A couple days ago on May 8th 2010 for the first time ever US, British, French, Polish (second time technically for them) and for the first time in years troops from the other CIS countries all marched together in Red Square in an unprecedented moment of reconciliation and rapprochment.
First video of two, we also get to see the Topol-M ICBM on display for the first time.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
What a bizarre juxtaposition. "Reconciliation," and a brand new nuke. Hurm.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Yeah, Blayne, I'm surprised you don't see the cynical posturing in that. Rather I'm surprised you are able to ignore it.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
The United States and the other Allied HoS's all accepted the invitation didn't they?
Also it has been long standing tradition that new military hardware are paraded on Red Square on May 9th ALWAYS there is nothing special about it and its been openly in development for over a decade now.
Heck even POLAND sent troops to march in Red Square this would have been unthinkable even last year, there is zero doubt that this event is not only marvelous but unprecedented step towards a rapprochement between Moscow and is neighbours.
Your gonna need more proof then your own cynical gut feeling to argue against this, the historical evidence is against you.
Of course you probably didn't even watch the video so you don't have a right to comment.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
you don't have the RIGHT to comment
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
Have you seen the link or otherwise thought of, composed, or fabricated some kind of thoughts on the event having saw the video and listened to the commentary?
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote: Your gonna need more proof then your own cynical gut feeling to argue against this, the historical evidence is against you.
Nice buddy. I don't have to prove my opinion of what Russia does for publicity. They did it, I think it was cynical posturing. What do you want me to do, produce a memo with the words: "On May 9th, we shall cynically posture by displaying our new thermonuclear weapon delivery system on the day of an international march celebrating the anniversary of peace that ushered in the era of our destructive domination of East and Central Europe." Get a clue dude.
quote: Also it has been long standing tradition that new military hardware are paraded on Red Square on May 9th ALWAYS there is nothing special about it...
Jesus Blayne listen to yourself please. They always do it on May 9th? Why, may I ask, do they always do this on May 9th? You're saying it's a coincidence? You're saying they don't do it for the same reason? You just said it had been in development for a decade. Well, this is a very convenient time to unveil it then, now that the allies have all been brought to your doorstep to observe it. How in god's name did you ever get to be such a tool of these people? Honestly, I just can't fathom it. I don't even want to make assumptions as to why you've gone in this direction. I guess people have all kinds of crazy reasons for what they do and think. Just please don't expect us all to sit here and googoo gahgah at this tripe.
[ May 11, 2010, 05:11 PM: Message edited by: Orincoro ]
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Have you seen the link or otherwise thought of, composed, or fabricated some kind of thoughts on the event having saw the video and listened to the commentary?
No, I did not sit through a 45 minute spectacle involving people marching around. That kind of thing doesn't get me off. Nor do the words: "34 million soviet servicemen took part in the Great Patriotic War." This is because as glad as I am that Stalin did not end up trying to share power with Hitler, I am not particularly happy with the way things turned out for Russia, or for Europe. I've never been convinced Stalin or Russia's government should be lauded today for what they did. Congratulate the wolf for scaring the fox out of the chicken coop. These people were liars and murderers and monsters, and when they weren't busy slaughtering their own people, they were very happy to have their enemies do it for them. There's no glow in my heart for any of that. I chalk it up to a loss.
Tell me, would you be wetting yourself with glee if the U.S. had an international rally on the mall in Washington D.C. and rolled out a big assed nuclear bomb or some kind of giant daisy cutter as the coup de gras? You think that would smack of really excellent taste and good timing? No? I'm betting that might be a bit off key. The fact that it's no freaking surprise Russia does crap like that should tell you something you obviously don't understand.
[ May 11, 2010, 05:12 PM: Message edited by: Orincoro ]
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
"Captain, I sense hostility"
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
you don't have the RIGHT to be hostile
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Heh.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
:snort:
Yeah that was undeniably hostile. I am not pro-Russian. Perhaps not a surprise considering where I make my home these days.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Have you seen the link or otherwise thought of, composed, or fabricated some kind of thoughts on the event having saw the video and listened to the commentary?
No, I did not sit through a 45 minute spectacle involving people marching around. That kind of thing doesn't get me off. Nor do the words: "34 million soviet servicemen took part in the Great Patriotic War." This is because as glad as I am that Stalin did not end up trying to share power with Hitler, I am not particularly happy with the way things turned out for Russia, or for Europe. I've never been convinced Stalin or Russia's government should be lauded today for what they did. Congratulate the wolf for scaring the fox out of the chicken coop. These people were liars and murderers and monsters, and when they weren't busy slaughtering their own people, they were very happy to have their enemies do it for them. There's no glow in my heart for any of that. I chalk it up to a loss.
Tell me, would you be wetting yourself with glee if the U.S. had an international rally on the mall in Washington D.C. and rolled out a big assed nuclear bomb or some kind of giant daisy cutter as the coup de gras? You think that would smack of really excellent taste and good timing? No? I'm betting that might be a bit off key. The fact that it's no freaking surprise Russia does crap like that should tell you something you obviously don't understand.
