The divide in Iraq has been there for many a year infact its been there even before saddam came to the scene, infact the one good thing about saddams regieme was he soley stopped a civil war.

Now they have removed him iraq will be the next somalia pretty much garentted i mean what is 1,600 troops a few tanks and air craft going to do, to a few million armed vengeful iraqies.

By day they are the friends, By night the enamy.

Oh Shaddup Avon! Only reason the west back israel is cos they need as many friends as they can get.

You would make a good politian :yep: :-j

In light of the overall quality of your post, I am sure she'll take that as a compliment :yep:

They do it mostly because many Israelis roots are in the West and because it the ONLY democracy in the region. There are a millionnew imigrants in Israel from the former USSR, but they dont get support for Israel from that direction, they get growing anti semitism and support for Iran and Hamas. :doh:

:yep: Just jiving with ya Avon. I know the crushing feeling of despair when ya haven't got ya Barrett :lol:

I'm not anti-Western. I live in the west and embrace it, though conditionally. I've great admiration for a huge number of Western values; I'm no less Western than any of you here. I've certainly heaped my piles of scorn on Russian authorities - far more so than on any other authority. What I am is not anti-western - I am anti-right-wing. And that's no foreign idea.

Nor is Russia anti-western - rather, I've observed the opposite.

Tell me now, why should Russia get in bed with the West? What did the West do for Russia? So far, I have to say that Russia's mistrust is merely a justified response.

Russia has paid a huge price for Western ventures over the last 300 years at least. It has participated in every major European conflict since 1700, generally allied with one of the Western powers. What does it get for it?

Some of the most celebrated Russian military achievements were in the late 18th century against the Turks, under commanders like Suvorov. But other than fame, Russians have little to show for their efforts - in fact, Austria gave back virtually everything that the Russian troops helped take from Turkey after negotiations. 1812 - Napoleon. A catastrophe for a huge number of Russian people, but he was ultimately stopped. And 230 years later, they'd take on a much bigger fish. Crimean War - there's your love from the west (a terrible and generally forgotten conflict). World War I - it was tensions between the Western powers that launched off that one, and Russia paid for it (and their yet-another attempt to be involved) more than anyone else. Communism - for those who don't know - was invented by Germans living in Britain. The Russian revolution was an experiment of purely Western ideas. Its spectacular failure cost all of Europe a lot, but Russians the most. World War II - don't even get me started. Cold War, although that was a two-player game.

The bottom line is, Russia has paid a terrible price over the last 300 years for being involved in the West's power games. There is no tragedy in world history comparable to that of the Russian people in the last few centuries. What did they get in return? Scorn and a downright snobbish attitude. They won nothing, and are now in dire straits of their decaying country, while some of these fine Westerners here seem to be content to sit around and speculate at their next supposedly-villainous move.

And you wonder why Russia should have great love for the west?

You actually managed to make Europes largest and potentially richest country, sound like a victim of the "evil" West! :roll: You dont thnk russians have any responsibility about their own country? The constant blaming and accusing of rest of Europe and especially its neighbours is a common and irritating feature in many russians. It would do good for Russia to look in the mirror, and grow up as a nation.

Where did I blame the West for Russia's situation? Although it all eventually sums up from a range of factors, I think it's safe to say that Russians have by and large themselves to blame for being unable to get past most of their problems. I just said that playing political games and social experiments with the West has not brought it only more problems, and they have been hurt tremendously by these involvements. Victimized, sometimes, but a lot of the time drawn in by their leaders' incompetence and even naivete that they can make a better world at least for themselves - and having millions of largely innocent people pay the price.

So, that's all I'm saying. So far, all I see is that Russia's involvement with the western politics or ideas costs millions of dead Russians. There's easily 60 million dead Russians for these reasons in the last century - and what does Russia have to show for it? Wounded pride?

Again, I'm more than open to proof of the contrary. But the West has simply done nothing for Russia but use it as a good source of cannon fodder.

