Russian Politics Thread: Добро пожаловать!

[Robert Bork]

/sarcasm so Shofercia doesn't get offended

[Shofercia]

/sarcasm so Shofercia doesn't get offended

Making not one, but two posts that contribute little to the thread, but I'm sure that their objective is most certainly not to get me offended.

[Robert Bork]

Russia left Syria? That's news to me. Putin utilized PR to point out that Russia's leaving Syria, when it was a simple troop rotation. The sheer amount of Western Journalists falling for it was hilarious. But Russia's still very much in Syria. The Russians are taking a break from pounding insurgents, but if you're ISIS in Syria, you probably shouldn't go anywhere near Palmyra or Latakia, unless you want a date with a good looking SpetzNaz bullet.

I see no evidence that it was merely a troop rotation. All of the sources I've read indicate that the intensity of the Russian intervention has strongly decreased since the announcement. Maybe I'm just being duped by the Western journalists, but I'm going to require some sources on this if you will provide them.

Also, I've only ever seen the SpetzNaz in Call of Duty, so I can't really speak on your imagery. [joking][/sarcasm][This remark was intended merely in jest. I make no claims to the validity or accuracy of its content.]

As for Clinton not bombing Assad - many reasons why. First, she won't have the American people behind her. It was the American Public that prevented the original Syrian Quagmire. Second, she won't have the Republicans behind her either, since for them, it'll be a nice chance to humiliate Hillary. Third, she'll be facing off directly with Russia, and indirectly with China. Not a good idea. She knows how to calculate the odds of success. Yes, she's a self-serving individual, but she isn't insane. Fourth, she isn't going to want to be tarred as badly as Bush was.

The American public is notoriously easy to sway. And why should Hilary Clinton be afraid of Russia and China?

You should know Republicans by now, too. They're going to attack Clinton for anything she does regardless. I doubt she's afraid to act based on their perceptions alone.

[Shofercia]

Russia left Syria? That's news to me. Putin utilized PR to point out that Russia's leaving Syria, when it was a simple troop rotation. The sheer amount of Western Journalists falling for it was hilarious. But Russia's still very much in Syria. The Russians are taking a break from pounding insurgents, but if you're ISIS in Syria, you probably shouldn't go anywhere near Palmyra or Latakia, unless you want a date with a good looking SpetzNaz bullet.

I see no evidence that it was merely a troop rotation. All of the sources I've read indicate that the intensity of the Russian intervention has strongly decreased since the announcement. Maybe I'm just being duped by the Western journalists, but I'm going to require some sources on this if you will provide them.

Also, I've only ever seen the SpetzNaz in Call of Duty, so I can't really speak on your imagery. [joking][/sarcasm][This remark was intended merely in jest. I make no claims to the validity or accuracy of its content.]

As for Clinton not bombing Assad - many reasons why. First, she won't have the American people behind her. It was the American Public that prevented the original Syrian Quagmire. Second, she won't have the Republicans behind her either, since for them, it'll be a nice chance to humiliate Hillary. Third, she'll be facing off directly with Russia, and indirectly with China. Not a good idea. She knows how to calculate the odds of success. Yes, she's a self-serving individual, but she isn't insane. Fourth, she isn't going to want to be tarred as badly as Bush was.

The American public is notoriously easy to sway. And why should Hilary Clinton be afraid of Russia and China?

You should know Republicans by now, too. They're going to attack Clinton for anything she does regardless. I doubt she's afraid to act based on their perceptions alone.

That was funny. Especially this part:

As for Clinton not bombing Assad - many reasons why. First, she won't have the American people behind her. It was the American Public that prevented the original Syrian Quagmire. Second, she won't have the Republicans behind her either, since for them, it'll be a nice chance to humiliate Hillary. Third, she'll be facing off directly with Russia, and indirectly with China. Not a good idea. She knows how to calculate the odds of success. Yes, she's a self-serving individual, but she isn't insane. Fourth, she isn't going to want to be tarred as badly as Bush was.

You should know Republicans by now, too. They're going to attack Clinton for anything she does regardless. I doubt she's afraid to act based on their perceptions alone.

You certainly know how to entertain.

[Robert Bork]

I see no evidence that it was merely a troop rotation. All of the sources I've read indicate that the intensity of the Russian intervention has strongly decreased since the announcement. Maybe I'm just being duped by the Western journalists, but I'm going to require some sources on this if you will provide them.

Also, I've only ever seen the SpetzNaz in Call of Duty, so I can't really speak on your imagery. [joking][/sarcasm][This remark was intended merely in jest. I make no claims to the validity or accuracy of its content.]



The American public is notoriously easy to sway. And why should Hilary Clinton be afraid of Russia and China?

You should know Republicans by now, too. They're going to attack Clinton for anything she does regardless. I doubt she's afraid to act based on their perceptions alone.

That was funny. Especially this part:

You should know Republicans by now, too. They're going to attack Clinton for anything she does regardless. I doubt she's afraid to act based on their perceptions alone.