Oh my gods your such an asshole and a wet blanket on many levels that its funny, first of all regardless of what you think of the former Soviet government they are still people and people fought for a government, a nation, and an ideology they believed in, the Soviet people were fighting for the right to exist the Nazi's did intend to enslave and murder the entire slav people and regardless of your thoughts of the former Soviet government or Communism or the current Putin/Medveydev government May 9th symbolizes their victory over a considerably worse evil.
The Soviet/Russian military is a source of great pride for Russians today, it is a military of victors military parades are for national pride and morale.
I expect you if you could at a minimum understand that and at least be respectful and maybe go "hey Americans marching in red square, thats kinda cool" not launch into anti-russian propoganda and dismiss the event and its significance.
You have also completely missed the point, yes it is tradition to show off new hardware on May 9th, because that is the jubilee for the end of the Great Patriotic War and Soviet victory over the Germans in a national struggle for survival, so yes it makes sense to show off the weapons that work to defend the motherland on that day for its symbolism and that is how its always been since 1945/6.
This isn't something new or aggressive.
quote:when they weren't busy slaughtering their own people, they were very happy to have their enemies do it for them.
That is very much bullshit and slander, if your gonna complain about them being liars then don't turn around and partake in the same revisionism of history. You cannot for a second think the Soviet Government no matter how high up there was "glad" that they're country got invaded.
Regardless of the circumstances leading up to that invasion if the Soviets weren't there at the level of economic readiness they had holding out against 80% of the German war machine then nothing short of nuclear assault on Germany would have won the war.
quote: Tell me, would you be wetting yourself with glee if the U.S. had an international rally on the mall in Washington D.C. and rolled out a big assed nuclear bomb or some kind of giant daisy cutter as the coup de gras? You think that would smack of really excellent taste and good timing? No? I'm betting that might be a bit off key. The fact that it's no freaking surprise Russia does crap like that should tell you something you obviously don't understand.
First of all Americans do hold military parades, second of all the situations are completely different, European and Asian cultures have a distinct history of holding parades that show off newer weapon systems to "show off" as a source of national pride there is nothing odd about it that comes off as awkwardly timed to outsiders, what would seem odd if weapons WERENT shown.
This is an example of cultural values dissonance you cannot honestly press your cultural values or norms unto other nations and expect it to not come across as completely ignorant.
The only time for the US to have a nuclear weapon on the parade grounds and come off as in bad taste is if they took an event that they generally didn't already unveil and parade around weapons and then put weapons there and moved them around.
The situations are completely different, say you had a July 4th Parade where you usually have nuclear missiles on parade and this year simply had a slightely bigger missile its nothing special, the US isn't my nation of focus so I would be ambivalent.
I would say "Hey thats Kinda cool" if say my local regiment went on parade with it.
That this years May Day parade came off as 'in bad taste' despite doing it every year for 65 years now is just a knee jerk reaction of someone who can't let go of the past.
Heck if the Poles could let go of Katyn enough to go on parade as well in the midst of national tragedy why can't you? It's not like they somehow didn't know that the Russians were gonna parade their nuclear arsenal again like y'know they do every year.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Look at that, blayne's back to swearing again
Great job blayne!
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: European and Asian cultures have a distinct history of holding parades that show off newer weapon systems to "show off" as a source of national pride there is nothing odd about it that comes off as awkwardly timed to outsiders, what would seem odd if weapons WERENT shown.
As a European I disagree with the characterisation.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote: when they weren't busy slaughtering their own people, they were very happy to have their enemies do it for them.
That is very much bullshit and slander, if your gonna complain about them being liars then don't turn around and partake in the same revisionism of history. You cannot for a second think the Soviet Government no matter how high up there was "glad" that they're country got invaded.
For the record, Blayne, and ignoring your rudeness, I didn't say that Russia was "glad to be invaded." I said that they were glad to have their enemies slaughter their own people. And they were. Millions of gypsies and Ukrainians died in the holocaust and in the midst of the war. The Soviets had already been attempting to exterminate these people. I hope you're very happy to defend a nation of people who stood by and waved their flags while 10 million Ukranians were starved to death in 1932. Not to mention the countless millions shipped off to gulags, or even better, given a "tener" and shot in the head by the side of the road in one of the numerous purges your oh-so-darling communists engineered. Noble, noble people they were, I am sure, who fought for the common good, and not to avoid being murdered themselves.
As someone who has lived a great deal of time in different parts of the continent, I also disagree with your totally fanciful characterizations of Slavic peoples, with whom I am much better acquainted than you. After nearly two years of working closely with people from every part of the former Soviet union, from Belarus to Siberia, to Kazakhstan, to the former Czechoslovakia, I can tell you that you have *no* idea what on Earth you are talking about. I know this because between us, *I* am the authority, and I don't happen to think I know much about the subject, despite having maintained a constant and avid interest in Slavic culture, and actually living with the people. So please, do spare us your "insights" gleaned from old war movies, or whatever video game sold you your silly ideas.
