Russia-Ukraine War Political Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
ATP said:
Everybody,even Irish,would preferred London to Moscow.
Click to expand...
Except for the pigs and those who have the opportunity to be on top in Russia.
Moscow was always the part of Ruthenia that nobody liked, especially since they became the most obedient collaborators of the Mongols only to stab them in the back when the Mongols started to weaken.
Every Ruthenian preferred to be ruled from Cracow and not from Moscow. Which of course the local princes did not like very much and for "treason" they could punish very severely. Novgorod the Great is a good example of this.
Do your think the British Empire was bad?
The British on their worst day were much better than the Russians on their best day.
 
Marduk said:
Yes you would if you knew what you are talking about, which you don't.
Opium wars are fucking nothing compared to the shit Ottoman Empire did.
www.history.com

Armenian Genocide: Facts & Timeline - HISTORY

The Armenian genocide was the systematic killing and deportation of millions of Armenians by Ottoman Empire Turks from 1915-1920, during and after World War I.
www.history.com www.history.com
Click to expand...
So, I went over your source in depth instead of just accepting it as true and...
Your citation disagrees with you. Your source explicitly states:

1. the armanians were always under foreign rule, and the ottoman empire was the most tolerant towards them of any foreign occupier they had. Thus they thrived under it.

2. the last ottoman emperor was different, and he was very harsh on armanian protesters who demeaned equal rights. sending soldiers to kill the protesters in a public show of force.

3. after he was deposed, the ottoman empire fell and was replaced by the Young Turks revolution, who created a multi party constitutional democracy. it was that new constitutional democratic government which performed the genocide.

And again, the above is all info from the source you provided me.
 
Last edited:
mrttao said:
So, I went over your source in depth instead of just accepting it as true and...
Your citation disagrees with you. Your source explicitly states:

1. the armanians were always under foreign rule, and the ottoman empire was the most tolerant towards them of any foreign occupier they had. Thus they thrived under it.

2. the last ottoman emperor was different, and he was very harsh on armanian protesters who demeaned equal rights. sending soldiers to kill the protesters in a public show of force.

3. after he was deposed, the ottoman empire fell and was replaced by the Young Turks revolution, who created a multi party constitutional democracy. it was that new constitutional democratic government which performed the genocide.

And again, the above is all info from the source you provided me.
Click to expand...
Ah, here comes the "Ottoman Empire really was nice to Armenians and it was just the Young Turks" argument.
Jizya, dhimmi status, instead of bullshitting people poorly read up on those and tell me if that counts as great treatment, and if you would want the minorities you like to be treated this way where you live.
 
Marduk said:
Ah, here comes the "Ottoman Empire really was nice to Armenians and it was just the Young Turks" argument.
Jizya, dhimmi status, instead of bullshitting people poorly read up on those and tell me if that counts as great treatment, and if you would want the minorities you like to be treated this way where you live.
Click to expand...
stop putting words in my mouth.
you are the one who chose to cite history channel, I just noted what your source says.

I do not approve or disavow any of that content, I am not saying what actually happened in reality. I am simply pointing out that the sources you cited say you are wrong.

While I am reasonably well learned, the armanian genocide is not something I have studied personally. Which is why I initially simply accepted your claims, then I looked at your source and noticed it explicitly contradicts you. So I pointed it out. Nothing more, nothing less.

As for Jizya and dhimmi...
I wish I got a mere 2%p extra tax for being an infidel instead of the inflation, usury, and other bullshit we all have to deal with.
 
Last edited:
mrttao said:
stop putting words in my mouth.
you are the one who chose to cite history channel, I just noted what your source says.

I do not approve or disavow any of that content, I am not saying what actually happened in reality. I am simply pointing out that the sources you cited say you are wrong.
Click to expand...
No they don't, go learn to read.

mrttao said:
As for Jizya and dhimmi...
I wish I got a mere 2%p extra tax for being an infidel instead of the inflation, usury, and other bullshit we all have to deal with.
Click to expand...
No, with Ottoman Empire you get not only extra taxes, and no, it wasn't "just 2% lol" like you claim, and second class citizen status, their economic and financial management was notably craptastic by Europe's standards, which was one of major reasons why it fell.
 
Marduk said:
No they don't, go learn to read.
Click to expand...
ok. lets read
your cited source said:
Young Turks
In 1908, a new government came to power in Turkey. A group of reformers who called themselves the “Young Turks” overthrew Sultan Abdul Hamid and established a more modern constitutional government.
Click to expand...
your cited source said:
Armenian Genocide Begins
On April 24, 1915, the Armenian genocide began. That day, the Turkish government arrested and executed several hundred Armenian intellectuals.

After that, ordinary Armenians were turned out of their homes and sent on death marches through the Mesopotamian desert without food or water.
Click to expand...
your source says the Armenian Genocide started 7 years after the ottoman empire fell and was performed the the turkish constitutional democracy which replaced it.

disclaimer:
Turkish history is not something I ever studied before. I do not claim that the above is true or false.
Only that this is what your cited source states.
 
mrttao said:
your source says the Armenian Genocide started 7 years after the ottoman empire fell and was performed the the turkish constitutional democracy which replaced it.
Click to expand...
So what the fuck was it called then if not Ottoman Empire? You are trying to get me on a technicality while you are simply wrong about said technicality.
1517–1924
1299–1922
mrttao said:
disclaimer:
Turkish history is not something I ever studied before. I do not claim that the above is true or false.
Only that this is what your cited source states.
Click to expand...
Which you have failed to understand with your silly attempts to separate the time of Young Turks influence from the continuity of Ottoman Empire as a polity.