You certainly know how to entertain.

You noticed.

[Shofercia]

That was funny. Especially this part:



You certainly know how to entertain.

You noticed.

Some things are hard to miss, irrespective of how much one wants to miss it.

[Baltenstein]

So a single post represents all of Russians? And didn't you swear to have me on ignore earlier?

Yes I did, I only klick on your hidden posts to have a laugh every now and then.

You should also point out that the moon is made of cheese while you're at it. I've stated numerous times that the reason for it isn't hurr-durr Muslims, but rather the lack of integration and the number of immigrants. "Hey, let's bomb a country in Africa/Middle East. Oh shit, we're getting refugees from these countries we bombed, I wonder, where is this causation thing? Oh well, let's take them all in, while doing a half ass job funding integration programs. Wait, why aren't they integrating? Why is the racial violence on the streets? Damn it, it's all Putin's fault! And Trump's! And Berlusconi's! It's totally not our fault, that people are hurt as a result of our policies, as Neolibs we're innocent lambs! No causation whatsoever!"

Yes, clearly rising religious/racial tensions in Germany are linked to Germany bombing African/Middle East countries. Because that's what Germany has done extensively in the past couple of decades. You know which country actually did drop bombs in Syria in the recent past?
Also, I was wondering when you would write your trademark "Hurr-durr, I iz stupid for disagreeing with Shof" dialogue aggain. Took you a while. Could you name those "half ass integration programs" that "Neo-libs" are taking funds away from? Becaue I don't think so.
Also, what do Trump and Berlusconi have to do with any of this? Who even mentioned them?

We actually don't know that. We do know that after Neoliberal/Neoconservative policies there was/is a growth of Islamophobia in Europe. Meanwhile the Russians are restoring Mosques: http://sputniknews.com/russia/20150924/1027431086.html

We also know that after climate change, there is a growth of Islamophobia in Europe. Clearly the two are connected.
Meanwhile, the Russian Federation is following a "zero asylum acceptance" policy in regards to Syria - a country which, unlike Germany, it actually is bombing - which I'm sure is much appreciated by Muslims as well. After, all, the Russians are building Mosques (which Western European countries are also doing, but whatevs)
What the Russian government has also been very busy at lately, is buliding amicable ties with almost every anti-Muslim party in Europe. Not to mention its traditional stance on matters related to the Yugoslavian conflicts.
As I said earlier: Should the claim in the Islam thread pop up that Russia is somehow a friend and protector of Muslims in Western Europe, I'll just link to this thread and let people draw their own conclusions.

By, the way, considering that racial/religious tensions are also sky-high in Russia (and are actually worse there than in Western Europe), I wonder who is responsible for that? Putin's neoliberal policies?

[Mahdistan]

And as we all know, most, if not all, Muslims find this intervention righteous and awesome.

Understandably we are a minority overall, but not a fringe one. I and most others who support it do for a number of reasons, namely because Russia seems to be the only one taking the fight against ISIS seriously, and is actively engaging them. They also don't have an agenda to split up Syria, and want to return the country back to its former strength. And, they're the only ones hitting their supply lines going into Turkey, while America ignores them because they might implicate their ally in aiding ISIS.

Would I like to see Russia accept some refugees? Sure, but I certainly understand their reasoning for not. I much prefer their strategy of stabilizing Syria, so there don't have to be refugees in the first place. Furthermore, Russian expectations for integrating Muslims are much better than those of Western Europe. Germany and the like expect Muslims to give up integral beliefs in the religion in exchange for local values to be considered 'integrated'. In Russia, Muslims are a part of the history of the nation, and thus are already given a role to play rather than forcing them to give up any part of themselves to 'join' society.

[Mahdistan]

Yes, clearly rising religious/racial tensions in Germany are linked to Germany bombing African/Middle East countries. Because that's what Germany has done extensively in the past couple of decades. You know which country actually did drop bombs in Syria in the recent past?

While Germany specifically didn't bomb Libya, it said nothing as the rest of NATO used its ports and bases for the operation. Germany could have refused, and/or withdrawn from NATO, but they let it happen, and now the Libyan refugee crises is ridiculously large as well, just not as covered by the media. Similarly, Germany is contributing to the system of funding rebels in Syria, destabilizing the nation and creating the crises in the first place, and is not just condoning the action of the Turks, but actually bending to Erdogan's will. If Germany wants an end to the crises, they will cut off all aid to rebels, turn to support the Syrian government, exit NATO, and immediately sanction, or worse, Turkey. But that likely won't happen, so the crises will continue.

[Baltenstein]

Understandably we are a minority overall, but not a fringe one. I and most others who support it do for a number of reasons, namely because Russia seems to be the only one taking the fight against ISIS seriously, and is actively engaging them. They also don't have an agenda to split up Syria, and want to return the country back to its former strength.