Blayne, I'm not even going to engage with the rest of it because you're cursing at me and calling me names, which not only breaks the rules around here, but is sad as well.
[ May 11, 2010, 07:25 PM: Message edited by: Orincoro ]
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
It is completely untrue that there were any attempt by the Soviet government to "exterminate" the Ukrainian peoples or anyone else, there isn't even consensus in Ukraine over it, it is a complete lie and a falsification of history.
edit: Not to say that the famines didn't happen, of course they occurred and somewhere between 3 to 7 million died but that isn't genocide.
I called you that because that is just how arrogant and condenscending you were coming off and you are not helping your case, ever hear of 'appeal to authority'? and other similar fallacies? Guess what your commuting them, just because you claim to have spoken to whatever number of Slavs doesn't mean its true, relevant or have any conclusive bearing on the discussion, you are not right talking to them any more then I was automatically right for speaking to Chinese netizens over msn.
I should also point out that I have ALSO talked with a number of Slavs and Europeans at Defencetalkdaily and Sinodefence, as well as at other forums and yes I have met a large number playing EVE-Online as native Russian nationals make up about 30% of its player base and a large number of them come onto teamspeak.
Point is, I don't care who you talked to your willingness to dismiss any knowledge I may have simply because you assume I don't have your illustrious foreign contacts and so self righteously dismiss them based on whatever "video games" I may have played with zero basis is whats bullshit and is why your credibility is hurt far more, if you have facts state facts and back them up, otherwise they are just baseless revisionisms.
I am defending against your blatant falsification of history, also claiming that 'glad to be invaded' and 'glad to have them slaughter our own people' is stupid, there's no difference between them, it is a false distinction, they are the same thing do not even attempt to try to say otherwise with me.
Your cheap copout of 'cursing and calling you names' is a cop out, your simply using it as a preemptive excuse to keep yourself from having to backup completely false claims.
quote:On April 26, 2010, newly elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, told Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe members that Holodomor was a common tragedy that struck Ukrainians and other Soviet peoples, and that it would be wrong to recognize the Holodomor as an act of genocide against one nation. He stated that "The Holodomor was in Ukraine, Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. It was the result of Stalin's totalitarian regime. But it would be wrong and unfair to recognize the Holodomor as an act of genocide against one nation."
Take. That.
[ May 11, 2010, 09:08 PM: Message edited by: Blayne Bradley ]
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Look at that, blayne's back to swearing again
Great job blayne!
Your doing a terrific job proving to me your just a simple troll.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
*pops popcorn*
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
Blayne, 6 years ago I saw a much better East/West moment in Red Square. I say Karl Marx, Lenin, and Stalin impersonators in Red Square willing to have their picture taken for $5. I saw Mickey Mouse doing the same at the other end of the square. Of course this one had no connection with Disney other than the purchase of an imitation suit, but the sight of it left me laughing for days. When I took Mickey's picture without paying, he threatened me with some very un-Disney like ways and used hand gestures that were physically impossible for the Real Mickey.
As far as the disasters of Soviet creation, have you read The Gulag Archeplego. It was written from a Russian point of view-- a hero of the Soviet fight against Nazi, who when returned to Russia was locked away. Stalin feared any officer who saw went West was corrupted and couldn't be trusted. Read it sometime. It will give you a different point of view.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
A few random individuals partaking in random things in Red Square in 2003 that has no international significance and not partaken by State level actors is irrelevant to realist politics.
I just so you know read "My Just War" by Gabriel Tempkin a Polish jew who had been raked by the Soviet system but nevertheless fought for the Soviet army heroically and to this day defends many of its actions as nessasary for the time, I also read "Years of my Life" by a former Soviet army general who had been purged from the Red Army and rehabilitated when they needed him during the War and stayed loyal throughout, there are plenty of Soviet citizens who even when they got targeted remained absolutely loyal to their ideology and to the Soviet motherland, Children of the Arbat also covers this a bit.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Blayne, if you really want to have more of an impact, try the following:
You're a troll.
Your posts belie this fact.
Personally, I find it very inconsiderate that you still choose to ignore these very basic usage rules in 5 years of posting here.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
For the love of god man this isn't the time or the place, lay off.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Look at that, blayne's back to swearing again
Great job blayne!
Your doing a terrific job proving to me your just a simple troll.
You decided to conclude that long ago, and considering how you apply the term (to pretty much anyone who consistently tells you to stop being an immature, hotheaded maker-of-too-many-low-quality-threads, for instance) it's something of a label of honor.
You're blowing up in a thread. Again. Grow up. And just watch me tell you this every time you blow up in a thread and need to be told to grow up.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: For the love of god man this isn't the time or the place, lay off.
