Hillary Clinton slams Russia for attempting to rebuild the Soviet Union - Polidicks

IMO, the Soviet Union never ended. Just went underground and is pulling the strings with thugs like Putin. Do you really think something that big and powerful wouldn't have had a sense of self preservation?

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;38777800]Two-power political environments are actually considered more stable and less prone to warfare than 3+ or singular.[/QUOTE] Yeah, Multipolar worlds are much more violent because of the regional hegemonies fighting.

[QUOTE=laserguided;38778729]Its pulled from some random article, its prospective EAU members and current EAU members. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Union[/url][/QUOTE] scary, good thing everyone here knows Finland is not joining that shit

oh lol, sure its fine with European Union and NATO but God forbids if Russia makes something simili- wait wait wait, holdon. Is that fucking Finland? [IMG]http://offiziere.ch/wp-content/uploads/Eurasian-Union.png[/IMG] No, nope, no thank you. We're content with our EU and the possible NATO membership.

Frankly I think it sounds awesome. I don't like the additional repression in the former Soviet-bloc, and the collapse was a horrific event that killed millions, but if the fact of the matter is that if we could get on Russia's good side instead of seeing them as evil commies, then potentially a lot of cooperation on world affairs could get done, providing we stop demonizing them as the red menace. Hell maybe we could outsource part of the war on terror and all that shit to them.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;38777707]Historically, Europe has never much cared for Russia.[/QUOTE] Except for when events in Russia represent a conflict in interests.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;38777800]Two-power political environments are actually considered more stable and less prone to warfare than 3+ or singular.[/QUOTE] It's working well with Democrats and Republicans.

[QUOTE=Marbalo;38777964]All quibbling aside, it's more distressing that she is not even aware of the factors that led up to this. The Russian people weren't even ready for the collapse. A whole lot of folks didn't even want it and many still blame Gorbachev for forcing democracy on people who were used to more authoritarian rule. And nobody could argue with the comparison between modern day Russia and 70-80's Soviet Union. [B]The lack of any organized crime, the decent quality of living, the great education, and above all a nation that held a respectable and quite feared status on the world stage was something that thrilled the population, or at least, kept it satisfied. [/B] After the collapse all that remained was crime, corruption, mass depression and paranoia of society, and an overall shitty country ruled by a handful of questionable people. All this because of external political pressure. I'm not trying to glorify the late days of the Soviet Union, but it was [I]significantly better[/I] than the way things are right now. And the fact that Western politicians act surprised and disappointed when Russia is reverting back to a more authoritarian state clearly shows a very selfish and uninformed nature of the situation. Selfish, because there is no other way Russia can realistically thrive unless it unites or a least seeks help from nations actually willing to grant help, like China and (surprisingly) many post-Soviet states. But apparently seeking some sort of mutual bond to increase the economical output of nations is the second coming of Stalin's Soviet Union.[/QUOTE] You live in a weird reality.

If its a Eurasian union then why add Finland? Also Turkey has plans like this for a turkic /eurasion union. But it excludes Russia... I thunk the radon why they don't add Turkey is because its a top nation allied with America

[QUOTE=Marbalo;38777964]And nobody could argue with the comparison between modern day Russia and 70-80's Soviet Union. The lack of any organized crime, the decent quality of living, the great education, and above all a nation that held a respectable and quite feared status on the world stage was something that thrilled the population, or at least, kept it satisfied. After the collapse all that remained was crime, corruption, mass depression and paranoia of society, and an overall shitty country ruled by a handful of questionable people. All this because of external political pressure. I'm not trying to glorify the late days of the Soviet Union, but it was [I]significantly better[/I] than the way things are right now. [/QUOTE] You're kidding, right?

[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;38779149]You live in a weird reality.[/QUOTE] No, I think you are just uneducated internet person. Russia had good education system in place that they put great effort into to show off to the world. The quality of living was good aswell, althought as with every big nation that varies between areas. They also had different lifestyle and cultural factors so you can't exactly compare Soviet citizen's quality of life with Western countries. People mostly grew their own food, and so starvations and such didn't exist. Up until the collapse of the Soviet Union of course. And how you think any sort of organized crime in Soviet Union was possible when they had entire propaganda campaigns urging citizens to report the slightest suspicious activities due to the paranoia of capitalist spies? Not to talk about the bloody KGB keeping tabs on almost literally everyone.

