Russian airstrikes in Syria

[Socialist Czechia]

There was, like, never communism anywhere.

There were, though, some more or less unsuccesful attempts to create socialism.

Which doesn't necessarily means that whole effort was for nothing.
Perhaps because it's so hard to create it, it's so worth it.

No shit, thanks to human nature known as Greed.

I love to argue about undeniable 'human nature' I can't possibly change through socialism. You know, it's true. Seriously.

But why to end there?

If my nature is to procreate, which really is and I am male, can I rape any women I want?

It's my nature, man! Respect my right to reproduce!

[The balkens]

No shit, thanks to human nature known as Greed.

I love to argue about undeniable 'human nature' I can't possibly change through socialism. You know, it's true. Seriously.

But why to end there?

If my nature is to procreate, which really is and I am male, can I rape any women I want?

It's my nature, man! Respect my right to reproduce!

And why we have laws. Or are just deliberately being stupid?

[Imperializt Russia]

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic, kiddies.

[The balkens]

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic, kiddies.

Chill fam.

[Novorossiya Soviet Ukraine]

Allah Souriya Bashar ou bassss!

Labbaik Ya Abu Ali Putin!

Thank God Mother Russia hast decided to mobilise in Syria.

In one working week, they hath torn ISIS asunder, Duty Free!

Uraaaaa!

[The Military Department of Freedonia]

This whole situation is funny. Putin is playing Barack Obama like a violin. Putin is not honest and is out for Assad since he is anally of Russia. If only we supported Israel like this we could benefit in a similar manner (and show strength, which is all the Russians and radical Islamic terrorists understand). I do think we should focus on taking out ISIS before we bother with Assad. Assad is evil, but he is not as much of a threat to the US as ISIS is. The removal of Bashar al Assad should be a secondary objective (He's from the same cloth as Saddam Hussein, and probably obtained his chemical weapons from Hussein. Remember when Saddam was gassing the Iraqi Kurds?!). We should have never shown weakness in the region and should have been the first to put boots on the ground (first in Iraq, so that as many Syrian troops are eliminated by ISIS as possible before we engage them or support a coalition that would engage them. It's always better to let your enemies slaughter each other, and then go in to clean up the mess and choose a winner.). Since we failed to take the lead on this, the Russians filled the void and are trying to take our place as THE world superpower (Vladimir Putin is an old KGB man who would like to restore the Soviet Empire, and unseat the Western nations while he's at it).

[The balkens]

Allah Souriya Bashar ou bassss!

Labbaik Ya Abu Ali Putin!

Thank God Mother Russia hast decided to mobilise in Syria.

In one working week, they hath torn ISIS asunder, Duty Free!

Uraaaaa!

I need a drink.

[Socialist Czechia]

I love to argue about undeniable 'human nature' I can't possibly change through socialism. You know, it's true. Seriously.

But why to end there?

If my nature is to procreate, which really is and I am male, can I rape any women I want?

It's my nature, man! Respect my right to reproduce!

And why we have laws. Or are just deliberately being stupid?

Then you have nothing against anti-greed laws, I hope. Like state's right to nationalize your stuff if other people needs it more than you.

respect all the laws.

[New Werpland]

So was communism, since it still influences edgy white teenagers that think they are entitled to shit.

There was, like, never communism anywhere.

There were, though, some more or less unsuccesful attempts to create socialism.

So again, project like EU can be repeated later. Which exists now is just completely wrong and can barely survives on daily basis. One day, one crisis, efforts in Bruxelles won't be enough, and structure will finally fall.

Which doesn't necessarily means that whole effort was for nothing.
Perhaps because it's so hard to create it, it's so worth it.

The USSR was for the most part State Socialist, that is undeniable.

Part of the reason for it's survival was it's oil, right now it's not very easy to have your economy survive on that. Meanwhile the rest of the economy was extremely unproductive and in recession, with nearly 50% of it's food coming from the remaining uncollectivized farms that existed in Siberia and elsewhere.

[The Military Department of Freedonia]

I love to argue about undeniable 'human nature' I can't possibly change through socialism. You know, it's true. Seriously.

But why to end there?

If my nature is to procreate, which really is and I am male, can I rape any women I want?

It's my nature, man! Respect my right to reproduce!

And why we have laws. Or are just deliberately being stupid?

He's making a point (and a dumb one at that).

