Crimeans Who Ushered in the Russians Now Have to Live With Their Choice

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tbrightson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This looks like the conversation that has developed needs it’s own thread. It has evolved into something that appears to nothing to do with Crimea. I have been away for a while, so can someone tell me where slavery, the civil war and Crimea are linked without reading through all 9 pages of comments. I tried, but I am missing the link.
 
Can’t really trust any of them east or west, specially Russia. Obviously the wolves never care about the opinion of the sheep. 🙂
 
In addition, spending money in Crimea only helps the Putin regime.
Obama has set it up to where American tax dollars go in direct support of Planned Parenthood, the world’s largest abortion provider and an organization that openly campaigns for the Democrats at every election. So I don’t know why people are talking like Putin is worse.
 
You don’t have to look half way around the world to find evil or things that are wrong. There are enough to go around wherever you are.
 
This looks like the conversation that has developed needs it’s own thread. It has evolved into something that appears to nothing to do with Crimea. I have been away for a while, so can someone tell me where slavery, the civil war and Crimea are linked without reading through all 9 pages of comments. I tried, but I am missing the link.
Some people were playing the game of “your ancestors did this!” In an attempt to excuse Putin of his wrongdoings, Tomdstone, brought up Native Americans and how they were slaughtered, then he brought up the Civil War and slavery which then sort of spiraled out from there. It’s gotten to the point where I’m having to agree and disagree with several people at the same time about different issues.
 
Obama has set it up to where American tax dollars go in direct support of Planned Parenthood, the world’s largest abortion provider and an organization that openly campaigns for the Democrats at every election. So I don’t know why people are talking like Putin is worse.
Good man for not following the ‘ideological line’! When somebody brings up Putin’s conspicuous faith, his personal life is decried. When Russia’s revitalised Church is mentioned, everybody calls it a sham. ‘Who am I to judge?’
Putin’s personal life is not our concern, but rather what he enacts in his capacity as leader.

With regard to war, neither side is innocent. Even in the short span from 2009 to the present-day, Western leaders have created a bloodbath out of the Middle East as a result of pre-emptive interventions/‘nation-building’ etc. Thus, without justification of either side, Putin hardly constitutes some sort of anomaly in work towards peace.
Once again, there are no heroes.

I cannot say what truly happens in Russia, since I am not Russian (I am Polish). There are ills in Russia, this cannot be denied. However, the west possess an equal share of evils, albeit relating to different problems. It comes down to a decision between two ‘evils’. As Christians who acknowledge the present transience and sinfulness of this world, this should be no surprise. There are no heroes.

As you have alluded to, western liberal (US, EU) leaders are not publicly Christian for the most part (modesty, perhaps :rolleyes:), and their largely policies act against the teachings of the Church. However, man is free in their system and enjoys material prosperity along with political rights. However, the Church is slowly being pushed out by the saecular forces of the liberal order. To summarise, in the west, Man is God and God has no place.

Russia has fewer freedoms, certainly fewer political rights and is not as prosperous. Mafia still possesses significant control, but is not as proliferated as it was in the 1990s. However, despite these problems, the Church has a significant public presence, and Putin is reversing the damages of the Yeltsinist laxity toward abortion through promotion of the family both verbally and through the creation of new awards/pensions promoting large families. This is exemplified by the minimal, yet stable rebounding of the ethnic Russian population after 1999). In Russia Man is sinful, perhaps obstinately sinful, however, he has enough wit not to usurp God. Such was the lesson of Socialism.

Both sides have their evils. That is not to be debated. However, since sin always will hinder utopian perfection in this world, this should be no surprise. As Christians, we must be pragmatic and choose that which is more favourable to the Church and the rather than defending the utopian luxuries of earthly freedom and material well being.
 