[QUOTE=smeismastger;38778872]oh lol, sure its fine with European Union and NATO but God forbids if Russia makes something simili- wait wait wait, holdon. Is that fucking Finland? [IMG]http://offiziere.ch/wp-content/uploads/Eurasian-Union.png[/IMG] No, nope, no thank you. We're content with our EU and the possible NATO membership.[/QUOTE] it would be like the YYA Treaty all over again

[QUOTE=Joazzz;38779481]it would be like the YYA Treaty all over again[/QUOTE] Well atleast we wouldn't have the "open border" policy that allows criminals to come and go as they feel like like right now. I give them that.

[QUOTE=smeismastger;38779456]No, I think you are just uneducated internet person. Russia had good education system in place that they put great effort into to show off to the world. And how you think any sort of organized crime in Soviet Union was possible when they had entire propaganda campaigns urging citizens to report the slightest suspicious activities due to the paranoia of capitalist spies? Not to talk about the bloody KGB keeping tabs on almost literally everyone.[/QUOTE] You're forgetting about the complete lack of an economy and the soviet black market during the late 70's, 80's, due to the massive recession. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Era_of_Stagnation[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Soviet_Union#1970.E2.80.931990[/url]

Eurasian Union is basically a Russian Empire 2.0. The not-Russia members are too weak to counter-weight the bear even if they combine themselves.

[QUOTE=Joazzz;38779481]it would be like the YYA Treaty all over again[/QUOTE] yeah, mark us as targets for us nuclear strikes without actually meaning shit edit: even sweden had plans to launch pre-emptive air attacks on ports and railways in finland incase russian troops came over the border because they thought we wouldn't resist because of yya.

So we can make those "in soviet russia"-Jokes again?

[QUOTE=smeismastger;38779456]No, I think you are just uneducated internet person. [B]Russia had good education system in place that they put great effort into to show off to the world.[/B] The quality of living was good aswell, althought as with every big nation that varies between areas. They also had different lifestyle and cultural factors so you can't exactly compare Soviet citizen's quality of life with Western countries. People mostly grew their own food, and so starvations and such didn't exist. Up until the collapse of the Soviet Union of course. And how you think any sort of organized crime in Soviet Union was possible when they had entire propaganda campaigns urging citizens to report the slightest suspicious activities due to the paranoia of capitalist spies? Not to talk about the bloody KGB keeping tabs on almost literally everyone.[/QUOTE] You mean being told fucked over history with distortions making the west look bad and saying that all the soviet union did was help the countries they occupied ? I take it personally because in my country, when the soviet union occupied it and began bringing out there "history", they tried to tell us that they saved us from illiteracy ( when 99% were able to write and read ).They said that the occupation was good, but in reality they just sucked out the life out of our nation. Living quality was quite shit.The best way to get something was to use a "blat" if you knew someone with a good position. The reason most people grew there own food is because most of the people BEFORE occupation mostly worked in farms, rather then in cities. Refer to this post to be completely ridiculed. - [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1197956&p=36782483&viewfull=1#post36782483[/url]

[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;38780022] Refer to this post to be completely ridiculed. - [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1197956&p=36782483&viewfull=1#post36782483[/url][/QUOTE] That's great in the context of that thread, but what does that have to do with quality of life in the Soviet Union during the 70's and 80's?

[QUOTE=FrankOfArabia;38779568]You're forgetting about the complete lack of an economy and the soviet black market during the late 70's, 80's, due to the massive recession. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Era_of_Stagnation[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Soviet_Union#1970.E2.80.931990[/url][/QUOTE] Lack of economy...rofl Glad to see in these days you can still say anything about the USSR and people will believe it.

[QUOTE][IMG]http://offiziere.ch/wp-content/uploads/Eurasian-Union.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] There is no way in hell Finland would want to join that

[QUOTE=Conscript;38780283]Lack of economy...rofl Glad to see in these days you can still say anything about the USSR and people will believe it.[/QUOTE] The economy of the Soviet Union was crumbling due to a rise in arms manufacturing in the early 80s and that the Soviet Union poured tons of money into the Eastern Bloc in order to keep those countries from falling apart. The USSR sold everything they could to their satellite states at below-market costs in order to keep them socialist and in their sphere of influence, away from the west. The problem when you sell at below-market prices for a long time is, eventually that debt amounts so high that it can't be repaid. When the oil and gas prices dropped in the 80s, it severely crippled the USSR economy which that was a big portion of. By the late 80s, continuing to funnel unpaid-back cash into the Eastern Bloc, staying up with a never ending war in Afghanistan and unable to keep up with the renewed arms race left the Soviet Union dead broke. It's why they didn't invade Poland during the early 80s with the Solidarity movement. If they invaded Poland, they would have to assume Poland's national debt to their own (while an invasion cripples their infrastructure), which they could not financially do.

