Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 10 Jul '15 00:02
    I have noticed there's been much hysterical demonization of Russia by
    ignorant Americans who have swallowed the usual propaganda in the US media--
    a Hollywood story of the American 'good guys' vs the Russian 'bad guys'.

    Stephen Cohen, an American scholar of Russia, strongly disputes US media narratives.

    _Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives: From Stalinism to the New Cold War_
    by Stephen F Cohen (2011 Columbia University Press)

    "The real U.S.policy was different--a *relentless, winner-take-all exploitation*
    of Russia's post-1991 weakness. Accompanied by *broken American promises*,
    condescending lectures, and *demands for unilateral concessions*, it was,
    and remains, disregarding official rhetoric, *even more aggressive and
    uncompromising* than was Washington's approach to Soviet Communist Russia."
    --Stephen Cohen (p. 168)

    "A growing military encirclement of Russia, on and near its borders, by U.S.
    and NATO bases,...it was the eastward expansion of the NATO military
    alliance beginning in the 1990s, that ...threatened (Russia)" (p. 168)

    The US government had promised Russia that it would *not* expand
    NATO eastward (beyond incorporating the GDR, East Germany, into NATO).
    Then the US government blithely violated its promise. While few Americans
    seem to believe there's anything wrong with this, most Russians feel differently.

    "A tacit (and closely related) U.S. denial that Russia has *any legitimate
    security concerns* outside its own territory, even in ethnically akin or
    contiguous former Soviet republics such as Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia.
    ... (Richard) Holbrooke declared that faraway Slav nation (Ukraine)
    part of 'our (US) core zone of security." (p. 169)

    So the US government unilaterally declares that Ukraine is part of the
    US 'core zone of security' while denying that Russia has any legitimate
    security concerns there. How would Americans respond if Putin were
    to declare that Mexico is part of Russia's 'core zone of security' while
    denying that the USA has any legitimate security concerns there?

    "Even more, a presumption that Russia does not have full sovereignty
    within its own borders, as expressed by constant U.S. interventions in
    Moscow's internal affairs since 1992." (p. 169)

    "Underpinning these components of the real U.S. policy have been familiar
    Cold War double standards condemning Moscow for doing what Washington
    does--such as seeking allies and military bases in former Soviet republics..." (p. 170)

    "When in the 1990s *the U.S.-supported Yeltsin overthrew Russia's
    elected parliament and constitutional order by force*, gave its national
    wealth and television networks to Kremlin insiders, *imposed a constitution
    without any real constraints on executive power and began to rig elections,
    it was 'democratic reform'.* When Putin continued this process, it was 'authoritarianism'." (p. 170)

    Boris Yeltsin's 'leadership' was a disaster for the Russian people, which
    may explain why he's so admired by 'conservative' and 'liberal' Americans.

    "Finally, the United States has been attempting, by exploiting Russia's
    weakness, to acquire the nuclear superiority it could not achieve during the Soviet era." (p. 170)

    The USA's extreme dishonesty and hypocrisy and its ruthless pursuit
    of imperialist exploitation should *not* surprise anyone who has studied
    enough of US history. The triumphalist Americans have sought to treat
    Russia almost as though it had unconditionally surrendered to the USA,
    While most Russians are realistic enough to know that Russia's weaker
    than the USSR and much weaker than the USA, there's still a popular
    attitude of defiance toward US demands. One Russian once told me,
    "After the Americans have invaded and conquered us and extinguished
    every spark of resistance--which Hitler never could do--then and only
    then may they act like they are our absolute masters. But not until then."

    To be realistic, I don't see how the vast gulf between American perceptions
    and Russian perceptions of history can be bridged any time soon, if at all.
    And I foresee continuing conflict between the USA and Russia.
  2. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    11 Jul '15 10:32
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    I have noticed there's been much hysterical demonization of Russia by
    ignorant Americans who have swallowed the usual propaganda in the US media--
    a Hollywood story of the American 'good guys' vs the Russian 'bad guys'.

    Stephen Cohen, an American scholar of Russia, strongly disputes US media narratives.

    _Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives: From Sta ...[text shortened]... bridged any time soon, if at all.
    And I foresee continuing conflict between the USA and Russia.
    There are a few grains of truth here. Missing from this post however is the fact that America has no plan whatsoever to "conquer" Russia. Napoleon, the Kaiser, and Hitler all tried to do this, and failed. It can't be done, and America knows this.
  3. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    11 Jul '15 11:38
    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Originally posted by bill718
    There are a few grains of truth here. Missing from this post however is the fact that America has no plan whatsoever to "conquer" Russia. Napoleon, the Kaiser, and Hitler all tried to do this, and failed. It can't be done, and America knows this.
    Indeed. Then there are all those attempts to conquer Afghanistan...