What did the Confederate States of America stand for? Read the Cornerstone speech of their vice president and you will see. This philosophy of subjugating the Black African and enslaving him and his family was the soul of the Confederate States of America according to the book A New Birth of Freedom by Harry V. Jaffa.
The Confederate states stood for treason and slavery I’m not a supporter of the past Confederacy or Neo-Confederates, I just really don’t see the problem of having old statue’s in some small towns, like others have said it’s more about the bravery of soldiers than glorifying the old Confederacy.

By the way if anyone wants to create a separate thread on the American Civil War, I’m game.

Now back to the issue of the Crimean annexation, What gives a nation in this day and age the right to forcibly annex another nation’s territory? Going by this logic, Russia should give back territory it took from Finland, Germany (in East Prussia), Estonia, Latvia, and Japan. Also does anyone find it hypocritical that Russia does not recognize the sovereignty of Chechnya? Russia fought a war to keep control of this area, and yet they have the audacity to take another nation’s land. If Crimea wants to be independent fine, but then chechnya should also be independent.

“Chechnya is part and parcel of the Russian Federation.”
-Vladimir Putin
 
With regard to war, neither side is innocent. Even in the short span from 2009 to the present-day, Western leaders have created a bloodbath out of the Middle East as a result of pre-emptive interventions/‘nation-building’ etc. Thus, without justification of either side, Putin hardly constitutes some sort of anomaly in work towards peace.
Once again, there are no heroes.
.
Well, America and the West learned from the best! Seeing as how Russia also invaded Afghanistan.
 
Well, America and the West learned from the best! Seeing as how Russia also invaded Afghanistan.
Well this part of history is likewise detached from the present-day problems. However, I will indulge the comment (bait taken).

The USSR’s invasion of Afghanistan was hardly an unprecedented land-grab. There had existed something of a ‘Middle-Eastern Yugoslavia’, which participated in both Eastern and western spheres. However, balances hardly last long. Naturally, when a new Socialist government faced threats from Islamists (freedom fighters?), and an America expressing a return to interventionism echoing the policy of the Johnson administration, the ‘peace of Détente’ was effectively over. It was back to a balancing act, and the Soviets believed that the Afghan government would be quickly cemented by a limited intervention. Otherwise, the American sphere would directly border the USSR. It was a colossal and tragic miscalculation, but hardly an arbitrary action.
As I will always repeat, there are no heroes, only more or less favourable villains.

But, this was the USSR. We are dealing the Russian Federation. Although there are institutional similarities between the two, this is natural, particularly since the USSR occupies nearly 75 years of pivotal Russian history.
Among the conflicts initiated by the Russian Federation since 1991 (I use the narrative of aggression to appease the Slavophobes for the sake of expediency), one is truly an internal conflict (Chechnya, Dagestan, itd.) and the others are Georgia and the present Ukrainian Civil War. In effect, this amounts to two direct external conflicts since 1991.
The United States has directly participated in three external conflicts since 2000.
Both the RF and the US have utilised occupation during at least one of these conflicts. Thus, I will conclude by saying that neither side is good nor bad. International law, borders of nations are all relative notions dependent upon strength, which unfortunately is the reality of a sinful world.
 
Good man for not following the ‘ideological line’! When somebody brings up Putin’s conspicuous faith, his personal life is decried. When Russia’s revitalised Church is mentioned, everybody calls it a sham. ‘Who am I to judge?’
Putin’s personal life is not our concern, but rather what he enacts in his capacity as leader.

With regard to war, neither side is innocent. Even in the short span from 2009 to the present-day, Western leaders have created a bloodbath out of the Middle East as a result of pre-emptive interventions/‘nation-building’ etc. Thus, without justification of either side, Putin hardly constitutes some sort of anomaly in work towards peace.
Once again, there are no heroes.

I cannot say what truly happens in Russia, since I am not Russian (I am Polish). There are ills in Russia, this cannot be denied. However, the west possess an equal share of evils, albeit relating to different problems. It comes down to a decision between two ‘evils’. As Christians who acknowledge the present transience and sinfulness of this world, this should be no surprise. There are no heroes.

