Russia says will defend Syria against U.N. sanctions

In Russia itself you are right for now--unfortunately majority of Russians are AntiAmerican. It's partly thanks to the Clinton Administration carousing with the corrupt Yeltsin regime, partly to the Cold War left overs and partly its due to centuries old antiWestern sentiments often induced by the ruling clans to justify their absolute hold on power.

However, in the United States, you can find that most of Russians are well integrated into the American life if you look deep enough. If your knowledge of Russian Communities in the US is limited to the Brighton Beach nightclubs, restaurants, or grocery shops, you might think otherwise, but Russian/Russian Speaking Americans are Spread across the country and you can meet them in a number of large or medium sized companies and colleges working, studying, etc.. In a New York as far as I know, younger Russians try to live in places like Manhattan, New Jersey, etc--not Brighton Beach enclave.

Here is some interesting statistics of the Russian Speakers in the LA Area I digged.

http://www.prgroup.info/news/26102005.72/article.html

So far, the American invasion have turned Iraq from a secular Qaeda-free dictatorship into an anarchy and haven for terrorists. It also boosted oil prices. You'll get another Iraq (and Vietnam in several years, yes, it was all right in Vietnam at first, too) in Syria. If Russia fails in her attempt to save the USA from another blunder in Middle East.
Already American resourses are stretched (remember Louisiana National Guard). A Russian proverb: where it's thin, it tears.
Some people here have mentioned Russian anti-Americanism. Its extents seems to be over-estimated. However, sending bombers all over earth doesn't help promote love to America. You start to think who's next.
I've read invectives above about unpleasant "Russian" communities in Brooklyn and Brighton Beach. It's funny; people don't realise that they are not only being politically incorrect and racist, but much, much worse -- anti-Semitic. For those ghettos are populated by Jews, not Russians.

"You'll get another Iraq (and Vietnam in several years, yes, it was all right in Vietnam at first, too) in Syria. If Russia fails in her attempt to save the USA from another blunder in Middle East."

Some of US Americans know who it was that promoted and funded that Vietnam War. Russia HAS NEVER EVER been about saving anybody but themselves.

Also Putin who is to host the next G8-Summit said it is to be about "energy security", so what does Syria have to do with Russia's energy security other than setting up shop right next door to old Saddam's former oil fields?

Just mythoughts, you underestimate Russian rotten idealism.
I'd love if you were right, and Russia always saved but herself (which is not criminal by Western standards, by the way). Unfortunately, it is not so.

Cynics in Russia say, we should help the USA to get involved into various messy affairs like Afghanistan, with no hope of any positive outcome. The more "Shock and Awes", the less troups and money the Americans will be left to meddle in our affairs. Saving our lives and freedom at the expence of Arabs is immoral, yes, but, on the other hand, isn't all world politics immoral? Nevertheless, Mr. Putin is not cynical enough to run a big country successfully. He's just lucky.

Syria has nothing to do with Russian energy security -- we've got our own oil. Unfortunately for her, Syria is too close to the oilfields from which Europe, Japan and the USA are supplied.

"Just mythoughts, you underestimate Russian rotten idealism.
I'd love if you were right, and Russia always saved but herself (which is not criminal by Western standards, by the way). Unfortunately, it is not so."

Well I cannot disagree with the results of Russian attempts to save herself, and one would think some lessons might be learned. What I see transforming out of Russia is the attempted projection that "capitalism" is the method of operation. I see nothing capitalistic in bedding down with the likes of Syria, Iran, N.Korea, and Chavez to our south.

"Cynics in Russia say, we should help the USA to get involved into various messy affairs like Afghanistan, with no hope of any positive outcome. The more "Shock and Awes", the less troups and money the Americans will be left to meddle in our affairs. Saving our lives and freedom at the expence of Arabs is immoral, yes, but, on the other hand, isn't all world politics immoral? Nevertheless, Mr. Putin is not cynical enough to run a big country successfully. He's just lucky."

I would say the cynics are in full implementation of this plan, and are gearing up to take advantage.

"Syria has nothing to do with Russian energy security -- we've got our own oil. Unfortunately for her, Syria is too close to the oilfields from which Europe, Japan and the USA are supplied."

Yes Russia does indeed have plenty of oil, so that being the case what advantage does it gain Russia to meddle with the suppliers of oil to Europe, Japan and the USA???? Could it be that Russia seeks to be the controller of the worlds oil???

> Well I cannot disagree with the results of Russian
> attempts to save herself, and one would think some
> lessons might be learned.
Unfortunately, my English is too poor to understand you adequately. Do you mean that Russia was too successful in her attempts at saving herself? Or not successful enough? Or do you mean that Russia saved those who didn't want to get saved by the Russians? And who should learn lessons? The misguided Russians or the careless Americans?

