Boston Bombing News Thread

[4588686]

Kazakhstan, for example.  Which is many times more massive than Chechnya.  

[4588686]

That's your opinion, and I disagree. Russia is unlikely to give up any territory that has been incorporated into the Russian Federation itself. Only the former Republics, which were not a part of the RSFSR have been let go, and even they remain in the Russian sphere of influence. Why do you think it was Russia that contacted the U.S. government about the Boston Marathon bombers before any of this mess happened. They do know what is going on in their territory, even if American government officials in their smug superiority reject the idea. I respect you Hasan, but not when it comes to religious, political, economic, or common sense issues.   :dance2:

 

 

It's not my opinion.  I've given specific facts and counterexamples and you have given unsubstantiated conjectures and the impressions from a Russian guy you met at Church.  

[Apotheoun]

Kazakhstan, for example.  Which is many times more massive than Chechnya.  

Kazakhstan was not a part of the Russian Federation, it was a separate Soviet Republic. Chechnya has been an administrative unit of the Russian Federation for a very long time, and the Russians are not going to let it go anymore than the USA will let California secede from the union.

[Apotheoun]

It's not my opinion.  I've given specific facts and counterexamples and you have given unsubstantiated conjectures and the impressions from a Russian guy you met at Church.  

Let's get one thing straight . . . both of us are expressing opinions, but alas your opinions are stupidity dressed up as a college paper.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Apotheoun

[4588686]

Kazakhstan was not a part of the Russian Federation, it was a separate Soviet Republic. Chechnya has been an administrative unit of the Russian Federation for a very long time, and the Russians are not going to let it go anymore than the USA will let California secede from the union.

 

That's because the Soviet Union divided chinks of the Russian Empire, of which Kazakhstan had been a part since the 18th/19th century in various degrees, into formally separate republics, although substantively they remained subjugated. 

Edited April 21, 2013 by Hasan

[Apotheoun]

That's because the Soviet divided chinks of the Russian Empire, of which Kazakhstan had been a part, into formally separate republics, although substantively they remained subjugated. 

Again, what you have failed to show is that regions incorporated into the RSFSR were allowed to just leave peacefully. Moreover, Kazakhstan remains in the Russian sphere of influence, and will for the foreseeable future.

 

My Russian friends would be laughing their heads off at your comments.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Apotheoun

[StMichael]

To defend your ignorance by attacking me is to be expected.

 

If the US so defeated Mexico then why does Mexico even exist? It would have been more states for the US.

 

Furthermore, $15 million in 1848 was not chump change, by any means. In 2012 dollars it would be $441,176,470.59.

 

There would be no reason for the United States to pay a nation they defeated a dime for anything. Did Russia pay another country for they land they occupy? If they did, then you have a case. If they didn't you are stretching taffy.

 

And it matters not if the treaty was signed under duress or not, it was signed. Furthermore, a few years later (5) they sold us even more land. Was that also under duress?

 

Do yourself a favor and read the treaty, grab a history book and stop parroting false history.

 

I am just pointing out that America, like Russia, conquered another country and then forced the said country to give it territory. Neither America or Russia are ever going to voluntarily give up what they conquered, nor would I expect them to, which is why I told a certain poster that it is not because of who is presently the president of the Russian Federation that Chechnya is a battle zone, it is because the people of Russia are not looking to give up what their ancestors won by war.

 

St. Michael if you think that Mexico wanted to sign the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo you are not the brightest bulb in the bunch. When you are defeated in a war you sign whatever the victor wants you to sign. And yeah, America paid for the region, after we smashed Mexico to pieces.

 

[4588686]

Again, what you have failed to show is that regions incorporated into the RSFSR were allowed to just leave peacefully. Moreover, Kazakhstan remains in the Russian sphere of influence, and will for the foreseeable future.

 

My Russian friends would be laughing their heads off at your comments.

 

 

Why does it make any difference that it was part of the Russian Federation given how the Soviet state actually functioned prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union?  The Russian Federation was only a few years old when the Chechen wars broke out.  Under the logic you presented there isn't any reason that Kazakhstan should be  just as dearly held as Chechnya.  Moreover, areas withing the Russian Federation were given just the sort of regional autonomy that could have been worked out with Chechnya and somehow Russian society didn't collapse.  

 

 

I am glad to see that you've found friends.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Hasan

[Apotheoun]

To defend your ignorance by attacking me is to be expected.

 

If the US so defeated Mexico then why does Mexico even exist? It would have been more states for the US.

 

Furthermore, $15 million in 1848 was not foolish person change, by any means. In 2012 dollars it would be $441,176,470.59.

