously brought all these territories into the Russian state will work again. Whatever the authorities of Ukraine, the Baltic States or Georgia say, for example, we are essentially a single people existing in a single space. There are fewer cultural differences between us than between the French and the Spanish, for example. But France and Spain United in the European Union. In the same way, all these pseudo-independent republics of the former USSR without artificial separation of the peoples living there will unite together.
And this Association is fiercely afraid of the parochial elite - it will mean the end of their power, the removal of their financial flows. Your politicians are well aware that if Russia unites the adjacent territories, it will turn out to be a state even more powerful than the Soviet Union - and this will actually mean that Europe in General will roll back somewhere on the margins of the political process in the world. The United States will receive a competitor, which will not be able to give a civilizational rebuff, and as a result, the American world order, which was so diligently built by the United States for more than a century, will simply collapse. And the US will lose power over the world.
This is my point of view on the political processes in the world.
Can you justify your point of view without propaganda clichés about bad Putin or Stalin?
)