Of course, you do. You're Shiite, and the vast majority of Shiites is pro-Assad. The vast majority of Sunnis is not, though.

Would I like to see Russia accept some refugees? Sure, but I certainly understand their reasoning for not. I much prefer their strategy of stabilizing Syria, so there don't have to be refugees in the first place. Furthermore, Russian expectations for integrating Muslims are much better than those of Western Europe.

Russian Muslims (Tatars etc) are part of Russia's identity and history. Arab Muslims most certainly aren't. And Islam in Russia works best in the regions where it has always been the traditinal religion of the land, like Tatarstan. Where Muslims have arrived recently (like in Moscow), tensions and hostility are just as bad, if not worse, than in Western Europe.
Not that it matters anyway, because it doesn't look like Russia is going to change its "zero refugees" policy anytime soon.

Germany and the like expect Muslims to give up integral beliefs in the religion in exchange for local values to be considered 'integrated'.

If they don't want this, they shouldn't go there. Western European society is already far more lenient towards keeping your traditional customs and beliefs as a Muslim immigrant than most other places in the world.

While Germany specifically didn't bomb Libya, it said nothing as the rest of NATO used its ports and bases for the operation. Germany could have refused, and/or withdrawn from NATO

That's ridiculous. You really think any country would leave NATO over such relatively minor foreign policy disagreements?

If Germany wants an end to the crises, they will cut off all aid to rebels, turn to support the Syrian government, exit NATO, and immediately sanction, or worse, Turkey.

The one thing I agree with you at is that Germany, and the EU as a whole, need to take a harsher stance against Erdogan's bullshit. However, unilaterally supporting Assad is not the solution. He let this clusterfuck situation escalate in the first place. And most people in Syria outside of the Alawites and the minorities don't want him anymore.

[Mahdistan]

Understandably we are a minority overall, but not a fringe one. I and most others who support it do for a number of reasons, namely because Russia seems to be the only one taking the fight against ISIS seriously, and is actively engaging them. They also don't have an agenda to split up Syria, and want to return the country back to its former strength.

Of course, you do. You're Shiite, and the vast majority of Shiites is pro-Assad. The vast majority of Sunnis is not, though.

Would I like to see Russia accept some refugees? Sure, but I certainly understand their reasoning for not. I much prefer their strategy of stabilizing Syria, so there don't have to be refugees in the first place. Furthermore, Russian expectations for integrating Muslims are much better than those of Western Europe.

Russian Muslims (Tatars etc) are part of Russia's identity and history. Arab Muslims most certainly aren't. And Islam in Russia works best in the regions where it has always been the traditinal religion of the land, like Tatarstan. Where Muslims have arrived recently (like in Moscow), tensions and hostility are just as bad, if not worse, than in Western Europe.
Not that it matters anyway, because it doesn't look like Russia is going to change its "zero refugees" policy anytime soon.

Germany and the like expect Muslims to give up integral beliefs in the religion in exchange for local values to be considered 'integrated'.

If they don't want this, they shouldn't go there. Western European society is already far more lenient towards keeping your traditional customs and beliefs as a Muslim immigrant than most other places in the world.

While Germany specifically didn't bomb Libya, it said nothing as the rest of NATO used its ports and bases for the operation. Germany could have refused, and/or withdrawn from NATO

That's ridiculous. You really think any country would leave NATO over such relatively minor foreign policy disagreements?

If Germany wants an end to the crises, they will cut off all aid to rebels, turn to support the Syrian government, exit NATO, and immediately sanction, or worse, Turkey.

The one thing I agree with you at is that Germany, and the EU as a whole, need to taking a harsher stance against Erdogan's bullshit. However, unilaterally supporting Assad is not the solution. He let this clusterfuck situation escalate in the first place. And most people in Syria outside of the Alawites and the minorities don't want him anymore.

I don't support Assad, just the Syrian government. If conditions were better, I would like to see Assad gone, but the situation dictates that only Assad can save the country from chaos. And note that this isn't for sectarian reasons; I would prefer a government more representative of the Sunni majority, but the cost would just be too heavy.

And in my mind, it's reasonable to expect religions to keep generally separate in society, and for the most part, this has proven successful in Russia. Dislike towards Arabs is more of an ethnic tension than a religious one, and my point was that Islam as a religion is generally less discriminated upon in Russia than in Western Europe. The German government, as well, invited these people in, without considering that the German population is much less considerate of Muslims than the government. Russia has few movements to discriminate against Muslims compared to Germany and the like.

And an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation is considerably bigger than a simple foreign policy decision. NATO's action was illegal, and Germany and all the countries involved should have been aware of that. I don't expect they will, but nonetheless, it would make them less responsible for the refugee crises. Like I said, I don't like Assad either, but it's either support a Middle-Eastern dictator, or prolong the refugee crises and risk greater expansion by ISIS. As well, had the United States, with NATO's blessing, not funded rebels in Syria in the first place, the situation might be a lot more under control.

