insuffi

Read the nytimes article, and look up videos from the Odessa massacre.

1) That was not what I was doing. He was comparing Russia and the U.S. in the last paragraph, so it was very relevant.

2) If we're talking about atrocities, let's talk about 100,000 casualties in Iraq.(most conservative estimate). Additionally, 2,400 dead from drone strokes. Most, if not all, without due process in Pakistan and Yemen.

3) Tempering influence? Are you serious? Is it tempering to overthrow governments and install new ones while denationalizing oil contracts? I heard Lybia's a democracy now and not a shithole.

U.S. is just as bad as Russia. Your time of being the beacon of light and democracy is gone.

Just like it was the russians in Odessa that burned all those people alive? Please.

Russia barely supports anyone in the east. Even NY times(the newspaper that was fully pro Iraq war) went in, talked to the separatists and found out they're just pro federalization.

Your blind hate for Putin is apparent. You'll start blaming earthquakes in Oklahoma on him soon.

Just to make it clear, I don't disagree with your first two paragraphs regarding nationalism and alcoholism, but your apologetic attitude for the US is somewhat worrying.

Except for Ukraine, which is a controversial subject, when was the last time Russia directly threatened a sovereign nation and overthrew their governments?

Now, how about the US in the last 14 years - Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Haiti, Gaza Strip, Somalia, Iran, Lybia and Syria. Does that not come off as "crazy" to you?

EDIT: oops, sorry. Forgot Yemen and Pakistan, against whom there is no official declaration of war either.

Oh wow, a putinbot. Great argumentation.

Or rather it has to do with Russia and the Brics trying to subvert the dollar, not war. Not to mention, there's no way it would get cut off from the west at this point, if only in political rhetoric. Nordstream and Southstream kicked Washington in the balls at every turn, to the point where they're almost dropping their intentions.

Next, the west has a shit ton of money invested in the Russian stock markets. Their stock markets rebounded back to previous levels a few weeks after the sanctions.

Furthermore, military equipment. See France.

Uh, freedom. what? Have you been to Russia?

Heh, Right. Is there free mass media anywhere else? Are you aware that any journalist who spoke out against the Iraq war never had a career again? Free mass media is a political talking point, not a real thing.

Would you prefer Yeltsin? Putin is what Russia needs.

Except birth rate in Russia has been rapidly increasing in the last 14 years.

They are making steps to legalize content, such as vkontakte legalizing 70% of their media material.

It's certainly not that Putin needs to suppress dissent from his own people. It's a very small minority in Russia that would like Putin removed.

Now, if we're talking about the west investing x billion in "democratic institutions"(Ukraine, anyone?), it makes some sense for Russia to isolate itself. Obviously, it's easy to paint Russia as evil, but the cold war is over, buddy.

Perhaps I am confusing the ends with the means. But international law? Several ex US presidents can't even fly to certain countries in Europe because they'd be jailed right away.

International law - indefinite detention, torture; or killing with drones without due process? Doesn't seem like international law is held in high esteem in the US.

We're in agreement. I myself hail from a former soviet satellite country.

My point is that it's insulting to call the US benevolent. The difference between US and USSR is that the US prefers a more subtle way of conquering a country, namely, by causing turmoil and overthrowing the government, letting rebel groups run rampant and financing them. It's always easier to overtake strategic resources during anarchy.

Why do you think all the Iran, Ukraine etc civil wars are happening. Because the BRICS countries want to move away from the dollar.

Would you feel the same, on average, if you were a citizen of a South American country, or how about the middle east?

Except when you pay police salaries, you're expecting them to maintain order within a society. The end goal of advanced military equipment[0] is to kill people as efficiently as possible. It's the goal, not something out of line.

[0] Doesn't even have to be equipment. Maintaining databases which are required for a functioning military complex means you're still serving their vision. Their visions as of late are often amoral.

But you still sleep well at night, right? Continuing to ignore the people dying everyday because of geopolitical aspirations.

Eh fine. I'm starting to sound self-righteous. My issue with your statement is how absolutely peaceful you are about contributing to war machine. You're implicitly helping the armed forces kill people.

Your statement is barely even tangentially related to what I said. It's an issue of perception and morality.