For the love of God, man, this IS the time and the place. I read this forum every day because 90% of the posts are legible, making my perusal quick and efficient. All I ask is that you make AN EFFORT to write more legibly to bring that average up. You know the difference between "your" and "you're". I know you do.
I admit I'm being selfish, but I care about this forum. It's special to me. Clarity and cleanliness are two of the main reasons why it's special. I'm just trying to protect that.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Now, your just being silly!!!
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Blayne, I don't think it's possible for enough people to encourage you to take a step back, and a deep breath, and pay attention to what the people in this thread are telling you.
Seriously. They're trying to help you, man.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Look at that, blayne's back to swearing again
Great job blayne!
Your doing a terrific job proving to me your just a simple troll.
You decided to conclude that long ago, and considering how you apply the term (to pretty much anyone who consistently tells you to stop being an immature, hotheaded maker-of-too-many-low-quality-threads, for instance) it's something of a label of honor.
You're blowing up in a thread. Again. Grow up. And just watch me tell you this every time you blow up in a thread and need to be told to grow up.
You are the one who consistently posts provocative one liners in those threads and are thus a part of the problem as such your statements are inherently hypocritical, there is ultimately no reason to abide by your apparent standards when you yourself will not apply them fairly and equally.
When you are no longer a part of the problem then your words will not ring hollow.
Posted by 0Megabyte (Member # 8624) on :
"there is ultimately no reason to abide by your apparent standards when you yourself will not apply them fairly and equally."
So, to spite him, you'll be a jerk to other people?
What if he told you not to break my fine china? Would you do that to spite him, too?
Isn't there a factor you're forgetting here?
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote: On April 26, 2010, newly elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, told Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe members that Holodomor was a common tragedy that struck Ukrainians and other Soviet peoples, and that it would be wrong to recognize the Holodomor as an act of genocide against one nation. He stated that "The Holodomor was in Ukraine, Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. It was the result of Stalin's totalitarian regime. But it would be wrong and unfair to recognize the Holodomor as an act of genocide against one nation."
quote: Take. That.
A #1, Yanukovych is a pro-Russian shill. And 2, it's right there in your quote, even from him. It was a result of Stalin's totalitarian regime. Whatever your interpretation, is it not even half reasonable for you to accuse me of falsification, and *slander.* Grow up. You seem to be a bigger pissant now than you were 5 years ago, when you could barely speak English.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: When you are no longer a part of the problem then your words will not ring hollow.
:Snort: In order for someone not to be a problem in your eyes Blayne, they would have to never disagree with you on anything. You can be argumentative and self-righteous all you want, but you're not going to have the best time shutting down all the people who think you're a massive tool.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
The horrors of the soviet regime pass by a Canadian college student. For my family who had to flee Russia due to religious persecution, such memories are not so fleeting. And if you don't think Stalin was the kind of guy who would happily order the mass starvation of Ukrainians to make sure a revolt didn't happen (not saying he did but that it would be in his character), you're extremely naive.
Life in Russia during that time period, even after Stalin, was life of fear. My parents told me a story about some people whose kid made the innocuous comment that she liked an American brand of lipstick. The parents were terrified. If that comment went to the wrong people, they could have been taken away.
That's how much fear people lived in.
[ May 12, 2010, 08:22 AM: Message edited by: Phanto ]
Posted by Flying Fish (Member # 12032) on :
Anybody who tells Blayne to grow up is a troll. He told me so.
Canadian college kids know everything! Other people spend too much time working, studying, traveling, supporting themselves, to know everything.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Clearly Blayne's videogame time is much more valuable than my personal experiences with real-life people who are not all of my same age and attitudes. I may live in the former soviet union- but my post count in the forums reveals me to be a nOOb.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Seriously. They're trying to help you, man.
I'm not. I'm just having fun watching the two of them collide It's actually vaguely comforting.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: When you are no longer a part of the problem then your words will not ring hollow.
I'm not part of 'the problem' unless you want to somehow fundamentally blame your hotheadedness, immaturity, and thread-spam on the people who finally grow tired of and strenuously object to it and/or just tell you to shut up after you prove yourself incapable of accepting much more thoughtful criticism.
Which is the cycle you love to throw this forum through anyway. So, by all means, continue convincing yourself that that apparently my criticism of you somehow doesn't 'count.'
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin:
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: For the love of god man this isn't the time or the place, lay off.
For the love of God, man, this IS the time and the place.
Maybe it should be "For the love of God-Man, this isn't the time or the place; lay off." Even demigods need love.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Seriously. They're trying to help you, man.
I'm not. I'm just having fun watching the two of them collide It's actually vaguely comforting.
Shhh!
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
unprecedented historic event
your going to click this link and admit its you're favorite
quote:I've never been convinced Stalin or Russia's government should be lauded today for what they did. Congratulate the wolf for scaring the fox out of the chicken coop. These people were liars and murderers and monsters, and when they weren't busy slaughtering their own people, they were very happy to have their enemies do it for them. There's no glow in my heart for any of that. I chalk it up to a loss.