[QUOTE=smeismastger;38778872]oh lol, sure its fine with European Union and NATO but God forbids if Russia makes something simili- wait wait wait, holdon. Is that fucking Finland? [IMG]http://offiziere.ch/wp-content/uploads/Eurasian-Union.png[/IMG] No, nope, no thank you. We're content with our EU and the possible NATO membership.[/QUOTE] Something that resembles an Asian NATO more closely is the SOC. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/SCO_%28orthographic_projection%29.svg/500px-SCO_%28orthographic_projection%29.svg.png[/img] but it's not a military alliance, however they're cooperating with [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Organisation[/url] which is more like NATO.

[QUOTE=Rika-chan;38777748]Hillary Clinton isn't looking her best[/QUOTE] She's not far from seventy, I would said the opposite. It's hard to imagine many people her age with stressful jobs manage to keep up their appearances even half as well as she does.

woo go Russia

[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;38777874]How about we take the people who are pretty delusional out of the area ? I think that would probably make for a "nil"[/QUOTE] No it wouldn't, most people here don't want another soviet union, and those who do are in fact delusional. I like my country as it is right now, thank you

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;38780773]No it wouldn't, most people here don't want another soviet union, and those who do are in fact delusional. I like my country as it is right now, thank you[/QUOTE] most Ukrainians I know share that sentiment. They aren't proposing the baltics as part of this alliance for obv. reasons. [editline]10th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;38779123]It's working well with Democrats and Republicans.[/QUOTE] except that's totally different he's talking geopolitics, you're talking domestic politics.

[QUOTE=trotskygrad;38780918]most Ukrainians I know share that sentiment. They aren't proposing the baltics as part of this alliance for obv. reasons. [/QUOTE] Ukraine is the path to a warm water port and access to the southern oceans via the Suez Canal. I don't believe Russia will ever stop looking to some way to incorporate that nation into itself as it has done in the past.

because 90% of the republics are SOOOO much better off now. Ukraine and the western satellites are doing well and that's it.

I think it's funny you make a post full of uncited claims, and you get a bunch of agrees. Thanks for proving my point. [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;38780385]The economy of the Soviet Union was crumbling due to a rise in arms manufacturing in the early 80s and that the Soviet Union poured tons of money into the Eastern Bloc in order to keep those countries from falling apart.[/quote] [url]http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~theed/Cold_War/f_Conclusion/media/Figure2.jpg[/url] [url]http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~theed/Cold_War/f_Conclusion/media/GDP_Growth_Rate_b.jpg[/url] Soviet GDP was growing all the way until the gorbachev years. Defense spending as a share of GDP dropped in the reagan era. The soviets were arms exporters for decades, selling cheap stuff to anyone, including pact members, who doubled as a consumer base for soviet products and an exporter of resources to the USSR. The satellites were not simple money pits. [Quote]The USSR sold everything they could to their satellite states at below-market costs in order to keep them socialist and in their sphere of influence, away from the west.[/quote] In order to develop these nations and eventually make money off trade with them, which they did. Consider the relationship between cuba and the USSR. Members of the trade bloc basically exported everything to the USSR. [Quote]The problem when you sell at below-market prices for a long time is, eventually that debt amounts so high that it can't be repaid. When the oil and gas prices dropped in the 80s, it severely crippled the USSR economy which that was a big portion of.[/quote] The russian federation paid this debt that's 'so high it can't be repaid', with an economy a fraction the size of the USSR and also in shambles. The biggest problem for the warsaw pact and the USSR and the debt they had, was that the loans were made mostly by the west, whose interest rates persistently rose from 86 onwards. [url]http://www.nytimes.com/1989/03/02/business/east-europe-s-burden-of-debt.html[/url] Nearly 40% of the debt total at the end of 1988 was accrued over 4 years. More garbage on gorbachev's platter. [Quote]By the late 80s, continuing to funnel unpaid-back cash into the Eastern Bloc, staying up with a never ending war in Afghanistan and unable to keep up with the renewed arms race left the Soviet Union dead broke.[/quote] 1. There was no renewed arms race. 2. The war in afghanistan was waning on its scale and resistance. Hell, the DRA continued to exist after the collapse of the USSR. [Quote]It's why they didn't invade Poland during the early 80s with the Solidarity movement.[/quote] No, they didn't because gorbachev made a pledge to have nothing to do with the affairs of the warsaw pact countries. [Quote]If they invaded Poland, they would have to assume Poland's national debt to their own (while an invasion cripples their infrastructure), which they could not financially do.[/QUOTE] Are you going to cite any of this?