[Baltenstein]

I don't support Assad, just the Syrian government.

But he is the Syrian government.

And in my mind, it's reasonable to expect religions to keep generally separate in society, and for the most part, this has proven successful in Russia. Dislike towards Arabs is more of an ethnic tension than a religious one, and my point was that Islam as a religion is generally less discriminated upon in Russia than in Western Europe.

I highly doubt that. Do you have any numbers to support this?

The German government, as well, invited these people in, without considering that the German population is much less considerate of Muslims than the government.

While I agree that Merkel's handling of the situation was pretty craptastic, here's what happened in late summer of 2015: There were hundreds of thousand of migrants/refugees stuck in Budapest between the central train station and Orban's police force, not being able to go anywhere. The situation was getting increasingly tense and explosive. This was the background which made the German government decide to grant them asylum status - it was only adressed to this particular group of people. Twitter, Facebook and human trafficker propaganda then warped the message into stating that Germany wants half the Muslim world to come over and will give them free housing and benefits and shit. Which motivated hundreds of thousands of people from the Maghreb and other regions - people who never had any right to claim refugee status in the first place - to make the journey.
So yes, the German government made a major blunder. But it's not as if they invited people from outside the EU into the EU on purpose. They wanted to defuse the situation in Hungary.

Russia has few movements to discriminate against Muslims compared to Germany and the like.

Again, numbers? Because comparing, say, the number of Neo-Nazi movements and racist murders in Russia to those in Germany surely doesn't make it seem that way.

And an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation is considerably bigger than a simple foreign policy decision. NATO's action was illegal, and Germany and all the countries involved should have been aware of that. I don't expect they will, but nonetheless, it would make them less responsible for the refugee crises. Like I said, I don't like Assad either, but it's either support a Middle-Eastern dictator, or prolong the refugee crises and risk greater expansion by ISIS. As well, had the United States, with NATO's blessing, not funded rebels in Syria in the first place, the situation might be a lot more under control.

Lots of players, including Assad, have screwed up royally in Syria. But speaking of Germany, they gave weapon support to Kurdish groups - the very same groups that Russia is now supporting too, after their recent fallout with Erdogan. Would you say supporting the Kurds was/is wrong too?

[Mahdistan]

I don't support Assad, just the Syrian government.

But he is the Syrian government.

And in my mind, it's reasonable to expect religions to keep generally separate in society, and for the most part, this has proven successful in Russia. Dislike towards Arabs is more of an ethnic tension than a religious one, and my point was that Islam as a religion is generally less discriminated upon in Russia than in Western Europe.

I highly doubt that. Do you have any numbers to support this?

The German government, as well, invited these people in, without considering that the German population is much less considerate of Muslims than the government.

While I agree that Merkel's handling of the situation was pretty craptastic, here's what happened in late summer of 2015: There were hundreds of thousand of migrants/refugees stuck in Budapest between the central train station and Orban's police force, not being able to go anywhere. The situation was getting increasingly tense and explosive. This was the background which made the German government decide to grant them asylum status - it was only adressed to this particular group of people. Twitter, Facebook and human trafficker propaganda then warped the message into stating that Germany wants half the Muslim world to come over and will give them free housing and benefits and shit. Which motivated hundreds of thousands of people from the Maghreb and other regions - people who never had any right to claim refugee status in the first place - to make the journey.
So yes, the German government made a major blunder. But it's not as if they invited people from outside the EU into the EU on purpose. They wanted to defuse the situation in Hungary.

Russia has few movements to discriminate against Muslims compared to Germany and the like.

Again, numbers? Because comparing, say, the number of Neo-Nazi movements and racist murders in Russia to those in Germany surely doesn't make it seem that way.

And an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation is considerably bigger than a simple foreign policy decision. NATO's action was illegal, and Germany and all the countries involved should have been aware of that. I don't expect they will, but nonetheless, it would make them less responsible for the refugee crises. Like I said, I don't like Assad either, but it's either support a Middle-Eastern dictator, or prolong the refugee crises and risk greater expansion by ISIS. As well, had the United States, with NATO's blessing, not funded rebels in Syria in the first place, the situation might be a lot more under control.

Lots of players, including Assad, have screwed up royally in Syria. But speaking of Germany, they gave weapon support to Kurdish groups - the very same groups that Russia is now supporting too, after their recent fallout with Erdogan. Would you say supporting the Kurds was/is wrong too?

There are political groups in Syria who are opposed to Assad but wish to maintain the government, the PFCL, for example. And in Russia, there is little controversy on the positions of Muslims in society, and people calling for them to be exiled are a fringe. In Germany, Austria, France, and elsewhere in Western Europe, meanwhile, parties supporting the mass deportation of Muslims on the basis of their religion are making great strides in elections. The majority of Germans have declared Islam has no place in Germany. Meanwhile, the Muslim Kadyrov is among the most respected politicians in Russia.