I've never understood the mindset that lauds Soviet participation in bringing down Hitler, beyond appreciation for the sacrifice of individual Soviets and realpolitik considerations that is.
Stalin had agreements with Hitler until Hitler turned on him, and the general consensus I've always heard is that Stalin would've turned on Hitler himself, given time. So why, oh why, are we supposed to regard the USSR as one of the good guys in WWII? Because they fought Hitler? What about the time the USSR enabled Hitler's aggressive war by promising not to attack themselves, dividing up Europe between them?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
For me it's a mixture of entertainment, bafflement, and, "Wouldn't it be nice if..." The defense of the Soviet Union and its leadership in the 1930s and 1940s is so bizarre.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: ... I've never understood the mindset that lauds Soviet participation in bringing down Hitler, beyond appreciation for the sacrifice of individual Soviets and realpolitik considerations that is.
How many of Blayne's mindsets do you figure you understand? Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Well, I start out with 'probably few'. But when I start adding words like 'international', 'politics', 'communism', and then of course the big enchilada 'China', the list shrinks and shrinks.
Seriously, though, the Soviet Union as 'good guys' in WWII is something I encountered quite a bit in high school and junior high. Farther into college it became less common, but still, even at earlier stages, it was still strange. I don't understand why it's taught that way.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Clearly Blayne's videogame time is much more valuable than my personal experiences with real-life people who are not all of my same age and attitudes. I may live in the former soviet union- but my post count in the forums reveals me to be a nOOb.
This is the same trivial arrogant dismissive bullshit as before, my love of video games has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, the point here is you crossed the line you ASSUMED that my world view is a result of video games and thus assumed that it somehow doesn't count because of that.
Which royally pisses me off as it isn't the case at all, at most you could say I found ways of connecting with some amount of people through it as a medium, which is just as legitimate as written correspondance, also for your information if you look at the Daedelus Project under EVE-Online much of EVE's demographic is adults.
However that isn't even so much as the beginning of peoples I may have met and spoken to, some were elderly Armenian tourist, some are people I met online etc, point is you had no right of business to be a dismissive arrogant snot just because I play video games.
You are also not changing your argument, your argument was "The Soviets were glad that the Germans started killing their own people" and "The Soviets were (paraphrasing) killing Ukrainians and Gypsies before that".
Which is clearly wrong and out of context, the famines effect everyone in the former Soviet Union and didn't target Ukrainians specifically in some conspiracy to wipe out ethnic Ukrainians.
And yadda yadda, you didn't like it when I insulted you for being an arrogant cad but its perfectly alright for you to call me a pissant and other dismissive insulting words? Riiiiight.
Your also guilty now of shifting goalposts and moving the argument, the thread was about how cool it was that for the first time ever French, American and British soldiers were marching in Red square and now for the first time since 1945 Poles, Ukrainians and others are also marching there but you dismissed this JUST because they decided to like they do EVERYYEAR to parade nuclear weapons somehow undoes the significance of the occasion and blame it on misinterpreted history that happened decades ago.
Your the one who needs to grow up and let go of the past.
quote:I'm not part of 'the problem' unless you want to somehow fundamentally blame your hotheadedness, immaturity, and thread-spam on the people who finally grow tired of and strenuously object to it and/or just tell you to shut up after you prove yourself incapable of accepting much more thoughtful criticism.
No you are a part of the problem because you make snarky narcissistic comments at my expense without caring about what I had in mind for the thread at all, things you know for a fact upset me hoping to get a reaction out of me, that is why you are a part of the problem and is hypocritical of you to "demand" that I modify my behavior while you think yourself immune from that standard and is probably why no one listens to your ideas of improving the forum, because your a hypocrite who probably trolled the forum just to raise the attention of it deliberately and thus every word out of your mouth rings hollow.
quote:I'm not. I'm just having fun watching the two of them collide [Wink] It's actually vaguely comforting.
Which says an awful lot about you.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Well, I start out with 'probably few'. But when I start adding words like 'international', 'politics', 'communism', and then of course the big enchilada 'China', the list shrinks and shrinks.
Seriously, though, the Soviet Union as 'good guys' in WWII is something I encountered quite a bit in high school and junior high. Farther into college it became less common, but still, even at earlier stages, it was still strange. I don't understand why it's taught that way.
Rakeesh, the only explanation I can think of (namely, that most educators today are sympathetic to communism, and so tend to whitewash it), you'd probably write off as partisan hackery. And... you'd probably be right to do so.
I went to school in the SF East Bay area (near Berkeley), so my experiences are hardly indicative of every public school. That said, I certainly learned in school that Soviets were the good guys in WW2. And that the whole Soviet threat post-WW2 on was trumped up by evil conservatives and McCarthy. Also that the atrocities committed at home by corporations during the 30s and 40s were a much more important thing to focus on than some silly old war.