 

There would be no reason for the United States to pay a nation they defeated a dime for anything. Did Russia pay another country for they land they occupy? If they did, then you have a case. If they didn't you are stretching taffy.

 

And it matters not if the treaty was signed under duress or not, it was signed. Furthermore, a few years later (5) they sold us even more land. Was that also under duress?

 

Do yourself a favor and read the treaty, grab a history book and stop parroting false history.

St. Michael we conquered Mexico and took their territory. We also gave them some cash to make it easier to swallow, but America's acquisition of the Southwest was by conquest pure and simple. Mexico is just lucky that the United States didn't absorb the whole country, but the issue of slavery prevented that from happening.

[Apotheoun]

 

I am glad to see that you've found friends.

Thanks. You should try it. It would help to balance out your egoism, and help you to see that many of your "facts" are just your subjective opinion masquerading as facts. Perhaps as you get older you will move away from your college attitude that what you think has value to other people.

[4588686]

Thanks. You should try it. It would help to balance out your egoism, and help you to see that many of your "facts" are just your subjective opinion masquerading as facts. Perhaps as you get older you will move away from your college attitude that what you think has value to other people.

 

 

I don't know.  Judging by your posts it seems like making friends leads to sloppy thinking :/

[Apotheoun]

I don't know.  Judging by your posts it seems like making friends leads to sloppy thinking :/

It would be helpful if you started thinking instead of simply regurgitating the same worn out old liberal tripe. 

[4588686]

It would be helpful if you started thinking instead of simply regurgitating the same worn out old liberal tripe. 

 

 

I wasn't aware that critical thinking was a liberal tripe.  

[Apotheoun]

I wasn't aware that critical thinking was a liberal tripe.  

I know you believe what you say, but your hand seems to write things that have no apparent connection to reasoned thought.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Apotheoun

[StMichael]

Conquest is what the Roman Empire did. They didn't pay cash and not take it all.

 

The war was started by Mexico, finished by the US.

 

Stating the United States "stole" land, is absolutely false, historically misleading and factually untrue.

 

 

St. Michael we conquered Mexico and took their territory. We also gave them some cash to make it easier to swallow, but America's acquisition of the Southwest was by conquest pure and simple. Mexico is just lucky that the United States didn't absorb the whole country, but the issue of slavery prevented that from happening.

 

[Winchester]

Thanks. You should try it. It would help to balance out your egoism, and help you to see that many of your "facts" are just your subjective opinion masquerading as facts. Perhaps as you get older you will move away from your college attitude that what you think has value to other people.

 

He has friends. Me, for instance.

[Apotheoun]

He has friends. Me, for instance.

Internet friend or friend in real life? 

[Socrates]

I know this is a highly un-pc thing to say on here, but however you want to argue it, being conquered by the U.S. is by far the best thing that ever happened to the territory won from Mexico.

 

Overall, Mexico is miserable hell-hole over-run by drug violence (though, if current U.S. policy persists, we may wind up as they are).

 

Or, to quote the lyrics of a Texas country song, "If things are so good down in Mexico, why are they all coming here?"

 

 

[4588686]

He has friends. Me, for instance.

 

 

You forgot to add, 'No homo.' >(

Edited April 21, 2013 by Hasan

[Socrates]

Not mad. Just giving you some friendly advice before you opened you mouth and looked ridiculous. Sadly you didn't heed that advice. :'(
 

 

Probably because a lot of people are concerned about how the right wing will utilize the attack to support stupid foreign policy. See my previous post about your political cohorts using the last attack to initiate the most disastrous foruegn policy in our nation's history.

Good article by Deroy Murdoch on this topic (written before the Boston bombers were identified).

And here's some pure amesomeness from the great Mark Steyn: "The 'Co-exist' Bombers."
[/quote]


Can't pull them up.

 

Right. So I've written a 20+ paper on the rise of transnational terrorism in Chechnya and the Russian government response to it. I've also lived in a Muslim country down the street from a Salafi mosque whose congregants believed that they had a right to attack Kafir and any Muslims who align themselves with them. I'm aware that transnational terrorism from groups that base their ideology on Islam exist.


Nowhere did I imply that 9/11 was a right wing conspiracy. In fact, I explicitly identified it as an attack perpetuates by Muslims. Some basic critical reading skills could really help you here.

What I said, and this is indisputably true, is that a right wing administration used that attack to launch a massive ground war in Central Asia which has no viable end in sight, launch a war in the gulf based on fraudulent evidence, massively expand the national security state, and enact a global program or kidnapping (*hint* I'm talking about extraordinary rendition *hint*) and torture.

 

Vomit

 

Cool story, bro.