And like I said above, groups like the ADI are rising in political power in Germany. Individual attacks are a poor gauge of national hatred, because anyone can go out and kill people they don't like. But this shows that hatred of Muslims is high enough that people are willing to make political amendments to see them removed from society. The Nazis are a problem, but they aren't seeing massive strides in the Russian government.

I don't think supporting the Kurds in Syria is the best move, as they have, despite hopes that they'd compromise with the government, proven themselves divisive and are putting their agenda ahead of stabilization. The best move would be to cease supply drops altogether, and join forces with Russia and the Syrian government to just destroy ISIS as fast and decisively as possible.

[Geilinor]

And like I said above, groups like the ADI are rising in political power in Germany. Individual attacks are a poor gauge of national hatred, because anyone can go out and kill people they don't like. But this shows that hatred of Muslims is high enough that people are willing to make political amendments to see them removed from society. The Nazis are a problem, but they aren't seeing massive strides in the Russian government.

Are there actual statistics on this? Russia's third largest party, LDPR is far-right nationalist and I do know there are many skinheads.

[Mahdistan]

And like I said above, groups like the ADI are rising in political power in Germany. Individual attacks are a poor gauge of national hatred, because anyone can go out and kill people they don't like. But this shows that hatred of Muslims is high enough that people are willing to make political amendments to see them removed from society. The Nazis are a problem, but they aren't seeing massive strides in the Russian government.

Are there actual statistics on this? Russia's third largest party, LDPR is far-right nationalist and I do know there are many skinheads.

The LDPR is around, but they aren't really growing. The closest thing to a 'Nazi' party in Russia would probably be the Slavic Union, but they're banned.

[Shofercia]

So a single post represents all of Russians? And didn't you swear to have me on ignore earlier?

Yes I did, I only klick on your hidden posts to have a laugh every now and then.

And yet your posts are so spiteful. Then again, maybe you find spite hilarious, who knows?

You should also point out that the moon is made of cheese while you're at it. I've stated numerous times that the reason for it isn't hurr-durr Muslims, but rather the lack of integration and the number of immigrants. "Hey, let's bomb a country in Africa/Middle East. Oh shit, we're getting refugees from these countries we bombed, I wonder, where is this causation thing? Oh well, let's take them all in, while doing a half ass job funding integration programs. Wait, why aren't they integrating? Why is the racial violence on the streets? Damn it, it's all Putin's fault! And Trump's! And Berlusconi's! It's totally not our fault, that people are hurt as a result of our policies, as Neolibs we're innocent lambs! No causation whatsoever!"

Yes, clearly rising religious/racial tensions in Germany are linked to Germany bombing African/Middle East countries. Because that's what Germany has done extensively in the past couple of decades. You know which country actually did drop bombs in Syria in the recent past?
Also, I was wondering when you would write your trademark "Hurr-durr, I iz stupid for disagreeing with Shof" dialogue aggain. Took you a while. Could you name those "half ass integration programs" that "Neo-libs" are taking funds away from? Becaue I don't think so.
Also, what do Trump and Berlusconi have to do with any of this? Who even mentioned them?

Oh, are tensions only rising in Germany? Because I thought that my post addressed the entire EU. And some EU countries did bomb Africa/Middle East. Generally speaking, bombing an area can produce refugees, I thought that was sort of obvious. Neoliberals are promoting austerity, which take away from education programs, and, last time I checked, education tends to fight ignorance. Since apparently these programs were so hard to find for you, (even though it took me all of five seconds,) I shall post a link: http://www.sirius-migrationeducation.or ... -students/

Minister of Education Mrs. Wanka announced that no more money will be allocated to supporting the integration of foreign university students in Germany. Despite an increasing number of foreign students coming to Germany and measurable economic benefits for the Federal Republic, the ministry will cut funding without substitution.

We actually don't know that. We do know that after Neoliberal/Neoconservative policies there was/is a growth of Islamophobia in Europe. Meanwhile the Russians are restoring Mosques: http://sputniknews.com/russia/20150924/1027431086.html

We also know that after climate change, there is a growth of Islamophobia in Europe. Clearly the two are connected.
Meanwhile, the Russian Federation is following a "zero asylum acceptance" policy in regards to Syria - a country which, unlike Germany, it actually is bombing - which I'm sure is much appreciated by Muslims as well. After, all, the Russians are building Mosques (which Western European countries are also doing, but whatevs)
What the Russian government has also been very busy at lately, is buliding amicable ties with almost every anti-Muslim party in Europe. Not to mention its traditional stance on matters related to the Yugoslavian conflicts.
As I said earlier: Should the claim in the Islam thread pop up that Russia is somehow a friend and protector of Muslims in Western Europe, I'll just link to this thread and let people draw their own conclusions.

By, the way, considering that racial/religious tensions are also sky-high in Russia (and are actually worse there than in Western Europe), I wonder who is responsible for that? Putin's neoliberal policies?