As you have alluded to, western liberal (US, EU) leaders are not publicly Christian for the most part (modesty, perhaps :rolleyes:), and their largely policies act against the teachings of the Church. However, man is free in their system and enjoys material prosperity along with political rights. However, the Church is slowly being pushed out by the saecular forces of the liberal order. To summarise, in the west, Man is God and God has no place.

Russia has fewer freedoms, certainly fewer political rights and is not as prosperous. Mafia still possesses significant control, but is not as proliferated as it was in the 1990s. However, despite these problems, the Church has a significant public presence, and Putin is reversing the damages of the Yeltsinist laxity toward abortion through promotion of the family both verbally and through the creation of new awards/pensions promoting large families. This is exemplified by the minimal, yet stable rebounding of the ethnic Russian population after 1999). In Russia Man is sinful, perhaps obstinately sinful, however, he has enough wit not to usurp God. Such was the lesson of Socialism.

Both sides have their evils. That is not to be debated. However, since sin always will hinder utopian perfection in this world, this should be no surprise. As Christians, we must be pragmatic and choose that which is more favourable to the Church and the rather than defending the utopian luxuries of earthly freedom and material well being.
Is threatening one’s neighbors with nuclear weapons Christian? Is this what it means for nearly 20% Muslim Russia to be Christian? Really?

Oh, and an opposition figure gunned down as well, one does wonder if it was a well-timed vacation at that, not that one has seen Mr. Putin much this past week.

Oh, and landlines on the phone whenever one hears about those approval polls.
 
Is threatening one’s neighbors with nuclear weapons Christian? Is this what it means for nearly 20% Muslim Russia to be Christian? Really?

Oh, and an opposition figure gunned down as well, one does wonder if it was a well-timed vacation at that, not that one has seen Mr. Putin much this past week.

Oh, and landlines on the phone whenever one hears about those approval polls.
Успакойся, я вас прошу :cool:. Like I said, both East and west have problems. Russia is not officially Moslem, by any means. The United State has a large non-Christian minority, and yet somehow the US is a paragon of Christianity.
Opposition figure gunned down? Like I said, unless you have inside access into the GRU, FSB, MvdRF, Kreml, etc. I doubt my conclusion and yours will bear any accuracy to reality.
All I acknowledge is that Nemtsov is dead. That much is certain. Emotionalism and presumptions are quite unnecessary and potentially dangerous. Harmful, baseless rumours can become agents of provocation and have led to the unnecessary provocation of war.

As to the nuclear question. Brinkmanship is simply a game of bluster, particularly when surrounded by enemies. And let’s face it, Russia is surrounded by NATO. Just observe a map of the alliance and you will see. Russia’s declaration hardly constitutes a real threat. This is especially true since the threat is revealed in retrospect. The world needs to see Russian muscle and resolve without action commitment to such a course of action. It would be far more alarming if the nuclear warhead declaration occurred one year ago during the Crimean reunification, since it would have signified a willingness to carry out a threat that not even the madman Hrushchev dared enact in 1962.
 
Good man for not following the ‘ideological line’! When somebody brings up Putin’s conspicuous faith, his personal life is decried. When Russia’s revitalised Church is mentioned, everybody calls it a sham. I cannot say what truly happens in Russia, since I am not Russian (I am Polish). There are ills in Russia, this cannot be denied. However, the west possess an equal share of evils, albeit relating to different problems. It comes down to a decision between two ‘evils’. As Christians who acknowledge the present transience and sinfulness of this world, this should be no surprise. There are no heroes.