> What I see transforming out of Russia is the attempted
> projection that "capitalism" is the method of operation.
You mean that the Russian are trying hard to act capitalist but aren't good at it yet? Perhaps.

> I see nothing capitalistic in bedding down with the
> likes of Syria, Iran, N.Korea, and Chavez to our south.
Well, as far as I understand capitalism, you bed down, as you put it, with anybody, if it pays off. I don't think there is anything especially horrible about Syria etc. It's just they're our sons-of-a-bitch, whereas the rest are yours.

> I would say the cynics are in full implementation of
> this plan, and are gearing up to take advantage.
Then simply leave the outcast states alone, and that'll frustrate the cynics' plan.

> Yes Russia does indeed have plenty of oil, so that being
> the case what advantage does it gain Russia to meddle
> with the suppliers of oil to Europe, Japan and the
> USA????
Russia is in no position to meddle with anything. It's just trying to preserve what is left of law of nations. Not only of idealism, but also in order to save herself from a future "Shock and Awe".

> Could it be that Russia seeks to be the controller of the worlds oil???
No, it couldn't. Most of world's oil is under firm control by the USA. And somebody like Brzezinski (if I spell his surname right) has openly declared that it is America's goal to control all of it.

"Unfortunately, my English is too poor to understand you adequately. Do you mean that Russia was too successful in her attempts at saving herself? Or not successful enough? Or do you mean that Russia saved those who didn't want to get saved by the Russians? And who should learn lessons? The misguided Russians or the careless Americans? "

You excel well in English.

You need know that it is the system, or method of doing business, government I speak too. There are many Russian Christians who have put to shame many US Christians, and those Christians have my full admiration.

I speak about the system of governance, and how destructive governments can be to their own people as well as all people they come into contact with. I will not limit this to only the land of Russia, as this nation has had some very dismal elected leaders over the course of our short history.

I live in a nation truly blessed from its inception despite what some have attempted to do to her. I do not discount those blessings and do my best to maintain my standards in show of my thankfulness. Now I do not believe the US is the most blessed nation in all of recorded history because we are so good, rather a promise fulfilled and we in this day and age are the benefactors of that promise if we can maintain it.

Sadly you are most correct in that phrase "careless Americans" as many are forgetful, fat and lazy and do not appreciate what it is they have been given.

That said I also know that many people within the US have the need to do what Clintons called equalized all nations, and they mean to bring down our standards to be equal with all other nations.

Some conservatives think to be capitalists alone is the "salvation" of the nations of this world, however, unless done God's way there is little difference in capitalism and communism. Just to call oneself a capitalists and yet attempt to do ones brother in before the brother does one in leads to destruction of both.

You see there is one thing that sets this nation apart from all others from its inception is acknowledgment that it is the Creator that endows "RIGHTS" that no man/government can give or take. Sadly toooo many humans have sought to elevate themselves to "creator" status as having the power and authority to give and take the very Heavenly Father given "RIGHTS".

On the one hand Putin rages about his terrorists problems, yet on the other hand he is busy through what is called capitalism arming the world's population of terrorists with the very weaponry to fight and kill US who were attacked by the terrorists upon our own land.

Now it took 70 years for that ungodly system of communism to fall, yet it appears that the lessons of what brought the system down have not yet been learned. The system appears the same method of operation is in tact, just whitewashed under a new name called capitalism, all for the intent and attempt to make US equalized.

Just mythoughts, I see.
Unfortunately, Russia cannot follow your way of salvation. Our version of Christianity doesn't justify bombing and otherwise beating whole nations into Stone Age. Nor does our, possibly naive, understanding of human rights.

You, like many other Americans, seem misinformed about the connection between Syrian and former Iraqi regimes and the islamic terrorism. There is none. Those regimes are secular, originally socialist and opposed to radical Islam. Shortly: Saddam Hussein couldn't give orders to Usama Ben Laden.

To JasonC: the red line just below the button "Word Wrap: ON" reads: "Loose lips sink ships".

>We don't espouse Multiculturalism here on FR.
Oh, I see. It's a conservative resource. I got here via direct links to pages.

It is funny, then, that a "thin veneer of civilised Russians" is mentioned here. Because those, luckily, few "civilised" Russians are liberals of the worst sort. Sickeningly multicultural. The very kind of people you ought to despise. So should be the guy who referred to them.

Russian conservatives, on the other hand, do not think of themselves as "westernised" and never treat westernisation as a synonym of civilisation.

> And yes, Western civilization far exceeds All others.
A useful and laudable conviction for any conservative (after substitution of his own civilisation).