If only there was a way to summarize what's been going on:

1. EU member states bomb countries in the Middle East/Africa.
2. Homes of quite a few people are destroyed, partially by the bombings, partially by the terrorists taking over. This results in homeless people who become refugees.
3. The refugees flee to Europe.
4. This, in turn, increases immigration of people into Europe.
5. Meanwhile in Europe, massive austerity measures start taking place.
6. The voters are pissed off and protest austerity.
7. Education budgets are cut, exposing the countries to more ignorance.
8. As austerity and ignorance are on the rise, immigration hits Europe in massive numbers.
9. As a result, some blame the immigrants, since when immigrants arrived, shit got worse, even though the immigrants had little to do with that.
10. Instead of promoting more education programs, the EU promotes more austerity.
11. As a result, the locals start taking their anger out on the immigrants.
12. Having been bombed in their own countries and not quite getting to the promiseland, the immigrants respond with violence.
13. This, in turn, creates ghettoization, which stokes more and more racial violence.
14. The EU responds with even more austerity measures. Ignorance has now taken full control, if only there was this thing, called properly funded integration education...

Of course Balt starts out with a glorious strawman. His strawman hinges on the claim that I was only talking about Germany, when, in fact, in actual reality, I was talking about the EU as a whole. Not just Germany. There are more countries in the EU than Germany. Russia's stance on Kosovo isn't anti-Muslim, it's anti-KLA. The KLA does not represent all of Muslims, or even most of Muslims, but hey, if you're grasping as straws, you might as well go all the way.

[Geilinor]

Are there actual statistics on this? Russia's third largest party, LDPR is far-right nationalist and I do know there are many skinheads.

The LDPR is around, but they aren't really growing. The closest thing to a 'Nazi' party in Russia would probably be the Slavic Union, but they're banned.

The AfD is growing, but they have less representation than the LDPR (and none federally until the next election).

[Robert Bork]

You noticed.

Some things are hard to miss, irrespective of how much one wants to miss it.

Very low energy.

[Sharania]

NATO isn't going to fight Russia over Eastern Ukraine, especially when the problem can be solved via a Referendum. I know that you want a war, but it's really not going to happen.

I said nothing about NATO fighting Russia in Ukraine - directly. Besides, there will be no need. With right equipment Ukrainian army will be in Moscow in a week with minimal losses.

Instead of "Referendum" these separatist hell-holes will get what they deserve - de-communization and filtration camps, to weed-out all Putin's agents.

By, the way, considering that racial/religious tensions are also sky-high in Russia (and are actually worse there than in Western Europe), I wonder who is responsible for that? Putin's neoliberal policies?

This. Remember anti-Roma pogrom? Shocking, just shocking. Such thing would have never happened in the civilized country.

[Baltenstein]

And yet your posts are so spiteful. Then again, maybe you find spite hilarious, who knows?

Good thing then that your own posts are so free of spite. You literally portray people who disagree with you as mentally challenged in your many, many "funny" dialogues.

Oh, are tensions only rising in Germany? Because I thought that my post addressed the entire EU.

Your original post was about how "neoliberal policies" are making "60 % of Germans" not wanting Islam.

And some EU countries did bomb Africa/Middle East. Generally speaking, bombing an area can produce refugees, I thought that was sort of obvious. Neoliberals are promoting austerity, which take away from education programs, and, last time I checked, education tends to fight ignorance. Since apparently these programs were so hard to find for you, (even though it took me all of five seconds,) I shall post a link: http://www.sirius-migrationeducation.or ... -students/

Of course you would post something that has nothing to do whatsoever with immigrants/refugees, both of which foreign students largely aren't. Foreign students go to a country via legal student visa to study for a limited amount of time and then leave again.
This is not what immigrants and/or refugees are doing. Especially not the current refugee wave.

And of course your obsession with "austerity" strikes again. People have pointed out to you repeatedly that spending vastly more money that you have at your disposal is not somehow an option any country's government can afford to pursue.
Here is what has also happened recently:

- The ECB has introduced a massive program of Quantitative Easing to promote consumption and investments.
- The German government has introduced a minimum wage and earlier pension entry ages.
- The German government has/is spending a massive amount of money on housing and integration programs for the recent huge influx of refugees.

But nope, the only thing they are doing is "austerity".
Of course, if somebody points out that Russia is also slashing it government expenses to balance its budget, like every government ought to do, it stops being "austerity". Then it's okay.
By the way, you also didn't adress where the hostility between Muslim immigrants and Russians in Russia is coming from. Is it austerity there too?

If only there was a way to summarize what's been going on:

1. EU member states bomb countries in the Middle East/Africa.
2. Homes of quite a few people are destroyed, partially by the bombings, partially by the terrorists taking over. This results in homeless people who become refugees.
3. The refugees flee to Europe.

Russia is also bombing in Syria. Quite more so than any European country, in fact. But I suppose Russian bombs don't create refugee waves.

Of course Balt starts out with a glorious strawman.