As you have alluded to, western liberal (US, EU) leaders are not publicly Christian for the most part (modesty, perhaps :rolleyes:), and their largely policies act against the teachings of the Church. However, man is free in their system and enjoys material prosperity along with political rights. However, the Church is slowly being pushed out by the saecular forces of the liberal order. In other words, man is God and God is unnecessary

Russia has fewer freedoms, certainly fewer political rights and is not as prosperous. Mafia still possesses significant control, but is not as proliferated as it was in the 1990s. However, despite these problems, the Church has a significant public presence, and Putin is reversing the damages of the Yeltsinist laxity toward abortion through promotion of the family both verbally and through the creation of new awards/pensions promoting large families. This is exemplified by the minimal, yet stable rebounding of the ethnic Russian population after 1999). In Russia Man is sinful, perhaps obstinately sinful, however, he has enough wit not to usurp God. Such was the lesson of Socialism.

Both sides have their evils. That is not to be debated. However, since sin always will hinder utopian perfection in this world, this should be no surprise. As Christians, we must be pragmatic and choose that which is more favourable to the Church and the rather than defending the utopian luxuries of earthly freedom and material well being.
Is that why Putin is worth 40 billion (some even say 70) because he’s forsaken the luxuries of this world? And I don’t think Putin has invaded Eastern Ukraine for God!

This is a man who lauds the likes of Communist criminals/tyrants (Andropov, Lenin. . . etc.), and has no compunction killing off his opponents, so I hardly doubt that Russia is going to be some sort of religious haven under Putin’s control.

p.s. I don’t doubt that Obama is wrong on many issues, but he isn’t the one who’s invaded a sovereign (Christian) nation.
 
Is that why Putin is worth 40 billion (some even say 70) because he’s forsaken the luxuries of this world? And I don’t think Putin has invaded Eastern Ukraine for God!

This is a man who lauds the likes of Communist criminals/tyrants (Andropov, Lenin. . . etc.), and has no compunction killing off his opponents, so I hardly doubt that Russia is going to be some sort of religious haven under Putin’s control.

p.s. I don’t doubt that Obama is wrong on many issues, but he isn’t the one who’s invaded a sovereign (Christian) nation.
Почему вы так неспокойно говорите?😃
When I referred to luxuries, I meant across the board liberty etc. Freedom and political rights are an unnecessary luxury to our existence. This is why we have leaders. So long as we do not starve and are uninhibited in our road toward Theosis, we do not need utopian ‘freedom’, ‘democracy’ etc.

Again, Putin’s net worth cannot be verified. I do not have a record of his assets and I doubt that anybody beyond his relevant financial agents does as well. These numbers are pure estimations which could be motivated for sensationalist reasons.

‘No compunction killing off his opponents’ Has the Nemtsov assassination been verified as as Kreml ‘wet-work’? The same can be said for Politkovskaya.
Are you Putin’s priest? Psychologist? I would avoid making judgements about a person’s conscience, particularly in the face of inconclusive evidence.

With regard to the Communist history, Putin does laud Communist events and persons. I read the speeches. I listen to interviews and I am familiar with Russian thinking, and this fits perfectly with contemporary Russian thought. There is no denying it.

However, where is the praise truly directed?

The platform of Единая Россия (United Russia), Putin’s party, contains no official ideology.
United Russia is a consensus party. Thus, any historical event or leader that contributes to the greatness of the Russian state (or its equivalence) cannot be omitted from the ‘state pantheon’.
For example, would you not deny that Stalin led Russia to victory agains the fascist monster? The point is national pride about the victory and acknowledging Stalin’s rôle in the war. However, this is not a praise of Stalin himself, nor of his programme.
We have День Победы (Victory Day) every year to celebrate the victory against the Germans who threatened our very existence. It is the victory we celebrate and the events leading to it. If you want to worship Stalin, Lenin, the KPSS and Socialism/‘Communist path’ attend meetings of the KPRF headed by Gennady Zyuganov, one of Putin’s vocal opponents.

Furthermore, consensus politics ensured both political and literal survival for anybody in the highly factionalised post-Soviet political life during the 1990s and the early 2000s.

I should add perhaps, that Alexandr Solženicyn, the author of the fiercely anti-Communist Gulag Archipelago voiced, until his death in 2008, support for Vladimir Vladimirovič Putin and the programme pursued by United Russia.
One should not blindly follow the opinions of one man, but such words coming from a victim and vocal opponent of Socialist oppression certainly bear great significance.
 