    When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, and the women come out to cut up what remains, jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains and go to your gawd like a soldier.
    Rudyard Kipling
  4. 11 Jul '15 11:53
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    I have noticed there's been much hysterical demonization of Russia by
    ignorant Americans who have swallowed the usual propaganda in the US media--
    a Hollywood story of the American 'good guys' vs the Russian 'bad guys'.
    Duchess64, a notoriously hard-line Stalinofascist, publishes another rambling, lie-packed apology for that mass murdering war criminal and dictator, Vladimir Vissarionovich Putin.

    What a Dutchess64 surprise...
  5. 11 Jul '15 14:30
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    Duchess64, a notoriously hard-line Stalinofascist, publishes another rambling, lie-packed apology for that mass murdering war criminal and dictator, Vladimir Vissarionovich Putin.

    What a Dutchess64 surprise...
    What about the mass murdering war criminal GW Bush? Are you giving him a pass? Obama is killing people with air strikes on Iraq and Syria. Isn't he a mass murderer too? What about the Saudi kingdom? Yemen is not exactly blessed with peace right now. I could go on and on.
  6. 11 Jul '15 17:51 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by bill718
    There are a few grains of truth here. Missing from this post however is the fact that America has no plan whatsoever to "conquer" Russia. Napoleon, the Kaiser, and Hitler all tried to do this, and failed. It can't be done, and America knows this.
    "There are a few grains of truth here."
    --Bill718

    So Bill718 fantasizes that he understands Russia better than Stephen Cohen does?

    Bill718 again shows his abysmal misunderstanding of the context.
    Of course, the Russian people are not seriously worried about being *invaded on land*
    by the USA today. One compelling reason is geography. The USA has no significant
    ground forces based near Russia's borders. If Ukraine were to join NATO and the USA
    were to build military bases there, then Russia would undoubtedly feel threatened.

    The Russian's comment (mentioned in my earlier post) was intended as criticism of the
    USA's unwarranted attitude of triumphalism over Russia, which has not yet been conquered.
  7. 11 Jul '15 17:58 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    Duchess64, a notoriously hard-line Stalinofascist, publishes another rambling, lie-packed apology for that mass murdering war criminal and dictator, Vladimir Vissarionovich Putin.

    What a Dutchess64 surprise...
    With Shallow Blue's talent for invective and self-evident 'expertise' on Russia, why doesn't
    he apply to replace Stephen Cohen as a professor of Russian studies at New York University?

    "..mass murdering war criminal and dictator Vladimir *Vissarionovich* (sic) Putin"
    --Shallow Blue

    When Shallow Blue insults someone, he should at least get the Russian name right.
    Putin's correct patronymic is 'Vladimirovich' (his father's named 'Vladimir' ).
  8. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    11 Jul '15 19:31
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    With Shallow Blue's talent for invective and self-evident 'expertise' on Russia, why doesn't
    he apply to replace Stephen Cohen as a professor of Russian studies at New York University?

    "..mass murdering war criminal and dictator Vladimir *Vissarionovich* (sic) Putin"
    --Shallow Blue

    When Shallow Blue insults someone, he should at least get the Russian name right.
    Putin's correct patronymic is 'Vladimirovich' (his father's named 'Vladimir' ).
    Putin’s Culture of Fear and Death

    Boris Nemtsov threw his big body, big voice and big heart into the uphill battle to keep democracy alive in Russia.

    By
    Garry Kasparov

    March 1, 2015 5:41 p.m. ET

    Boris Nemtsov, my longtime friend and colleague in the Russian opposition, was murdered in the middle of Moscow on Friday night. Four bullets in the back ended his life in sight of the Kremlin, where he once worked as Boris Yeltsin’s deputy prime minister. Photos showed a cleaning crew scrubbing his blood off the pavement within hours of the murder, so it is not difficult to imagine the quality of the investigation to come.

    Vladimir Putin actually started, and ended, the inquiry while Boris’s body was still warm by calling the murder a “provocation,” the term of art for suggesting that the Russian president’s enemies are murdering one another to bring shame upon the shameless. He then brazenly sent his condolences to Boris’s mother, who had often warned her fearless son that his actions could get him killed in Putin’s Russia.

    Hours after Boris’s death, news reports said that police were raiding his home and confiscating papers and computers. President Putin’s enemies are often victims and his victims are always suspects.

    Boris was a passionate critic of Mr. Putin’s war in Ukraine and was finishing a report on the presence of Russian soldiers in the ravaged Donbas region, a matter that the Kremlin has spared no effort to cover up. But the question “Did Putin give the order?” rings as hollow today as when journalist Anna Politkovskaya was gunned down in 2006, the same year that Putin critic Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned in London—or when a Malaysia Airlines passenger jet was shot down over eastern Ukraine last year.
    ...