Says the guy who is literally writing his own dialogue to put stuff into other people's mouth.

Russia's stance on Kosovo isn't anti-Muslim, it's anti-KLA.

Yes, I'm sure it's stance on Bosnia is similarly balanced, and I'm sure Muslims see it the same way.

[Shofercia]

Some things are hard to miss, irrespective of how much one wants to miss it.

Very low energy.

I had no idea that typing required high energy. I, for one, do not need Red Bull to type.

NATO isn't going to fight Russia over Eastern Ukraine, especially when the problem can be solved via a Referendum. I know that you want a war, but it's really not going to happen.

I said nothing about NATO fighting Russia in Ukraine - directly. Besides, there will be no need. With right equipment Ukrainian army will be in Moscow in a week with minimal losses.

Instead of "Referendum" these separatist hell-holes will get what they deserve - de-communization and filtration camps, to weed-out all Putin's agents.

I prefer not marching to Moscow, since that usually ends badly for those who do march, they end up partitioned, have their empires fall, or end up conquered and partitioned, but, then again, maybe Ukraine wants to be partitioned. I'm not sure at this point. Speaking of democracy, I prefer Democratic Referendums over massive violence.

And yet your posts are so spiteful. Then again, maybe you find spite hilarious, who knows?

Good thing then that your own posts are so free of spite. You literally portray people who disagree with you as mentally challenged in your many, many "funny" dialogues.

Do I do so with spite? Or with spade?

Oh, are tensions only rising in Germany? Because I thought that my post addressed the entire EU.

Your original post was about how "neoliberal policies" are making "60 % of Germans" not wanting Islam.

Yes... but Germany is part of the EU, or have they left the Union? I've also critiqued Neocon/Neolib policies in the US, which is, most definitely, not a part of Germany.

And some EU countries did bomb Africa/Middle East. Generally speaking, bombing an area can produce refugees, I thought that was sort of obvious. Neoliberals are promoting austerity, which take away from education programs, and, last time I checked, education tends to fight ignorance. Since apparently these programs were so hard to find for you, (even though it took me all of five seconds,) I shall post a link: http://www.sirius-migrationeducation.or ... -students/

Of course you would post something that has nothing to do whatsoever with immigrants/refugees, both of which foreign students largely aren't. Foreign students go to a country via legal student visa to study for a limited amount of time and then leave again.
This is not what immigrants and/or refugees are doing. Especially not the current refugee wave.

Refugees aren't planning to stay for a limited amount of time? And here I thought that they were in there for temporary refuge.

And of course your obsession with "austerity" strikes again. People have pointed out to you repeatedly that spending vastly more money that you have at your disposal is not somehow an option any country's government can afford to pursue.
Here is what has also happened recently:

- The ECB has introduced a massive program of Quantitative Easing to promote consumption and investments.
- The German government has introduced a minimum wage and earlier pension entry ages.
- The German government has/is spending a massive amount of money on housing and integration programs for the recent huge influx of refugees.

Ahhh yes, promote consumption - that's brilliant! In a time of great need, let's consume more useless shit. The government is spending for integration program? So why are the refugees not integrating then? I recall that a certain country, let's call it Russia, had to deal with hundreds of thousands of refugees from Ukraine. And yet I'm not seeing a massive rise in anti refugee sentiment. Hmm, I wonder why: http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the ... ssia-12181

“We have everything we need for a comfortable stay. Volunteers work with us continuously. They go to bed later than everybody and wake up earlier than everybody. They address our every need. Each of us had a comprehensive medical exam and was given a SIM card so we could stay connected with our relatives in Ukraine. Our children have everything: from diapers to new bikes.”

Now if I was an integration specialist, I would walk up to refugees and ask them "what do you guys need to integrate successfully into our society?" Applauding as the trains of refugees come is certainly nice, but having a step by step to do list after they leave the train might work a tad better. Some might say they need jobs. Others - to learn the language. Still others - schools for their kids.

Meanwhile in Germany: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/a ... s-migrants

Germany has announced new legal measures requiring migrants and refugees to integrate into society in return for being allowed to live and work in the country. Under the coalition government’s measures, announced on Thursday morning, asylum seekers face cuts to support if they reject mandatory integration measures such as language classes or lessons in German laws or cultural basics.

According to the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, the aim of Germany’s first ever integration law is to make it easier for asylum seekers to gain access to the German labour market, with the government promising 100,000 new “working opportunities”, expected to include low-paid workfare jobs. A law requiring employers to give preference to German or EU job applicants over asylum seekers will be suspended for three years. The vice-chancellor, Sigmar Gabriel, described the agreement as a historic step, saying he was convinced that “in a few years’ time this law will be seen as a milestone for our immigration law”. More than 476,000 asylum applications were registered in Germany in 2015, with officials putting the total number of arrivals at over a million.

Now I'm not entirely sure how 100,000 new jobs is going to employ over a million refugees, but perhaps the German Government's mathematicians know better. Maybe those not working can utilize quantitative easing to consume more goods with no Euros, who knows?

