Lemdro.id

1 point

1 year ago

Finlandization comes from Dugin, and his book which has so far defined Russian foreign policy objectives. We can argue back and forth whether Putin and his government agrees with those goals, but support for right wing parties across Europe, dividing the US along racist lines, and supporting Brexit speaks to it being true.

The US is not an immediate military threat for Europe. Economic, ideological, maybe, but not military. Russia is. So US bad, yes, but Russia bad too, and Russia is here.

report

420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net

[ - ]

1 point

1 year ago

So “Finalndization” (again, whatever you think that means) is not in fact “the stated goal of Russia.” You claim (without sourcing) it’s from a Russian academic and then acknowledge there’s room to speculate how much impact that academic’s work has on the Russian government.

The US is not an immediate military threat for Europe.

You’re changing the subject. I said:

You do not apply your “retaliation against warmongers” logic against the most aggressive country on the planet. This is because you do not actually believe it; you’re just using it to justify fighting an enemy you already wanted to fight.
Retaliation against the most aggressive country on the planet has not deterred it from further warmongering, so your logic is largely disproven, anyway.

report

[ - ]

1 point

1 year ago

All I’m saying that sitting here in Rotterdam, if the Ukrainian bro asks if they can bomb the peeps who said they will nuke Rotterdam, I don’t see people here saying no. Nobody here wants to fight anyone, WWII still has some open scars here. But so does MH370.

The US might be a fucktard, but it’s not them threatening us militarily currently. And on changing the subject, why are we talking about the US again?

report

420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net

[ - ]

0 points

1 year ago

the peeps who said they will nuke Rotterdam

Who is saying this? Russia sure isn’t. You keep making up threats.

And on changing the subject, why are we talking about the US again?

If you actually believe that aggressive, militaristic countries should face retaliation to get them to back down – if you actually hold that as a principle – you would apply it to all such countries, and the #1 example of that is the U.S.

You don’t apply it to the U.S., which shows you don’t actually believe it. You only apply it to countries you’ve already deemed enemies.

You keep saying Russia is your enemy because they’re threatening you, but all you’ve mentioned are invented threats, not anything Russia has actually said or did towards your country.

report

[ - ]

1 point

1 year ago

Two days ago, a Duma member suggested nuking Rotterdam. The same thing happened months ago, and every few months in the past two years.

Russian soldiers also actually shot down an airliner full of Dutch people, and tried covering it up.

I didn’t say that I support US policy, and you keep trying to deflect by pointing to them saying they are worse. And they may be, but they aren’t currently threatening military action against the EU.

report

420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net

[ - ]

1 point

1 year ago

Two days ago, a Duma member suggested nuking Rotterdam.

Show me a source. Earlier in this conversation you said something was the “stated policy of Russia,” then when you went to find a source it turned out it was not.

Russian soldiers also actually shot down an airliner

Presumably you’re referring to Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. That was not shot down by Russia, but by Ukranian separatists using a Russian-supplied weapon. I’m not aware of any evidence that anyone intentionally targeted it, either, much less intentionally targeted it because it had Dutch citizens. Non-Russians mistaking an airliner for a military target is not the same as Russia targeting you.

I didn’t say that I support US policy

OK, so what military retaliation against the U.S. do you endorse? Do you apply your policy of retaliation to everyone, or not? That’s what I’m getting at – you do not apply your policy of retaliation to everyone, only countries you’ve already decided are Bad Countries. This isn’t deflecting, it’s showing that you are not being honest when you say “aggressive countries should see military retaliation.”

report

[ - ]

https://www.newsweek.com/russian-official-nato-target-nuclear-strike-netherlands-1908346

1 point

1 year ago

Earlier in this conversation you said something was the “stated policy of Russia,”

Dugin’s book “The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia” has had a profound impact on Russian politics, shortly after its release the Duma had created a geopolitics committee staffed by Dugin’s adherents, it became a textbook for the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian military. So is Dugin’s book Russia’s official foreign policy? No. Does the book have a profound impact on Russian politics, and is it a guiding star for Russian ambitions?

Absolutely. If you ask Dugin, the only thing Putin is doing wrong is that he’s not doing it fast enough.

Dugin’s Russian faction is basically seeking the establishment of a new Russian Empire, and its methods - alliance with Iran, stoking ethnic tensions to encourage separatism in countries like Georgia, Azerbaijan or Ukraine and isolationism in the US or the UK are very visibly used by Russian foreign policy.

Russia officially says it’s not doing it, but Russia looks like Dugin, swims like Dugin and quacks like Dugin.

Show me a source.

For Russia threatening the Rotterdam Havens with nuclear strikes?

Here:

INB4 “well, it’s newsweek”, they are sourcing a Duma member on Russian state television.

And also:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67222213 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60547473

Presumably you’re referring to Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. That was not shot down by Russia, but by Ukranian separatists using a Russian-supplied weapon.

Ukrainian separatists in Russian “little green men” uniforms, coming from Russia, retreating back into Russia, with a launcher identified as belonging to the 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade, speaking with Moscow accents? After Russia claimed first that the plane they shot down was a Ukrainian An-26, then that they didn’t shoot down anything, it was a Ukrainian Su-25 with its short range infrared missiles? And after that, claimed it was actually a Ukrainian Buk? And now it’s “it wasn’t us, the Ukrainian Russian separatists are completely independent of us”? Is the Netherlands supposed to accept this fourth story after three proven lies and after independently confirming the responsibility of Russian citizens, and after Russia refused to be transparent during the investigation?

OK, so what military retaliation against the U.S. do you endorse?

Proportional retaliation for their aggressive actions. Right now, it’s mostly trade tariff back-and-forth over chicken and light trucks and stuff. The US has not been engaged in military action against European militaries since WWII. I would support diplomatic rebukes over the spy scandals of the last decade, though.

And I’m saying the same thing against Russia. Russian sponsored insurgents and Russian spies have attacked European civilians? Donating and selling weapons to this other neighbouring state which is fighting a defensive war against them is completely fair game.

report