I actually knew very little about WW2, except in broad strokes, until I was an adult, and sought the information out myself.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I assume by "don't understand" you mean, don't feel any appreciation for the obvious reasons.
I think it just comes down to people not being so capable of subtlety of thought about good and evil. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, while a useful axiom, also contains a fair degree of subtle distinction. If you look at the Soviets and Germany as two powerful forces of nature in that period, the fact that they fought each other, that they were bound to fighting each other at one point or another for various reasons, is over all probably a good thing for the world and for history. Their power together would have ended us, and the world we live in today. So we can thank Hitler for his destruction of soviet infrastructure and population as much as we can thank Stalin for his absorption of such losses fighting the Germans. Had they not locked themselves in such a death grip, the outcome might have been quite different, in a not so positive way.
But again, people are not so subtle. Hitler is seen as the maniacal aggressor, bent on world domination, and Stalin is seen as defending his homeland from invasion. While Hitler *was* a maniacal aggressor, he also had arguably sound reasons for a lot of his actions, granted his goals were, well, extreme. He wanted to rule the world- and Russia was a threat to that. More, Stalin also wanted to rule the world, and as you said, had one not struck, the other would have. Things were coming to a head, Hitler or no Hitler. Germany never *had* to be a part of this struggle for domination, but it turned out to be. And since Hitler struck first, and publicly, he's the big bad for all time. Stalin never gets his due because he never *really* invaded Eastern Europe. Diabolically, he allowed the Germans to sweep across it in force, fight Russia in winter, lose, and then roll up its flanks all the way back to Berlin, where the Soviets would set up camp for the next 45 years. Brilliant, actually, in a horrifying way. The Soviets got everything they wanted out of the deal- more even, since what they ended up with was a chunk too big for them to govern effectively.
I think also it's just the difference between how we characterize totalitarian national socialism and totalitarian communism. Stalin's way was harder to characterize than Hitler's. With Hitler you have the insane ramblings of his books and his speeches and his actions, in broad daylight. With Stalin, the party machine was so endlessly complex and convoluted and secretive and horrifyingly tortuous that it has taken people decades just to figure out the broad outlines of his crimes, and to mete out blame for this or that action or policy to either his party, or to him, or to others. As Solzhenitsyn put it in talking about the functioning of state security under the soviets, to paraphrase: "it was a functioning machine so vast and complex that it could not have been conceived, engineered, run, or understood in all its parts by any one man. We had the ant's eye view of things."
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
An obligatory link to Anna Akhmatova's Requiem.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Your also guilty now of shifting goalposts and moving the argument, the thread was about how cool it was that for the first time ever French, American and British soldiers were marching in Red square...
Meh, I don't think so. I think it was about you peeing on the forum to mark your territory, because it had been a whole six days since you started your last thread. You're naive Blayne, but you're not really so naive as to think that your rabid fanboism for communism and totalitarian governments wouldn't draw reactions you didn't agree with. You thought the idea of parading out a big-assed nuke in front of the world would draw positive reactions? You thought we would ooo and ahhh at the spectacle? You're not that dumb. This just gets to be one in a very, very long line of places where you get to spread your stink because you can't stand real people.
And yes, I am discounting your video game experiences because if they're anything like your time here, they haven't helped you all that much. Bite your hand a little harder if you don't like it. I'm sure your roommates love to hear you pounding your keyboard in frustration.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Cool it, Orincoro.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
The prosecution rests its case.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: The prosecution rests its case.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I assume you missed Tom's post.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Blayne, I'm not Tom. However, I'm pretty sure Tom is asking Orincoro to cool it because...
A) He thinks Orincoro generally behaves with basic decency and avoids using too much profanity or going off on huge whiny rants, and...
B) Even more importantly, he thinks Orincoro might actually listen to him, and dial his venom back a notch.
You've already proven in this thread that neither A nor B seem to apply to you.
The fact that Tom did not, at this moment, ask you to behave, does not in some way validate your behavior thus far.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
quote:It's actually vaguely comforting.
Which says an awful lot about you.
Indeed. It says I feast upon your nerd rage.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
No, I didn't. LOL.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: No, I didn't. LOL.
And look how the mighty have fallen, degenerated to the typical Last Man.
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
Well, this is a nasty one.
I'm actually with Blayne on his initial point, that it's cool to see this sort of symbolic gesture of friendship between Russia and the West. Especially after some of the ill-considered rhetoric tossed around during the Russia-Georgia conflict (ahem John "We Are All Georgians" McCain).
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Blayne: when you think you're insulting someone effectively by referencing TV Tropes, you are not. Please treat this as a truism.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Blayne, I'm not Tom. However, I'm pretty sure Tom is asking Orincoro to cool it because...
A) He thinks Orincoro generally behaves with basic decency and avoids using too much profanity or going off on huge whiny rants, and...
