Posted on 02/12/2016 1:03:48 PM PST by Trumpinator
Pope Francis if the first Rome and Patriarch Kirill of the third Rome are to release a joint declaration to touch on the single most important issue of shared concern between the Catholic and Orthodox churches today: the plight of Christians in Iraq and Syria and Africa who are being killed and driven from their homes by Islamists.
I guess that makes Putin's Russia the defacto defender of Christendom.
Two Romes have fallen, but the third stands, and a fourth there will not be." The Russian Monk Philotheus c. 1520
I have not seen the declaration yet to post it on here.
---
Baltics have lower strategic value to Russia these days. Just like the Suez Canal is not as important to the British empire. They both retain a geo-strategic value but it's not what it used to be. It would be a loss leader for Russia to occupy the Baltics as I remember stating because those areas have zero natural resources. It actually makes Russia money to sell them gas and power. Plus they were bypassed by Russia's underwater pipeline direct to Germany. The discussion had to do with Russia invading the Baltics. What for? The Baltics are not worth it to occupy by Russia.
As far as economic value? Hong Kong has zero natural resources (are you thinking about coal, again?) . . . do the Chinese have eyes on it, or not?
The discussion had to do with a war game where Russia wiped out NATO in a Baltics war. I mentioned that NATO is focused on the wrong theater of Russian Geo-strategic interest.
The discussion was about starting a war for the Baltics. They have too little (or did I say no value) value for that. It would not even end NATO if Russia pulled it off. But if they can knock Turkey out of NATO by tricking them into getting involved in a North Syrian war with the Kurds - that does have strategic value to Russia.
But you twisted that around for some reason - freaked you out. Oh well.
Here is the thread in question.
I love it when Commies whine about Nazis.
Can you list the 5 biggest differences between Nazis and Commies?
Whenever I ask that question, the Commies always run away without answering.
So you want 5 biggest differences between Nazis and Commies?
1) Nazism / Fascism are based on a mystical mythology while Commies try and see the world through science. For example Einstein's theories were rejected by the Nazis as being false "Jew Physics".
2) Nazism / Fascism was past based - they were attempting to go back to an original superman ancestor ideal. Commies think they are getting rid of the past to form a new paradigm.
3) Nazism / Fascism embrace ethnicity and separation from other people (aka nationalism) - sometimes violently so. Commies embrace the universality of man around the concept of the working class and are anti-nationalist. Nazism / Fascism is pro racists world view and commies embrace multi-ethnicity / melting pot concepts.
4) Nazism / Fascism allow for private ownership and are in partnership with large corporations and allow them to make large profits. Commies of course eliminate the profit motive and usurp private property.
5) Nazism / Fascism believe in the rule of a fuehrer uber alles. The commies believe in the power of the party via it's ruling institutions. In some cases, if you view anarchists in the same family as commies (though they both seem to hate each other) then commies themselves don't believe in having any power structure or authority other than the proletariat.
This was a fun exercise. Now tell us why you back those Nazi loving scum in Kiev? I don't back either side. Not my problem and those are not my ancestral people either.
German nuclear and rocket science during the war seemed pretty scientific to me. Lysenko may have disagreed.
2) Nazism / Fascism was past based - they were attempting to go back to an original superman ancestor ideal. Commies think they are getting rid of the past to form a new paradigm.
Trying to recreate the imaginary Aryan superman vs trying to create an imaginary New Soviet Man.
3)Nazism / Fascism is pro racists world view and commies embrace multi-ethnicity / melting pot concepts.
Commies did plenty of persecution against the Jews.
4) Nazism / Fascism allow for private ownership and are in partnership with large corporations and allow them to make large profits. Commies of course eliminate the profit motive and usurp private property.
Doesn't sound like Commies come out on top.
5) Nazism / Fascism believe in the rule of a fuehrer uber alles. The commies believe in the power of the party via it's ruling institutions.
One the one hand, Hitler and Mussolini.
On the other, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong-il, Kim Jong-un, Putin.
Now tell us why you back those Nazi loving scum in Kiev?
Nazi loving? How many Nazis got elected in Ukraine? As opposed to those Commie scum in Russia like Putin.
I don't back either side.
Based on your attacks on Ukraine and your defense of Russia and Putin, I find that difficult to believe.
German nuclear and rocket science during the war seemed pretty scientific to me. Lysenko may have disagreed.
------
Wrong application. The Nazis thought that there was actual magic in blood and in ideology and that they could pull off world conquest via magical thinking. That is why Hitler made those insane battlefield decisions. Somehow the "Triumph Of The Will" over actual real world facts would win out.
The rest are of your comments don't merit respect. I did not in any way say commies were successful - I just highlighted differences.
Communists hit on Jews the same way they did on Christians - they identified with a religion. Marx himself was a Jew, after all as were many Communist leaders in the USSR. Also, the persecution was also hit on Jews because they showed loyalty to Israel - same reason China persecutes Catholics because they show loyalty to the pope (in their twisted view that is).
The rest you did not seem to be able to counter argue "Doesn't sound like Commies come out on top" is a stupid reply - you asked for differences not whose system worked better.
I don't back either side.
Based on your attacks on Ukraine and your defense of Russia and Putin, I find that difficult to believe.
---------
I have never once called for helping Russia over the Ukraine. I don't know if you have called for the USA to help Kiev but I won't help those neo-nazi loving bastards if I can help it.
And the Neo-Nazis in Kiev pretty much run roughshod over the newly formed govt and make up most of the armed militias since the Uke army seems unwilling to fully commit to the war in the east.
So unless you want to also stay out of it - then your position is just like mine - your side (I assume) wants to actively arm those scum neo nazi militias. It is like McCain wanting to arm Syrian jihadis and pretending the Syrian rebels are not linked to al-Qaeda and ISIS in a loose alliance.
That's on you. You try and paint it as you have to be pro -Russian to not back the Kiev coup govt. I don't back either side. Including the commie scum in the east. I am not a Slav. They are not my people and neither side is worth any American aid. F**k 'em.
It didn't sound like the differences made the Commies better. So why the hate for the imaginary Nazis in Ukraine and the love for the real Commies in Russia?
That is your BS characterization not mine. And you didn't ask who made who better. That is s a stupid concept - are you somehow minimizing Nazis in comparison to Commies? And the Nazis in Kiev are not imaginary. They are pretty much the backbone of the coup govt. It's stormtroopers. Why are you trying to minimize the Nazis of Kiev's govt?
Or start whining about neocons. And Soros.
Marxism has two arms:
Socialism (national) with its command control economy.
Communism (international) with its supposed lack of any personal property.
Except: in both, the people at the top live like Rajas.
Hey, it's a good gig if you can get it. All you have to do is defend the Kremlin on FR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.