Besides, even in spirit you are wrong too, because its not exactly hard to find out that the life of Armenians in Ottoman Empire before Young Turks was not exactly pleasant or safe either.

The three major European powers: Great Britain, France and Russia (known as the Great Powers), took issue with the Empire's treatment of its Christian minorities and increasingly pressured the Ottoman government (also known as the Sublime Porte) to extend equal rights to all its citizens.

Beginning in 1839, the Ottoman government implemented the Tanzimat reforms to improve the situation of minorities, although these would prove largely ineffective. In 1856, the Hatt-ı Hümayun promised equality for all Ottoman citizens irrespective of their ethnicity and confession, widening the scope of the 1839 Hatt-ı Şerif of Gülhane. The reformist period peaked with the Constitution, called the Kanûn-ı Esâsî (meaning "Basic Law" in Ottoman Turkish), written by members of the Young Ottomans, which was promulgated on 23 November 1876. It established freedom of belief and equality of all citizens before the law. "Firman of the Reforms" gave immense privileges to the Armenians, which formed a "governance in governance" to eliminate the aristocratic dominance of the Armenian nobles by development of the political strata in the society.[15]
Click to expand...
Translation: Even in second half of XIX century, major (and not even democratic yet) European Powers were of the opinion that Ottoman Empire treated Christians like crap and pressured it to fix that. Which, under pressure and slowly, they eventually did to some part. For a short time, then it went to shit again.
 
Marduk said:
Translation: Even in second half of XIX century, major (and not even democratic yet) European Powers were of the opinion that Ottoman Empire treated Christians like crap and pressured it to fix that. Which, under pressure and slowly, they eventually did to some part. For a short time, then it went to shit again.
Click to expand...

As is usually the case, when Islamic nations do have a brief period of reform and less nastiness, after a generation or two the hardliners come in with a *vengeance*, and make everything so much worse than it was before.

Much like we're seeing the beginning of with Erdogan de-secularizing Turkey now.


The reason for this is because Islam is a fundamentally intolerant, brutal, genocidal religion. That is what it explicitly teaches.
 
LordsFire said:
As is usually the case, when Islamic nations do have a brief period of reform and less nastiness, after a generation or two the hardliners come in with a *vengeance*, and make everything so much worse than it was before.

Much like we're seeing the beginning of with Erdogan de-secularizing Turkey now.


The reason for this is because Islam is a fundamentally intolerant, brutal, genocidal religion. That is what it explicitly teaches.
Click to expand...

Well,they prefer rather enslave,not genocide.Machomet after all enslaved his captured enemies,not killed.He was merchant,after all.
 
ATP said:
Well,they prefer rather enslave,not genocide.Machomet after all enslaved his captured enemies,not killed.He was merchant,after all.
Click to expand...

True, but a campaign of enslavement can easily turn genocidal. Slavonia (part of Croatia) lost some 80% of its population just in the Great Turkish War. In fact, Croatia as a state would not recover to its pre-Ottoman population levels until 1800s.
 
Marduk said:
euroweeklynews.com

BREAKING NEWS: Putin fires Russian state deputy for sympathetic Ukraine comments

President Vladimir Putin has fired Russian state deputy head of Rossotrudnichestvo, Natalia Poklonskaya for her comments on the Ukraine war. The relevant decree was signed by Putin with Poklonskaya…
euroweeklynews.com euroweeklynews.com
Click to expand...

FWIW, Poklonskaya became a favorite waifu among Westerners after the Russian annexation of Crimea:

HT_natalia_poklonskaya_anime_tk_140325_16x9_608-e1634225851359.jpg


Natalia_Poklonskaya_by_Haiashi.jpg
 
Bacle said:
Click to expand...


The western world really isn't prepared to fight a peer power, and a lot of industry isn't really built up to do an extended fight. Russia looks like their going to go full brutality to win, and at this pace I think we will figure out if it all works when winter comes.
 
Bacle said:
Click to expand...


Strelkov was literally claiming Russia would collapse if it didn't fully mobilize to support Assad in 2015.

I have a lot of respect for Strelkov given he literally formed the DPR out of his drinking buddies in 2014 before then effectively fighting the Ukrainian Army to a standstill with said rag tag force. Since then, however, he was forced out because of politics and he's been something of a known Doomer in Russian circles for years. Given the background as to why he doesn't have an official position, taking that into consideration with his analysis needs to be said.
 
History Learner said:
Strelkov was literally claiming Russia would collapse if it didn't fully mobilize to support Assad in 2015.

I have a lot of respect for Strelkov given he literally formed the DPR out of his drinking buddies in 2014 before then effectively fighting the Ukrainian Army to a standstill with said rag tag force. Since then, however, he was forced out because of politics and he's been something of a known Doomer in Russian circles for years. Given the background as to why he doesn't have an official position, taking that into consideration with his analysis needs to be said.
Click to expand...

Russia tends to fight until they cant fight any more, 30,000 people is not enough to get them to quit, you need to kill at least a half a million russians before the country throws in the towel and we are not near those numbers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top