B) Even more importantly, he thinks Orincoro might actually listen to him, and dial his venom back a notch.
You've already proven in this thread that neither A nor B seem to apply to you.
The fact that Tom did not, at this moment, ask you to behave, does not in some way validate your behavior thus far.
I think to an extant it does as my primary issue had in fact been Orincolo's behavior and him asking him to cool it supports my complaint that Orincolo had been acting in a completely unjustified manner.
You should at least understand that I do not act this way because I like it only because I am unjustly provoked into doing so by people with the maturity of 4chan users and should come to no surprise if you try everything in your power to insult and poke someone with a short fuse what do you expect?
Janitor doesn't police the threads often enough to prevent people from acting like dicks and swearing is the only way to get his attention that yes people are acting like dicks to me.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Blayne: when you think you're insulting someone effectively by referencing TV Tropes, you are not. Please treat this as a truism.
The hell you talking about. The only obscure reference I used as an insult is from Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:Especially after some of the ill-considered rhetoric tossed around during the Russia-Georgia conflict (ahem John "We Are All Georgians" McCain).
Ill-considered only because we don't actually care very much if Russia rolls into Georgia or not.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: You're a troll.
Your posts belie this fact.
For your amusement:
quote:--Lisa if your not going to even both posting in the discussion page then dont edit out my contribution its rude.-- [[User:Blayne-T383|Blayne-T383]] 21:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
link Posted by Week-Dead Possum (Member # 11917) on :
quote: You should at least understand that I do not act this way because I like it only because I am unjustly provoked into doing so by people with the maturity of 4chan users and should come to no surprise if you try everything in your power to insult and poke someone with a short fuse what do you expect?
Take a look back at the sequence of posts there little buddy. I asked how you couldn't see the cynicism in the act, or how you could ignore it, and you responded by saying I didn't even have a right to comment.
"Waaawwaaawaaa they provoked me" is the excuse I get from my 7 year old students when I catch them kicking each other in the head because one of them said the other was smelly. Are you 7? Or are you a reality show contestant who knows they can get attention by flying off the handle at the slightest afront to your supposed dignity because we should all know how very delicate and sensitive your ego is, and we should all laud your "participation" as the work of genius you so clearly believe it to be? Or are you angry because your shilling for mass murderers does, somewhere in your addled brain, strike you as the slightest bit off-key?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: You should at least understand that I do not act this way because I like it only because I am unjustly provoked into doing so by people with the maturity of 4chan users and should come to no surprise if you try everything in your power to insult and poke someone with a short fuse what do you expect?
"You should at least understand that the way I act is never really MY fault; I blame others!"
quote:Janitor doesn't police the threads often enough to prevent people from acting like dicks and swearing is the only way to get his attention that yes people are acting like dicks to me.
This is retarded.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:You should at least understand that I do not act this way because I like it only because I am unjustly provoked into doing so...
Blayne, you are responsible for your behavior. No one else can make you behave badly.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Put another way, why do you give the people who provoke you so much power over you?
Because look, let's say for the sake of argument that you're entirely right about your behavior being totally provoked and not so bad anyway, that you're being persecuted and whatnot. That there are some jerks who go out of their way to hound you.
If all of that is true, why let them wind you up so badly? Seriously. From your perspective, you flipping out is obviously one of the goals of antagonizing you...so why do it so reliably?
That's not reverse psychology, that's an honest question. If you're right, Samprimary, Orincoro, et al, are targeting you. If that's true, don't you realize your reactions are exactly the kind of thing they'd be going for?
When are the things you say going to be your responsibility, Blayne? In all the years you've been on Hatrack, it's almost always someone else's fault.
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
Guys, do you honestly think anything you say is going to infiltrate Blayne's world view?
You've told him all this before.
I can't believe that you haven't yet figured out that the way to make Blayne listen to you is to put it up on TV Tropes instead of actually posting it. I really suggest you try it, it could be like having your own Hatrack puppet if you work it well enough.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
*shrug* Sometimes he listens, for awhile at least.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
It's more of a case of "sometimes I calm down."
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
It's more of a case of 'sometimes you grow up, but only in tiny, tiny steps, which aren't noticeable until you take a few months break from reading your threads'.
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
quote:Ill-considered only because we don't actually care very much if Russia rolls into Georgia or not.
Nor should we. There are plenty of bigger world problems we could put a dent in, that don't involve messing with the only force in the world that could destroy the United States in a single day.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:Nor should we. There are plenty of bigger world problems we could put a dent in, that don't involve messing with the only force in the world that could destroy the United States in a single day.
Well, at least you're honest about it. I am curious, though, what other world problems would you be in favor of 'putting a dent in' and when would you be in favor of doing so?
