4 ms·

> In 1994, "the west" will supply Chechen insurgents and help them with press campaigns and supply via proxy. sources, this is quite an outlandish claim? > In

> In 1994, "the west" will supply Chechen insurgents and help them with press campaigns and supply via proxy. sources, this is quite an outlandish claim? > In 2014, Russia will supply Donbass insurgents and help them with press campaigns and supply via proxy. Do you mean Russian troops invaded Ukraine but took off their id tags and have full military support? (and diplomatic since everyone knows they're Russian troops and anyone other then Ukraine killing them would provoke war?)

thriftwy 5y ago
"the west" was on good terms with many islamist groups pre-2001, and they happily provided troops for Chechen side. You can start with https://translate.yandex.ru/translate?url=https%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FИностранные_боевики_на_Северном_Кавказе&lang=ru-en https://translate.yandex.ru/translate?url=https%3A%2F%2Fru.w... With a lot of western media routinely showing Chechen insurgents as good people, Russian army as bad people (and then, showing Donbass insurgents as bad people, Ukrainian army as good people) they had it all fully coming. Wagging your tongue in press is an act of war.
- adriancr 5y ago
  You're not getting off this easy. This is what you said: > In 1994, "the west" will supply Chechen insurgents and help them with press campaigns and supply via proxy. Where's the sources that "the west" supplied the Chechen insurgents and helped them? And please share an English version of wikipedia, not a yandex translated version of a wikipedia page in Russian that has edits which have not even been verified. (which should have an equivalent in English anyway but I could not find it) What I would expect is similar to the CIA involvement in Afghanistan when Russia invaded which is widely sourced and documented and a quick google search away. If there was such involvement as you say, it would have sources already. (that being 30 years ago)
  - thriftwy 5y ago
    We're not in court and I don't owe you whatever you demand, while being content with whatever you provide. I'm just saying that, based on Russian wikipedia, Russians have moral base to think they're getting worse treatment from other parties than their own treatment of other parties, so they are on the good side of Kantian categorical imperative. You can't disprove that by just saying "I don't agree", "I don't like your wikipedia" and "My media says otherwise".
    - adriancr 5y ago
      I'm not disproving, you made an statement without sources, that doesn't make it true. If you had sources I would have likely learned something new.

thriftwy 5y ago

"the west" was on good terms with many islamist groups pre-2001, and they happily provided troops for Chechen side. You can start with https://translate.yandex.ru/translate?url=https%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FИностранные_боевики_на_Северном_Кавказе&lang=ru-en https://translate.yandex.ru/translate?url=https%3A%2F%2Fru.w... With a lot of western media routinely showing Chechen insurgents as good people, Russian army as bad people (and then, showing Donbass insurgents as bad people, Ukrainian army as good people) they had it all fully coming. Wagging your tongue in press is an act of war.

adriancr 5y ago
You're not getting off this easy. This is what you said: > In 1994, "the west" will supply Chechen insurgents and help them with press campaigns and supply via proxy. Where's the sources that "the west" supplied the Chechen insurgents and helped them? And please share an English version of wikipedia, not a yandex translated version of a wikipedia page in Russian that has edits which have not even been verified. (which should have an equivalent in English anyway but I could not find it) What I would expect is similar to the CIA involvement in Afghanistan when Russia invaded which is widely sourced and documented and a quick google search away. If there was such involvement as you say, it would have sources already. (that being 30 years ago)
- thriftwy 5y ago
  We're not in court and I don't owe you whatever you demand, while being content with whatever you provide. I'm just saying that, based on Russian wikipedia, Russians have moral base to think they're getting worse treatment from other parties than their own treatment of other parties, so they are on the good side of Kantian categorical imperative. You can't disprove that by just saying "I don't agree", "I don't like your wikipedia" and "My media says otherwise".
  - adriancr 5y ago
    I'm not disproving, you made an statement without sources, that doesn't make it true. If you had sources I would have likely learned something new.