On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 11:48 AM, Kelly St. Clair <xxxxxx@efn.org> wrote:

<Some very cogent and telling points - as did Phil  and Kurt - assuming that the reader of them has a competent grasp of English. . . .>

Folks, this is going nowhere.

 

Or at least it isn't going where you want it to go.

 

Greg very obviously drank deeply of the Russian-Model Communist Kool-Aid during his formative years. So there is little point in responding to him.

 

There is no Russian-Model Communism. If you knew anything about it, you just wouldn't say that. Communism was largely imported from Germany.

 

 

Although I will admit that I found it rather amusing to watch him quote decades-old propaganda,

 

Propaganda works both ways, but yours is very fresh :-)

 

as well as dismiss Madden without even googling his book (and thus finding that Madden is an historian of ancient Rome, unlike all those who incorrectly compare the modern U.S. with that ancient state).

 

I did Google Madden, and even Amazoned him :-) You are so given to making assumptions

I don't need Madden to tell me where the USA is heading

 

 

But what was a tad frightening is that Greg seriously seems to believe in a Russian "right" to conquer one's neighbors.

 

Actually, all nations PRACTICED this until at least 1930s.

The USSR had a right to do so under international law, so it’s not my belief, particularly since I don't believe anything

 

The U.S. used to believe in something similar. We called it Manifest Destiny. Except we were content to *buy* our way to continental hegemony whenever this seemed possible (Louisiana Purchase, Alaska Purchase, Gadsden Purchase, etc). 

 

Not quite. The USA invaded British Canada, Spain, France, and Mexico.

The purchases were cheaper than the potential repercussions of taking a military action against a European, and for the most part were offered to the USA rather than demanded. Until the ACW the USA couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag, and then relapsed into this state until the Second World War.

 

Even scarier, Greg uses the worldwide reach of U.S. forces - which do NOT occupy entire countries but only a few scattered bases - to again justify Russia conquering it's neighbors.

 

Actually, its reach-and-stay :-) For over a decade, and decades in the case of South Korea and Germany/Italy.

Yet again I need to point out that "Russia" had not EVER existed as a state.

There was the kingdom of Moscow (Moskovy in the West), then Russian Empire from late 17th century to the early 20th, then the USSR, and finally the Russian Federation. All these are distinct and very different state entities that have always been multi-national, and Russia was and remains a core nation within the state entities.

The USA is also a (federated) state, but is multinational in that within it exist quite a few indigenous nations.

 

Assuming Greg's views are typical of Russians [Sorry! That should be "those of Russian cultural descent." Must remain PC!], then Russian perception is definitely slanted toward the paranoid.

 

I don't think there is a typical Russian, just as there probably isn't a typical American, but this doesn't matter. You are not versed in mental disorders enough to tell group trauma from paranoid delusions. Group trauma is easy to understand. Imagine that every family you know, in fact every family in your suburb, had lost at least one member to war, and another to slavery/starvation. Half had lost all their possessions, and the other half their dwelling. All adults had lost their jobs, and had to re-skill because their places of work were destroyed. Add to this that 50% of the families had lost at least one child and 25% at least two.33% of adult males returned with various degrees of physical trauma, and others with mental trauma. This is called group trauma, and the group in this case is 60% of the population of the USSR that until 1941 resided West of the line from the Arctic Ocean to the Caspian Sea. And, this effects of this trauma are inherited by their children and grandchildren in various ways. That is another 50 years of dealing with effects of social mass trauma. And this brings us to 1995, so the fact that 'Russians' had been able to effect a massive socio-cultural change starting in the mid-80 is actually a pointer that as a society suffering from multiple traumas (there are others than the effects of the Second World War), they actually recovered earlier and fuller than expected

​ (change being the expected outcome of therapy)​

, by a decade. 'Russians' are much stronger than some other societies.

 

And since perception is reality (at least for the entity doing the perceiving), that means the rest of us better prepare for war. Because it seems that is the only thing Russia understands.  

 

I have news for you - America IS AT WAR. If one war isn't enough for the Congress, they can always start another, but at a guess, the USA is not coping well at all, which is why it keeps trying to introduce all these 'magic bullet' technologies that have been posted here recently. This is not reminiscent of the Roman Empire, but of the last years of the Third Reich.