[edit]
...and the reason I'm personally in the West iand not Russia is because, likewise, Russia had no use for me other than potential cannon fodder. The jury is still out on what things will turn out like for me here.
Again, keep in mind that I'm merely stating the obvious facts as to why Russia is not keen on cooperation on the Iraq or Iran questions, and other Western schemes that it's been reluctantly opposing. I'm not whitewashing any particular side here.

Haha, and I can't believe the irony - when I was finishing that post, a (Russian) song/poem suddenly came up on my playlist that fully summed up the issue here:

That's the only thing I'm arguing for here.

Well, as a Westerner myself, I am anti-left-wing for the exact opposite. The problem with left-wing thought is the idea of other people doing things to make your life or situation right. What has the West done for Russia??? What has Russia done for itself. Democratic policy didn't work in Russia not because the West didn't make it work for Russia. Russia must take responsibility for the inability to successfully implement political and economic reform. Don't lay the blame at the West.

I do however agree that the Clinton administration screwed up by not helping to foster the move toward democratic reforms in Russia, but ultimately it's up to Russia itself to continue progress in that direction.

And if Putin thinks it's in Russia's interest to alienate the West and help rogue nations like Iran develop non-conventional military arms, he's delusional. This will only hurt Russia in the long run.

Well, Putin isn't that dumb. And he's played in with the west more than once - only when it was to his advantage.

I don't think the faults of the Putin government, let alone the Yeltzin government, are excusable. But of course you could turn it around and say that the West is perfectly reasonable in not getting too involved with 'reconstructing' Russia - after all, what interest is theirs to put back on its feet a giant with a massive nuclear arsenal?

I'm sad to acknowledge this, but from my observations of the people on both sides - the two are still in a cold war of sorts. Even if the outright animosity is gone, both still seem to snicker at each other's faults and quietly smirk to themselves when the other side gets its wings clipped. And get enraged when the other side doesn't work the way they want it to. The fact is that as the Russian government regains awareness of its world interests, it's coming back to playing the same game that the Americans haven't quit - vying for spheres of influence and a world that is as favourable to their agenda as possible.

As far as Russia and reconstruction - there's no real plot there. The fact is that democratic reform has more or less failed before it really started; and economic reform turned into a nightmare of a massive wealth gap and the complete lack of a middle class - an essential element to developing a stable liberal democracy (if such there is). Meanwhile, in a country that had a 20th century as awful as that, there isn't going to be a revolution for a long time. I wouldn't count on that at all.

So, I guess the question is "What to do about Russia?". That I don't know. Anything but a nuclear showdown, however!
The first step, I think, would be dispensing with the "Bad Guys" issue.

:yep: :up:

CCIP, c'mon that was just a 'headline' to get the viewers in. You really should have understood that...

Where to begin with such a distorted simplification of left-wing ideology? Let's see. The left-wing tends to support public rather than private education, the rationale being that it is in society's best interest to afford an equal education to all so that all will have an opportunity to become productive citizens who can contribute to society. The ultimate goal being a skilled workforce that can create a robust economy. How is this "doing things to make your life or situation right"? I gather you prefer the right-wing approach where education is privatized and only a small minority receive a good education.

Ironic how most right-wingerers are themselves the product of public education and many have children who are also in public schools. That's the problem with right-wing ideology: it is so much easier to spout it than it is to live it; so many of the hard-fought victories the left has fought for (public education, the 40 hour work week, minimum wage, etc) are taken for granted now by those on the right that they have the luxury of being opposed to it ideologically while reaping its benefits in their day-to-day life.

Well you have your view of left-wing ideology. My view of right-wing ideology is that it is the ideology of hypocracy.

Maybe someone would like to begin a separate new left/right thread? :yep:

I can only say russia is in a catch 22 phrase if it supports the west 100% then the ties between moscow bejing and tehran will only make things worse.

If russia supports iran 100% then it will only make things worse between Moscow and Washington.

So russia has gone for the comprimise not wholey supporting either.

dupe