    Mr. Kasparov is the chairman of the New York-based Human Rights Foundation. His book on Vladimir Putin, “Winter Is Coming,” will be published by Public Affairs in the fall.

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/garry-kasparov-putins-culture-of-fear-and-death-1425249677

    Perhaps it would do you good to read this book “Winter Is Coming" written by Garry. Kasparov.
  9. 11 Jul '15 19:42 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    [quote][b]Putin’s Culture of Fear and Death

    Boris Nemtsov threw his big body, big voice and big heart into the uphill battle to keep democracy alive in Russia.

    By
    Garry Kasparov

    March 1, 2015 5:41 p.m. ET

    Boris Nemtsov, my longtime friend and colleague in the Russian opposition, was murdered in the middle of Moscow on Friday night. Fou ...[text shortened]... erhaps it would do you good to read this book “Winter Is Coming" written by Garry.[/b] Kasparov.[/b]
    RJHinds has been running around putting up this same post in more than one forum.
    I may browse through Kasparov's new political book, but I find it hard to take seriously
    the opinions of someone who believes the absurd 'New Chronology' of history.
    Kasparov's the most famous supporter of this nonsense.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)

    Kasparov has closely aligned himself with American neo-conservatives. As such, he's taken
    much more seriously by hard right-wing American publications such as the 'Wall Street Journal'
    than by most Russians. While I believe that Putin should be criticized and challenged,
    Kasparov's one of the least credible--among most Russians--critics of Putin.
  10. 11 Jul '15 20:05
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    Duchess64, a notoriously hard-line Stalinofascist, publishes another rambling, lie-packed apology for that mass murdering war criminal and dictator, Vladimir Vissarionovich Putin.

    What a Dutchess64 surprise...
    My post consisted chiefly of quotations from Stephen Cohen, an American Jewish scholar of Russia.

    Shallow Blue seems to have been born too late. Given his hysterical Russophobia,
    if Shallow Blue had been born in the early 1920s, he could have joined the approximately
    45,000-55,000 (according to Wikipedia) other Dutchmen who volunteered to fight in
    the Waffen-SS against the USSR. Among all the non-Axis countries, the Netherlands
    has the distinction of supplying the highest number of volunteers for the Waffen-SS.
    But perhaps it's not too late! Shallow Blue still could volunteer to join the Azov Battalion.
    (By the way, I have met right-wing Ukrainian nationalists who admire Stepan Bandera.)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion

    If we had been born earlier, my Russian Jewish friends and I would have been on the other side.
  11. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    11 Jul '15 20:38 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    RJHinds has been running around putting up this same post in more than one forum.
    I may browse through Kasparov's new political book, but I find it hard to take seriously
    the opinions of someone who believes the absurd 'New Chronology' of history.
    Kasparov's the most famous supporter of this nonsense.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fome ...[text shortened]... ed and challenged,
    Kasparov's one of the least credible--among most Russians--critics of Putin.
    I have not looked into the 'New Chronology' of history controversy. And this is the first i have heard that Kasparov believes in the 'New Chronology' of history.

    However, we do have what is called 'Dark Ages' and much of our current accepted history is not without controversy. So I do not see the fact that Kasparov is questioning some aspects of history troubling, since such questioning has often uncovered information that was not known.

    Since none of us were there to know for sure what happened, his supposed beliefs on those historical times is really of no importance to the validity of his views of present times. So whether he is right are wrong on the history of the Middle Ages does not mean he does not know what is happening in his own lifetime.
  12. 11 Jul '15 20:58
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I have not looked into the 'New Chronology' of history controversy. And this is the first i have heard that Kasparov believes in the 'New Chronology' of history.

    However, we do have what is called 'Dark Ages' and much of our current accepted history is not without controversy. So I do not see the fact that Kasparov is questioning some aspects of history ...[text shortened]... history of the Middle Ages does not mean he does not know what is happening in his own lifetime.
    Kasparov's believing in the 'New Chronology' of history might be compared to RJHinds
    believing in 'young earth creationism'.
  13. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    11 Jul '15 21:17
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Kasparov's believing in the 'New Chronology' of history might be compared to RJHinds
    believing in 'young earth creationism'.
    I guess i have reduced you to straw man arguments.

    The Near Genius
  14. 11 Jul '15 23:17
    Which country and political system would you rather live in ?
  15. 12 Jul '15 01:49 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by FishHead111
    Which country and political system would you rather live in ?
    Obviously the Russian.

    Personally I see little difference between what the US has today and what Russia had then and still has today. What's the difference between a one party system and a two part party system?