[The balkens]

And why we have laws. Or are just deliberately being stupid?

Then you have nothing against anti-greed laws, I hope. Like state's right to nationalize your stuff if other people needs it more than you.

respect all the laws.

Shit that i paid for?

Fuck no.

[The Military Department of Freedonia]

And why we have laws. Or are just deliberately being stupid?

Then you have nothing against anti-greed laws, I hope. Like state's right to nationalize your stuff if other people needs it more than you.

respect all the laws.

Nationalizing private property (is off-topic) is wrong because it is privately earned and, thus, privately owned. If government takes it then there is no incentive to work harder and be inventive, because there is no extra reward.

[Socialist Czechia]

There was, like, never communism anywhere.

There were, though, some more or less unsuccesful attempts to create socialism.

So again, project like EU can be repeated later. Which exists now is just completely wrong and can barely survives on daily basis. One day, one crisis, efforts in Bruxelles won't be enough, and structure will finally fall.

Which doesn't necessarily means that whole effort was for nothing.
Perhaps because it's so hard to create it, it's so worth it.

The USSR was for the most part State Socialist, that is undeniable.

Part of the reason for it's survival was it's oil, right now it's not very easy to have your economy survive on that. Meanwhile the rest of the economy was extremely unproductive and in recession, with nearly 50% of it's food coming from the remaining uncollectivized farms that existed in Siberia and elsewhere.

Such planned economy led to ineffiency. Fortunately, there were also more succesful attempts. Like Yugoslavia, free socialist state with opened borders and succesful economy, controlled mostly through democratic worker's cooperatives.

[Geilinor]

The USSR was for the most part State Socialist, that is undeniable.

Part of the reason for it's survival was it's oil, right now it's not very easy to have your economy survive on that. Meanwhile the rest of the economy was extremely unproductive and in recession, with nearly 50% of it's food coming from the remaining uncollectivized farms that existed in Siberia and elsewhere.

Such planned economy led to ineffiency. Fortunately, there were also more succesful attempts. Like Yugoslavia, free socialist state with opened borders and succesful economy, controlled mostly through democratic worker's cooperatives.

Yugoslavia was known for having high unemployment and inflation during most of its history.

[The Military Department of Freedonia]

There was, like, never communism anywhere.

There were, though, some more or less unsuccesful attempts to create socialism.

So again, project like EU can be repeated later. Which exists now is just completely wrong and can barely survives on daily basis. One day, one crisis, efforts in Bruxelles won't be enough, and structure will finally fall.

Which doesn't necessarily means that whole effort was for nothing.
Perhaps because it's so hard to create it, it's so worth it.

The USSR was for the most part State Socialist, that is undeniable.

Part of the reason for it's survival was it's oil, right now it's not very easy to have your economy survive on that. Meanwhile the rest of the economy was extremely unproductive and in recession, with nearly 50% of it's food coming from the remaining uncollectivized farms that existed in Siberia and elsewhere.

To the person you quoted, North Korea is pretty much as pure as communism gets. Pure communism cannot exist because it requires "perfect utopian people". Newsflash: PEOPLE AREN'T PERFECT!

[Socialist Czechia]

Then you have nothing against anti-greed laws, I hope. Like state's right to nationalize your stuff if other people needs it more than you.

respect all the laws.

Nationalizing private property (is off-topic) is wrong because it is privately earned and, thus, privately owned. If government takes it then there is no incentive to work harder and be inventive, because there is no extra reward.

It's natural for human states for like whole known history since Ice Age.
If Chieftain, King or Republic wanted something, they had it. And you couldn't do anything against it.

Of course, except rebellion.
Not that risk of it ever stopped State from trying to do that.

[The Military Department of Freedonia]

Such planned economy led to ineffiency. Fortunately, there were also more succesful attempts. Like Yugoslavia, free socialist state with opened borders and succesful economy, controlled mostly through democratic worker's cooperatives.

Yugoslavia was known for having high unemployment and inflation during most of its history.

Why would someone want a communist/extremely socialist nation to succeed. It sucks for the average person. Capitalism is not perfect, but it's better for the average person than that economic system. Besides, for the leftist among you, there is no pure capitalism, at least in the US, because there are social safety nets like food stamps and unemployment insurance for those at the bottom. Even our poor do better than most in some other nations, especially as time goes on and state-of-the-art things become less expensive due to "shelf-life" and efficiency in production that results from the success of businesses when the government gets its foot off of their throat.