Well this part of history is likewise detached from the present-day problems. However, I will indulge the comment (bait taken).

The USSR’s invasion of Afghanistan was hardly an unprecedented land-grab. There had existed something of a ‘Middle-Eastern Yugoslavia’, which participated in both Eastern and western spheres. However, balances hardly last long. Naturally, when a new Socialist government faced threats from Islamists (freedom fighters?), and an America expressing a return to interventionism echoing the policy of the Johnson administration, the ‘peace of Détente’ was effectively over. It was back to a balancing act, and the Soviets believed that the Afghan government would be quickly cemented by a limited intervention. Otherwise, the American sphere would directly border the USSR. It was a colossal and tragic miscalculation, but hardly an arbitrary action.
As I will always repeat, there are no heroes, only more or less favourable villains.

But, this was the USSR. We are dealing the Russian Federation. Although there are institutional similarities between the two, this is natural, particularly since the USSR occupies nearly 75 years of pivotal Russian history.
Among the conflicts initiated by the Russian Federation since 1991 (I use the narrative of aggression to appease the Slavophobes for the sake of expediency), one is truly an internal conflict (Chechnya, Dagestan, itd.) and the others are Georgia and the present Ukrainian Civil War. In effect, this amounts to two direct external conflicts since 1991.
The United States has directly participated in three external conflicts since 2000.
Both the RF and the US have utilised occupation during at least one of these conflicts. Thus, I will conclude by saying that neither side is good nor bad. International law, borders of nations are all relative notions dependent upon strength, which unfortunately is the reality of a sinful world.
I agree the past is in the past neither side is"good" or" bad". Lots of Americans are growing weary of the war in the Middle East and wish to withdraw and I’m one of them.

However do you think that Russia is right in annexing Crimea? If so do you think the Russian Federation should grant Chechnya independence?
International law, borders of nations are all relative notions dependent upon strength, which unfortunately is the reality of a sinful world
That’s an incredibly Darwinist outlook international borders should be based upon morality, I highly doubt Putin really cares about the people of Crimea he is using this as an nationalistic issue to distract the Russian people away from the inflation of the ruble and the worsening Russian economy which is almost completely reliant on the exportation of oil/natural gas.
 
I agree the past is in the past neither side is"good" or" bad". Lots of Americans are growing weary of the war in the Middle East and wish to withdraw and I’m one of them.

However do you think that Russia is right in annexing Crimea? If so do you think the Russian Federation should grant Chechnya independence?

That’s an incredibly Darwinist outlook international borders should be based upon morality, I highly doubt Putin really cares about the people of Crimea he is using this as an nationalistic issue to distract the Russian people away from the inflation of the ruble and the worsening Russian economy which is almost completely reliant on the exportation of oil/natural gas.
Putin’s motivation would be easier to discern if the prices of oil had fallen well before the March crisis. I believe that the significant drop occurred either in June or July, certainly in the summer of 2014. If you want to go conspiratorial, you could argue that the west persuaded those controlling the market to act in accordance with the sanctions. But this is hypothesising, for which I have no proof.

And I keep repeating myself, we do not know how Putin feels/thinks/etc., unless one of us has the gift of clairvoyance. We can only draw conclusions from his policy. As of 18.3.2014, Crimea is part of Russia. That we know.
I will propose, with what I know, that the threat of a pro-western (NATO-controlled) Sevastopol was a greater motivation for the reunification. Sevastopol is Russia’s only true military access to the Mediterranean (which happens to be swarming with NATO ships) and more importantly one of Russia’s scarce warm water ports. Remember that access to the sea is a vital economic and military component for many large/important states.
Even when Crimea was attached to the Ukraine, Russia still had a guarantee of access to the port of Sevastopol. However, after the February Kiev putsch, that guarantee suddenly appeared quite jeopardised and with good reason. Do you expect the United States would suddenly abandon a military base simply because the host country experienced a negative (with regard to the base) regime change?
 