> Once upon a time, even the Czar of Russian accepted that
> and set off to become more civilized ( read WESTERN )and
> you folks added Great, to Peter's name.
This is a matter far too complex to be discussed on a forum. There are different opinions on the nature of Peter the Great's reforms and his greatness. One of the immediate results, however, is certain: a great European power of that time, Sweden, was crushed. If that "thin veneer" gets thick, and you are right about the value of Westernisation, it may come to Russians removing another superpower, say, the USA. Do you really want that?

"Just mythoughts, I see.
Unfortunately, Russia cannot follow your way of salvation. Our version of Christianity doesn't justify bombing and otherwise beating whole nations into Stone Age. Nor does our, possibly naive, understanding of human rights. "

You must get your "news" from CNN if you consider US's method of operation is "beating whole nations into Stone Age." I think you must not be aware that old Saddam agreed to disarm and be inspected way back at the end of the Gulf War when the whole world agreed to kick him out of Kuwait. Saddam had many UN resolutions and many years to fulfill his agreement and refused. Saddam chose not to join civilization and he continually demonstrated that he was about death and destruction not peace.

Saddam kept his people in the Stone Age while he and many others of this world stole proceeds from his OIL, under that UN Oil for rotten Food program, not a Christian way.

"You, like many other Americans, seem misinformed about the connection between Syrian and former Iraqi regimes and the islamic terrorism. There is none. Those regimes are secular, originally socialist and opposed to radical Islam. Shortly: Saddam Hussein couldn't give orders to Usama Ben Laden."

Syria and the Iraqi regimes were and are the protectorate states providing safety and funding of the islamic terrorists. Secularism uses what ever method necessary to maintain power for a few, and while old Saddam may not have issued "orders" to OBL their goals were one and the same.

Secularites are those more equal than the rest and just as our liberals do need the masses reliant upon them to maintain power. Whomever it is one relies upon becomes their "god". But hey it is written these things need be, and there is nothing new under the sun.

And old Saddam did NOT have weapons of mass destruction. However hard the Americans were seeking for them before and after 'Shoch and Awe", they haven't found any.

Not having the bomb -- that is what was his undoing.

Not watching the CNN, I don't understand what Saddam refused. His country was searched for weapons both before and after the Second Gulf War, as I have already said.

And, however bad the Ba'athist regimes be, they are a kind of jerks different from Islamic terrorists. They are enemies. It took an American occupation to turn Iraq into a nest of terrorists.

Another coincidence: the Talibs in their last year supressed the heroin manufacturing. After the liberation of Afghanistan it renewed.

There are, and have been, more Dostoevskys than Tergenevs. The Slavophiles in the majority have long deserved the epithet, scratch a Russian and a Tatar bleeds. And please, do not talk about capitalism in Russia; there is the very thinest of veneers at work there too in a nation where cronyism abounds. And when you talk of religiosity, what is it that you mean? The meaningless drone of Russian Orthodoxy, the supercilious pacifism of Tolstoi, or something else like a resurgence of the "Old Believers"? And what is Russian civilization? Is it the onion-domed churches created by Western architects, the buildings of St. Petersburg created by Western architects, the tsarist gems created by French and worn by European monarchichal families? Or is the Kremlin Walls, the perfect personifaction of the walled personality defying all entry from foreign sources?

Perhaps you don't really belong here at all, with your Krusgchevlite attitude. You might want to reconsider your bellicosity. Russian isn't going to "bury" the USA; nor will you ever regain the old USSR "SUPERPOWER" status.

I'm not the one who posted the :"thin veneer of civilized Russians" quote. But since you seem to revel in barbarism, the other poster wasn't really all that far off. And if you think that WESTERNISED" is a dirty word, then I suggest that you've been brainwashed to within an inch of your life.

And again, nobody here on FR, is pro multiculturalism; a term you appear to not truly understand.

When Peter made his European tour, your nation was living in conditions far removed from the then minimum level of technology. But hey, if you want to return to a pre Peter time, you can always become an al Quaeda/Taliban type Muslim and allow the Chechnians to take over.

Is PRAVDA still filled with nothing with disinformation, or are you just completely uninformed of factual recent history, because it is opposite of what you want it to be?

Here, let me give you the condensed version...........

We didn't take out Saddam, just for WMDs.

When a war is won, the losing side signs a peace accord/treaty. Should that treaty's terms are then broken by the loser, the war is still on. Not only did Saddam break almost every single term of that treaty, but he broke/ignored the SEVENTEEN UN resolutions, it had agreed to. Ergo, the GULF WAR was still on!

Shock and Awe was what WE called the bombing of Baghdad; not searching for WMDs.

His country was not allowed, by Saddam, to be thoroughly searched.

Saddam harbored and helped terrorists. He paid off the families of Palestine suicide bombers, as well.

You're just sore that the Afghan and Taliban forces beat the USSR troops; but American forces beat them all...just admit it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.