But nope, the only thing they are doing is "austerity".
Of course, if somebody points out that Russia is also slashing it government expenses to balance its budget, like every government ought to do, it stops being "austerity". Then it's okay.
By the way, you also didn't adress where the hostility between Muslim immigrants and Russians in Russia is coming from. Is it austerity there too?

No, what I said was that mass austerity is a poor policy, that, when combined with massive immigration, leads to disaster. In the English language, when I say that A + B = disaster, I am not saying that "only A" equals disaster; rather I am saying that A + B = disaster.

If only there was a way to summarize what's been going on:

1. EU member states bomb countries in the Middle East/Africa.
2. Homes of quite a few people are destroyed, partially by the bombings, partially by the terrorists taking over. This results in homeless people who become refugees.
3. The refugees flee to Europe.

Russia is also bombing in Syria. Quite more so than any European country, in fact. But I suppose Russian bombs don't create refugee waves.

They do. Some refugees from Palmyra are returning to Palmyra after the Russian bombing of nearby ISIS camps. In waves.

Of course Balt starts out with a glorious strawman.

Says the guy who is literally writing his own dialogue to put stuff into other people's mouth.

Such as?

Russia's stance on Kosovo isn't anti-Muslim, it's anti-KLA.

Yes, I'm sure it's stance on Bosnia is similarly balanced, and I'm sure Muslims see it the same way.

Did Georgia become a Muslim nation too? Did Moldova? Did Ukraine? Well, ok, maybe Ukraine did, not too sure what goes on there anymore.

[Shofercia]

The LDPR is around, but they aren't really growing. The closest thing to a 'Nazi' party in Russia would probably be the Slavic Union, but they're banned.

The AfD is growing, but they have less representation than the LDPR (and none federally until the next election).

The issue isn't AfD or LDPR. It's groups like the BNP, or NDP. They even joined a bloc to less us know of their... stance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_ ... nd_Freedom

Most ironic name ever.

[Robert Bork]

I had no idea that typing required high energy. I, for one, do not need Red Bull to type.

Correct. The only thing you do before you type is get confirmation from the Kremlin. /sarcasm

[Mugrul]

Ahhh yes, promote consumption - that's brilliant! In a time of great need, let's consume more useless shit. The government is spending for integration program? So why are the refugees not integrating then? I recall that a certain country, let's call it Russia, had to deal with hundreds of thousands of refugees from Ukraine. And yet I'm not seeing a massive rise in anti refugee sentiment. Hmm, I wonder why: http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the ... ssia-12181

Because those refugees are pro-Russian Ukrainians and not random strangers from North Africa and the Levant?

[Mugrul]

A few grad holes in the vicinity doesn't mean very much. But importantly the people of Gudjabauri weren't subjected to cleansing.

He didn't promise that it wouldn't forcefully united. An united Georgia was his promise yes, but not forcefully per se. Again there were many attempts at a diplomatic conclusion, but Kokoity refused to cooperate.

The population of South Ossetia was 70,000. Approximately 15,000 Georgians left before the war. Out of the remaining 55,000, 30,000 became refugees in Russia and 2,000 were reported missing. Most were later found, oddly enough, not inside their non existent homes. So that's 32,000/55,000, or 58% of the population of South Ossetia fleeing. The extreme majority of Tskhinval(i)'s population fled. But hey, it was just a few grad holes in the vicinity... And the only way to unite Georgia was to do so forcefully. It's the same with Crimea, or the Falklands.

That's not as bad as it sounds. Tskhinvali's population is around 30,000. Assuming that the population was roughly the same or higher at the time of the war (it's very unlikely the population was lower) then the city alone made up for almost 45% of South Ossetia's population.

Now compare that to the Georgian population in South Ossetia, of which 80% of the pre-war population are now gone. Yea some left before the war started. That's only indicative that the area was messed up before Georgian forces entered. Premeditative or not, most of those refugees were found kilometers away from (rather than inside) their non-existent homes.

Ossetians existed alongside Georgians for longer than the idea of South Ossetia was ever devised. During the USSR more lived in other parts of the Georgian SSR than within South Ossetia. So no it isn't quite comparable to the Falklands or Crimea.

The people living in Kodori never wanted to be a part of Abkhazia. Only a handful of Abkhaz lived there if any iirc. And you have my word that no non-Svans would like returning to a place where the government gets overthrown if they try to give Georgians citizenship.

Georgians can get citizenship in Kodori Valley. Granted, there's a catch - they'd have to give up their Georgian citizenship, which I disagree with; I think they should be allowed to have dual citizenship. However, poorly written dual citizenship laws do not equate with forceful subjugation.

Abkhazia makes it especially hard for ethnic Georgians to gain citizenship. In addition they're very vulnerable to crime for some reason and if the de-facto authorities get angry or something there's a possibility some unidentified individuals might burn down their homes.