[The balkens]

Anyway.

Apparently no one died in the first bombing. Either Russian targeting systems are that shitty or....

[Geilinor]

Yugoslavia was known for having high unemployment and inflation during most of its history.

Why would someone want a communist/extremely socialist nation to succeed. It sucks for the average person. Capitalism is not perfect, but it's better for the average person than that economic system. Besides, for the leftist among you, there is no pure capitalism, at least in the US, because there are social safety nets like food stamps and unemployment insurance for those at the bottom. Even our poor do better than most in some other nations, especially as time goes on and state-of-the-art things become less expensive due to "shelf-life" and efficiency in production that results from the success of businesses when the government gets its foot off of their throat.

Oh, I don't support a planned economy. I was only pointing out that Yugoslavia wasn't as good as some of its defenders point out. The advantage in my view was the independent foreign policy.

[Ararat Mountain]

Could this possibly make the mass immigrations from the area and Africa even worse? (If it could even get any worse than it is)

[The Military Department of Freedonia]

Nationalizing private property (is off-topic) is wrong because it is privately earned and, thus, privately owned. If government takes it then there is no incentive to work harder and be inventive, because there is no extra reward.

It's natural for human states for like whole known history since Ice Age.
If Chieftain, King or Republic wanted something, they had it. And you couldn't do anything against it.

Of course, except rebellion.
Not that risk of it ever stopped State from trying to do that.

The difference is that loyal servants of monarchs usually got some sort of bonus (like land or knighthood) for doing something exceptionally well, so there was incentive to advance. Also, the introduction of Christianity to many parts of the world resulted in prosperity (because of Christian work-ethic, and maybe God's plan).

[Geilinor]

Could this possibly make the mass immigrations from the area and Africa even worse? (If it could even get any worse than it is)

I don't know, but if Russia makes Syria worse it's their mess to clean up.

[The balkens]

Could this possibly make the mass immigrations from the area and Africa even worse? (If it could even get any worse than it is)

I don't know, but if Russia makes Syria worse it's their mess to clean up.

So we can stop caring about Syria and let Russia get bogged down?
Im down for that.

[Neu Leonstein]

They did do a poor job of it, the thieves of the 90s have been systematically driven from power and the economic assets of Russia are now managed in such a way as to benefit the people of that country.

Well... kinda depends on your time horizon. In the immediate near term, I guess you could say that, what with more people employed by the state sector now than there were at times in the USSR. But if you look a little bit in the future, Putin's social contract has become largely about the oil price. Presumably there are plenty of smart folks in Russia who know this and can see how unsustainable it all is. For some details, see here: http://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/iaiwp1524.pdf

This is a crazy expensive exercise in Putin thinking he can demonstrate how Russia is some sort of world power by "fixing" what he sees as the US having fucked up. But the truth is that Russia can't afford to be a world power. I guess Putin doesn't want to accept that (as I guess would be the case for many Russian people), and at any rate, he's not going to be around for long enough for that realisation to have serious consequences for him. And if anything, in the short run demonstrations like this one serve to strengthen nationalism and thereby distract from all the stuff that's going wrong. So yeah, from the perspective of Putin and his inner circle, this all makes sense. What doesn't make sense is why so many people in Russia are not more seriously questioning the sustainability of the system Putin offers.

But I guess that's common across a lot of countries... easier to benefit in the short-run and be happy with that than to do something uncomfortable today to be in a better place tomorrow.

[The Military Department of Freedonia]

Why would someone want a communist/extremely socialist nation to succeed. It sucks for the average person. Capitalism is not perfect, but it's better for the average person than that economic system. Besides, for the leftist among you, there is no pure capitalism, at least in the US, because there are social safety nets like food stamps and unemployment insurance for those at the bottom. Even our poor do better than most in some other nations, especially as time goes on and state-of-the-art things become less expensive due to "shelf-life" and efficiency in production that results from the success of businesses when the government gets its foot off of their throat.

Oh, I don't support a planned economy. I was only pointing out that Yugoslavia wasn't as good as some of its defenders point out. The advantage in my view was the independent foreign policy.

I know what you meant. I was actually attacking the person you were quoting who sounded like they were disappointed that Yugoslavia and the USSR failed.