chrysler

10 ms·

31.
by chrysler 3y ago
There was never any agreement, because a suggestion of even such agreement is anachronistic garbage. I'll let Soviet foreign minister Shevardnadze explain it: >> SPIEGEL ONLINE: In February 1990, Germany's foreign minister a
32.
by chrysler 3y ago
In Eastern Europe, those metaphors sound like "the final solution to the Jewish problem" sounds to western audiences. I mean, just look at it: >> Russia is restoring its unity - the tragedy of 1991, this terrible catastrophe
33.
by chrysler 3y ago
It's not, if you consider his bio. He had a delusion that he could reform the USSR, make republics sign a new union treaty and maintain Russian dominance over Eastern Europe. Russia - leader, others - serfs who have only as much freedo
34.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> Who’s next? Bush Sr.? Let's see what Soviet foreign minister Shevardnadze had to say: https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/interview-with-e... Denies that the subject even came up with Western
35.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> Are you seriously suggesting Russia is responsible for more death and destruction around the world than the US? Yes, without any question. WWII alone is responsible for tens of millions of deaths. USSR enabled Germany by dividing E
36.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> Yep, this is typical of Westerners. We know you Russians are dumb and don't appreciate our "great democracy". Yeah, we had a taste of it in the 1990s. USA came and destroyed the country, economy, jobs, the future. CI
37.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> What is a trusted source? How can I find one? I think this is close to impossible. Of course, everyone reads what one consider "trusted" source, but I have doubt any of them is. Sounds like you have become a perfect speci
38.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> The USA would not tolerate China in their "sphere of influence". Krushchev and Cuba learned that. 1. Nobody takes "spheres of influence" seriously in modern day. It's a 19th century simplification that divi
39.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> only once people see both entities as bad a proper thesis about a better more just world can be made. You're putting a loser mentality on full display. As much as cynical smartass Russians like to mock "fat stupid America
40.
by chrysler 3y ago
If you want Americans to run your country and be responsible for everything that happens there, then start by flying Stars and Stripes over the Kremlin.
41.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> Official "invitations" to the first round countries (PL, CZ, SK, HU) were issued around 1997 -- but that's the last step in the process. Not the last step at all. In July 1997, NATO invited Poland, Czech Republic and
42.
by chrysler 3y ago
I am referring to the 1997 Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation. It was signed in May 1997 during NATO summit in Paris. At the next summit in July, the first former Warsaw Pact c
43.
by chrysler 3y ago
And that's why I call it a conspiracy theory - it relies on a small number of select snippets, interpreted in the most favorable way possible, ignoring things like explicit statements to the opposite from the very same sources. A textb
44.
by chrysler 3y ago
My quote is from the same interview. I repeat: "The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years." If that interview leaves anything unclear, then Spiegel tried to get a "yes, as
45.
by chrysler 3y ago
Soviet leadership, including Gorbachev himself, have explicitly denied that any assurances existed. Like Shevardnadze, he denied that they even talked about it with western counterparts. In his own words: "The topic of ‘NATO expansion’
46.
by chrysler 3y ago
As Shevardnadze clarifies, all they talked about NATO was strictly in the context of German reunification and attempts to take quotes out of context are anarchronistic. What assurances did the USSR need if it had a large nuclear-equipped gr
47.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> Because it was verbally promised by different high ranking officials, that the NATO would NOT move further east. Not according to the Soviet foreign minister at the time. He also explains why this conspiracy theory is nonsense: at
48.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> But europe is not the US, as far as I know. Doesn't really change anything in the equation. Russian missiles in Kaliningrad can hit key US military installations like Ramstein AFB and RAF Lakenheath with practically no warning
49.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> persistent and excessive >> intense and often irrational There's nothing excessive or irrational in not wanting to die for your bunker rat's fever dreams. And they are absolutely correct to point out that using the
50.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> That USA would in fact tolerate chinese military in mexico? This is such a poor rhethorical question. Why play with hypothethicals like Mexico and China, if Europe already has direct Russian nukes in Kaliningrad enclave in the midd
51.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> That's how the alliance markets itself, but that's not how everyone in the world, especially their potential adversaries, perceives it. Not since 1990, at least. Cold War era defensive structures were dismantled when Wars
52.
by chrysler 3y ago
Comparisons with Cuba ignore the fact that the balance of military power in Europe is heavily in Russia's favor. For example, Russia hosts nuclear missiles in Kaliningrad enclave, in the middle of Europe. Map: https://www.wa
53.
by chrysler 3y ago
Not only have Russians flooded cities, they are also firing artillery into flooded areas to hamper rescue efforts: https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/16667845787473960... If your mental model of the world
54.
by chrysler 3y ago
Despite all the imperialism, Russians keep their wallets close. Western-aligned government (with expected rise in living standard) would've been an argument to stay in Ukraine, not to leave for Russia. In grander scheme, I believe that
55.
by chrysler 3y ago
Agreed. Three things that stood out: - "You had nothing to fear unless you were plotting something": someone overhearing mild criticism or a politically charged joke was enough to ruin lives, get yourself or relatives kicked out o
56.
by chrysler 3y ago
Bananas have a symbol status, given how mundane they are in countries that are open to international trade and how infamously difficult they were to get back then (among many other similarly mundane products). In mid-1950s, USSR imported 20
57.
by chrysler 3y ago
Stockholm syndrome. My father swears by rock hard toffee candy, because that's how they were by the time they reached his local store. Modern iteration that stays soft as intended and melts in mouth is blasphemy according to him.
58.
by chrysler 3y ago
CIA notoriously overestimated the USSR by assuming competence within (what seemed to them) reasonable bounds. Bananas were luxury items and this sad thing was the most popular ice cream, fondly remembered to this day, because there was noth
59.
by chrysler 3y ago
>> in socialist societies it's the working class How does it manifest itself? Did the Eastern Bloc working class have the best access to education, medicine and goods? Was there no party elite with dedicated hospitals and exclusi
60.
by chrysler 3y ago
It's all a part of the same picture. Details and figures may vary a little based on which periods are used for reference, but the overall story remains the same. As of April, according to RU FinMin, income from oil&gas is down -52%

More ›