We're writing off every nation bordering the PRC and Russia, presumably, so what does that leave?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Surely it's possible to write off Georgia without writing off, say, Poland or, indeed, Norway? Norway does, as it happens, have a land and sea border with Russia - a strategically important one, in fact. And, in what may not be a complete coincidence with regards to timing, just signed an agreement with Russia finally compromising on the long-standing - 40 years! - issue of how the Barents Sea border should run.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Is it possible? Certainly. That's just pragmatism. But the justification Destineer was using for Georgia applies to a lot of nations we aren't going to ignore, so I question its morality.
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh:
quote:Nor should we. There are plenty of bigger world problems we could put a dent in, that don't involve messing with the only force in the world that could destroy the United States in a single day.
Well, at least you're honest about it. I am curious, though, what other world problems would you be in favor of 'putting a dent in' and when would you be in favor of doing so?
We're writing off every nation bordering the PRC and Russia, presumably, so what does that leave?
Darfur and Africa in general, the usual list of trouble spots I guess.
If Georgia were some sort of democratic utopia (like Norway!), I'd feel differently.
Also, China is nowhere near the threat Russia could be. They have a no-first-use policy, and don't use nuclear weapons as political tools to anywhere near the extent that the US and Russia do.
Preventing any chance of nuclear war should be the highest priority for the US, as Reagan understood later in his term. It's far more important than helping fair-weather allies who only pretend to share our ideals.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Well, if you'd actually favor using military force in places like those - because that is absolutely what would be required - then I don't see an inconsistency and withdraw my objection on that basis. It's not an idea I hear supported much, though I wish it were.
As for nuclear war...preventing any chance is impossible. The weapons are there. The chance exists, and the safeguards are actually pretty damn crappy on the other side sometimes. How far do you bend over backwards in the name of preventing nuclear war? Not so far as to let Norway be invaded, apparently...but Georgia? I guess they're just not fortunate enough to have been separated long enough from the USSR to really have gotten going.
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
quote:Well, if you'd actually favor using military force in places like those - because that is absolutely what would be required - then I don't see an inconsistency and withdraw my objection on that basis.
If we had the troops to send, I'd definitely support it. Right now we're stretched pretty thin.
Posted by sinflower (Member # 12228) on :
quote:And that the whole Soviet threat post-WW2 on was trumped up by evil conservatives and McCarthy.
But this part is actually true. Okay, maybe not "evil conservatives" but certainly McCarthyism. Do you really think McCarthyism favored a rational, realistic worldview?
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by sinflower:
quote:And that the whole Soviet threat post-WW2 on was trumped up by evil conservatives and McCarthy.
But this part is actually true. Okay, maybe not "evil conservatives" but certainly McCarthyism. Do you really think McCarthyism favored a rational, realistic worldview?
I don't like McCarthy's methods. I don't necessarily think his concerns were unjustified, however.
I especially don't think that the Soviet Union (or Communism in a larger sense) was somehow not really a very significant threat.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: How far do you bend over backwards in the name of preventing nuclear war? Not so far as to let Norway be invaded, apparently...but Georgia? I guess they're just not fortunate enough to have been separated long enough from the USSR to really have gotten going.
I must say I doubt Russia would have gone nuclear over Georgia; but really, can one not recognise that the US has interests like any other country, but no commitment to the most pure abstractions of justice? What interest required American intervention in the Georgian conflict, at a time when US troops were pretty thinly stretched anyway? Besides that, is it so obvious that Russia was in the wrong?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:But this part is actually true. Okay, maybe not "evil conservatives" but certainly McCarthyism. Do you really think McCarthyism favored a rational, realistic worldview?
I think two things. One, I think McCarthyism went too far. Two, I think we won't be able to accurately gauge just how much too far they went for at least another decade or two. I think there's a reason such a crappy, broken political and economic system as the Soviet Union lasted four generations, and I don't think it owed to the sheer pluck and gumption of the Soviet government. I think a lot of the reason owed to espionage, and a calculated, long-term approach to espionage that we Americans seem to have a difficult time understanding. Then again the same can be said for foreign, economic, and domestic policy, and it can't be said only of Americans.
quote:I must say I doubt Russia would have gone nuclear over Georgia; but really, can one not recognise that the US has interests like any other country, but no commitment to the most pure abstractions of justice? What interest required American intervention in the Georgian conflict, at a time when US troops were pretty thinly stretched anyway? Besides that, is it so obvious that Russia was in the wrong?
I doubt 'Russia' would have gone nuclear over Georgia anymore than I doubt the United States would over anything other than a nuclear explosion or missiles already in the air.
If one is approaching the situation purely in terms of realpolitik style thinking, I don't have a beef with that. But if we're going to, say, be against tyranny and injustice in Africa as Destineer (and I, for that matter) say we ought to be, where is our duty to be against it everywhere?
As for whether Russia was wrong, well, I think they were wrong but I recognize there's plenty of wriggle room for both sides. But I also think Europe has had quite enough of Russian influence over its neighbors too, which means that when in doubt, I lean away from Russia.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)