Well it was there choice. Unlike the poor saps under the Kiev junta who had their “government” forced on them at the point of the gun.
Things mightn’t be looking so good for the Kiev junta,what with Germany and France starting to turn their back on the corruption riddled Junta… lol.
 
Both sides have their evils. That is not to be debated. However, since sin always will hinder utopian perfection in this world, this should be no surprise. As Christians, we must be pragmatic and choose that which is more favourable to the Church and the rather than defending the utopian luxuries of earthly freedom and material well being.
When you say “the Church” you must be referring to Russian Orthodoxy. The Catholic Church itselft is viewed with suspicion and is seen as a foreign intrusion in Russia. Putin himself as suggested that Orthodoxy is closer to Islam than it is to Catholicism. The Catholic Church can operate in the Russian Federation but they do so at the invitation of the Orthodox clergy. If they run afoul of the hospitality of Russian officials by, say, proselytizing Orthodox faithful or criticizing the government then they risk being booted from the country.
 
When you say “the Church” you must be referring to Russian Orthodoxy. The Catholic Church itselft is viewed with suspicion and is seen as a foreign intrusion in Russia. Putin himself as suggested that Orthodoxy is closer to Islam than it is to Catholicism. The Catholic Church can operate in the Russian Federation but they do so at the invitation of the Orthodox clergy. If they run afoul of the hospitality of Russian officials by, say, proselytizing Orthodox faithful or criticizing the government then they risk being booted from the country.
He also stated he was not a theologian, obviously. 🙂

If it is true in relation to the RO church - it is similar to what occurred in Northern Ireland for centuries, with church leaders of the protestant community a few decades ago, vocally stating ‘No Pope here’, and describing St JP11 as “The scarlet woman of Rome and viewed Catholicism as evil.

Putin’s response to Islamic radicalism, in 2009, before ISIS took off en force.

*Russia is fighting international terrorism and is ready to fight it anywhere. In our country we confront it first and foremost in Chechnya. That question is answered by the people who aided and abetted that aggression, who inspire and finance this kind of activities. They are religious extremists and international terrorists.

By the way, I would like you to note that the creation of a caliphate on the territory of the Russian Federation is only the first part of their plan. They speak about creating a world caliphate. They say it is necessary to kill Americans and their allies. I think that you are a country that is an ally of the United States and you are in danger. They speak about the need to kill all the non-Muslims or crusaders, as they put it. You are in danger. If you decide to become a Muslim, even that will not make you safe because they believe that traditional Islam is also hostile to the goals that they set themselves. So, even in that case you are in danger.

And if you want to become an Islamic radical and are ready to be circumcised, I invite you to Moscow. We are a multi-faith country and we have experts who can do it. And I would advise them to carry out that operation in such a way that nothing would grow in that place again. :D*

youtube.com/watch?v=ryqrqeeTJek
 
Very good point. I will however add that Catholicism carries suspicion in Russia for one other, very simple reason; the pope. However, it is not the notion of a religious head or anti-hierarchical sentiment that drives the opposition to the papacy. Patriarch Kirill acts as the Russian ‘pope’ and his position appears stable. What the Russians (and many Slavs) detest and fear is a foreign external force influencing their affairs.

I myself am Catholic, but I do see the advantage of the autocephalous model. Yes, autocephaly can succumb to nationalism, but it also prevents the absorption of the entire Church into the politics of a specific region. Let’s face it, the Catholic Church, with its singular leader is located in Rome, by default possesses a west-European character. Furthermore, until early modern times, the scope and range of the papacy was limited to western Europe. Recent popes have largely supported the creation of the European Union, although not without reservation for the such developments like the atheistic Constitution. In short, the papacy is a western institution. Consequently, Catholicism in Russia would negate the already besieged independence from the west. Look at the current state of my Catholic Poland and you will see what remains of independence after significant rapprochement with the west.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top