#meme #memestr #nostrmemes #memes 830,113 🤙💜

Thanks for the historical/cultural insight.

Ultimately the stupidest part of the interview seems to have been the first thirty minutes.

If he hadn't gone on that long political history rant the conversation would have been much more rational. In the context of what I have seen in these replies that portion just seems like an over-complicated way to cope with guilt.

Is Russia really putting up new statues of Stalin?

Sort of. Except Russia is the empire. There are still many federation subjects with their own "titular" ethnicities. Bashkirs, Tatars, Karelians, and more. I think that's part of the problem that they can't figure out of they're running a nation state or an empire.

But yeah, Russia hasn't successfully run a democracy for a meaningful period of time. So they don't have the collective memory to fall back on how to run a democratic country. They then believe en-masse that it's not actually possible, and that it's a sham everywhere.

It really looked like there was a period after the Soviet Union where they really tried to run a "normal" country. Then that didn't work out, so they fell back to what they're used to - having a tsar. If you look at Russian history, that's a recurring pattern. They try to modernize and be like any other European country, then that doesn't work, then they become antagonistic to the West. Then they lag behind in development. Then someone figures to try and modernize and be "normal". Rinse and repeat. I hope they can somehow break out of that cycle eventually.

Stack n sit back

No. It’s just western. I still wonder if all these wars are organised in the background anyway. Bitcoin will hopefully fix it.

Yeah, pretty much. We basically started the government, the military, the intelligence services from scratch right away. Whereas in Ukraine initially the same Soviet institutions persisted. Including the personnel.

But there are reasons for that. Our historical situation was markedly different. Latvia was a full fledged nation during the whole interwar period. One that was well developed industrially and socially. Think interwar Denmark or Finland. So from our perspective, and also according to internation law, we restarted that country, treating the Soviet Period as illegal occupation. As we didnt want a repeat of that situation we single mindedly took the geopolitical course "as far away from Russia as we can get".

For all the other ex-Soviet countries apart from the Baltics the situation was different in that for them the independence sort of 'happened'. E.g., they didnt spend late eighties trying to get out of it. So then the response was different too.

The story is widely misreported.

They are levying fees against automated bulk messaging platforms (sms spammers, basically)

This is not a free speech thing. It’s a pay-to-spam in bulk thing.

#meme #memestr #nostrmemes #memes 829,915 🤙💜

Wow that was an interesting read. Thanks

Thanks for the historical/cultural insight.

Ultimately the stupidest part of the interview seems to have been the first thirty minutes.

If he hadn't gone on that long political history rant the conversation would have been much more rational. In the context of what I have seen in these replies that portion just seems like an over-complicated way to cope with guilt.

Is Russia really putting up new statues of Stalin?

Thanks for the historical/cultural insight.

Ultimately the stupidest part of the interview seems to have been the first thirty minutes.

If he hadn't gone on that long political history rant the conversation would have been much more rational. In the context of what I have seen in these replies that portion just seems like an over-complicated way to cope with guilt.

Is Russia really putting up new statues of Stalin?

Thanks for sharing your perspective. That helps me understand the situation better.

I am under the impression that Latvia is fairly independent and that Belarus is more or less a puppet government of Russia. Does that match your view of the situation?

Well said.

I will not morally defend the actions of Putin or the Russian army- but I also can’t morally defend Nato/CIA involvement in the 2014 Ukraine coup, or the actions of the Ukraine government against the eastern regions after that.

Similar to the NATO bombings of Belgrade Serbia, after the Croatians got assurances/support from US/Nato and ended that part of the Yugoslav war- NATO took it too far with their response to the war in Bosnia.

We have a path forward for peace: trade and business relations reopen with a globally independent and decentralized monetary unit.

As long as one countries fiat is enforced as a unit of trade, there will be constant conflict and often war.

Yeah, Biden couldn't do an interview like this, and it would be pointless anyway. You'd have to talk to the real puppet-masters behind the scenes, possibly Victoria Nuland or Susan Rice (or even other Deep State denizens buried more deeply in The Swamp) to get the U.S.-NATO rationale.

Perhaps along the national self-determination line of argument, one could argue that #Ukraine has the right to join NATO if it wants to. Russia saying that it can't is like the U.S. trying to dictate what nations can and can't have nukes. But I do understand Russia not wanting missiles pointed at it right on her border, just like the U.S. objected to Soviet missiles stationed in Cuba during the Cold War. Perhaps if the Ukraine were to join NATO they should agree not to do this.

But the real rationale for US-NATO actions in this conflict probably has to do with stirring up trouble for #Russia in order to keep the Military-Industrial-Complex gravy-train alive, as well as hiding the money-laundering and bioweapons development that the Deep State had going on there...

I've had a couple days to reflect on the Putin interview and watch how others have reacted to it.

This post may trigger some, but I have no control over how people choose to interpret what they read.

First, I will say Putin and Russia's military actions are reprehensible. I will never be an advocate for big government, war, or any sort of violence.

That being said I have not found a major point from the conversation that I disagree with. I am not an expert in European history so I can't comment on the accuracy of the first thirty minutes, but regarding the current global state of affairs, it seems Putin has a grasp on the reality of the situation. He seems to be exclusively focused on Russia's best interest and he resisted several opportunities to trash his opponents.

In comparison, the US has been screaming about Russia interfering in elections and blaming them for our inflation. Neither of these claims have been proven and the latter is completely ridiculous from a monetary policy perspective.

The arguments I have heard against Putin's position have largely been character attacks or appeals to emotion. Both are worth considering, but lack logos. So far I have not heard a logical rebuttal of his claims.

I would like to hear rational arguments against his position if anyone has some points to share.

I have no desire to argue Russia's position or any other nation. My primary interest has always been in fostering peace and a greater understanding of the world we live in.

My 2 cents is Russia has been fighting a rear guard action against aggression for years. Considering the psychological impact of Germany moving so fast East in the Second World War and that geography makes Moscow vulnerable, it’s hard to perceive of other responses from them. The question I always have is if USA/Europe stop attacking people all over the world, would we have more peace or would those that we attack feel emboldened to project state violence? We cannot know the answer until western nations stop attacking other nations perpetually.