11 ms·

> Russian hegemony What does this mean?

• Robotbeat 5y ago
  Ask a Ukrainian!
  • datameta 5y ago
    Or a Georgian, or a Chechen.
    • the-dude 5y ago
      Can we conclude from your example and your parents' that for Germany the term is hyperbole?
      • datameta 5y ago
        I am not quite sure what you are saying or implying. What parent comment is pointing out is that Russia has invaded sovereign nations (cultural and economic allies) in the 21st century. In one instance of such it would go on to vehemently deny its involvement.
        • the-dude 5y ago
          That is not a hegemony right?
          • datameta 5y ago
            From wikipedia: > Hegemony is the political, economic, or military predominance of one state over other states.
            • the-dude 5y ago
              So it isn't. Why don't you answer the question yourself?
              • datameta 5y ago
                Please explain how an invasion of a sovereign nation does not qualify as military predominance.
        • Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
          Looks like US and NATO doing it all the time - well, till someone like taliban kicks them out
          • throwaway894345 5y ago
            > well, till someone like taliban kicks them out You might want to learn your history if you think Russia has never been kicked out by "someone like the Taliban". Mind you, Afghanistan was a much more peaceful country before the USSR invaded, but I won't fault a country too harshly for the impossible-to-predict consequences of meddling; however, I will fault a country for the motives of their meddling in the first place. E.g., does a country meddle to support or overthrow a violent regime? Do they aspire to liberate or oppress?
            • Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
              > Mind you, Afghanistan was a much more peaceful country before the USSR invaded Really? Where did you get that notion? As far as I know, it was under military junta rule > E.g., does a country meddle to support or overthrow a violent regime? And? Daud regime in Afghanistan was violent, isn't it?
  • teekert 5y ago
    Yes, and then we ask an Iranian what being influenced by the US means, and we stop all international collaboration and just focus on the EU. But then we shouldn't ask southern Europeans what northern European influencing is... I get that horrible things have happened, and nations did horrible things to each other. But we are citizens and I wish nothing but the best for citizens of other countries. I don't want war or influencing. I would like my gas to be a bit cheaper and preferably cleaner. Power to Iranian, Ukranian, Russian, EU and US (and all) citizens. I hope we can one day untangle our leaders from the companies in our countries and just make them do what is best for us.
    • datameta 5y ago
      I can see your words are amicable but drawing an equivalence of wrongdoing to another wrongdoer does not exonerate the former (Russia).
      • throwaway210222 5y ago
        > but drawing an equivalence of wrongdoing to another wrongdoer does not exonerate the former (Russia). Incorrect, it completely exonerates them if you are going to merrily let the the other wrongdoer carry on with the offending behaviour. If you disagree, ask what's the moral case for not dealing the other wrongdoer tomorrow morning?
        • datameta 5y ago
          My deep embarassment at the peace wrecking actions of the other wrongdoer (USA) as a citizen of the country in no way diminishes my absolute condemnation of Russia's actions toward Ukraine, as someone whose ancestry is from both the perpetrator and victim nation.
          • throwaway210222 5y ago
            My thoughts exactly. So lets deal with Russia today, and de-fang the USA tomorrow at 9am. No? Why not? See?
• throwaway894345 5y ago
  “Russian influence” would probably been a clearer choice of words.
  • the-dude 5y ago
    So what is exactly wrong with some Russian influence? As a Dutchie I am continously influenced by Americans, Germans, Frenchmen etc.
    • BurningFrog 5y ago
      Russia controlling much of your energy supply that they can turn off at will gives them power over you. Very different from choosing to watch American movies or cooking French food.
      • the-dude 5y ago
        They can only do this one time. AFAIK they do not have a history of doing this, only when terms of actual gas deals are not met. Which is common business sense. edit: you are downplaying US influence. Are you aware The Netherlands is a host for US nuclear weapons?
        • datameta 5y ago
          They used natural gas as a political lever with Ukraine on a constant basis. The same would be the case with Belarussia if they weren't forcefully aligned as political allies (an attempt at which is one of the main reasons of the Ukrainian invasion).
          • the-dude 5y ago
            Do you have sources Russia used this lever even though all terms of the deal were met? ( basically, the bills were paid ).
            • 5y ago
• gego 5y ago
  ...this is not what happened - Russia did deliver on time and the reserves were sold off. Now those same people cry wolf and want Exporters to offer more for cheap...