Skip to comments.
Islam thrives as Russia's population falls
The Toronto Star ^
| December 3, 2006
| MICHAEL MAINVILLE
Posted on 12/06/2006 6:06:27 AM PST by MadIvan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 last
To: MadIvan
Well, if arabs do take over Russia, what is left of you, come to Poland, and eastern europe. Let's make a friggin big eastern european army, and take them out. We would remind arabs a little of history. We would quickly make them remember the Scythians, Huns, Alans, and Sarmatians, along with a few others. I think it is safe to say that they would not very much enjoy this history lesson.
On second thought, I think an eastern european raid into arabia, and all muslim areas would be great right now. I know it's a lot to hope for, but can you just imagine a headline saying, "Russia and all of East Europe combine forces and raid innocent muslim countries." wa wa wa. Liberals the world over would be calling us anything from cruel to racist to fascist. I would be laughing and dancing with joy. Just think of all the plunder we could get from those oil rich places too.
Maybe someday. Until then, I guess we just have to do our best.
Let's pray that things get better between all of our countries, and within them too.
To: sergey1973
"It will be a payback time for all Infidels for any defeat Muslims suffered from them for centuries unless infidels wake up and unite to defend themselves from Islamic menace. For now things don't look promising. Infidels are busy being at each other throats while Islam marches on"
Exactly! We have to stop squabbling! We have to start being "terrible"
To: Tailgunner Joe
It was Kievan Rus which ruled Crimea before the muslims took it over, not Moscow. Clearly Kiev has the older historical claim to the area. Rus or Russia had different capitals at different times, the first was Novgorod (near St. Petersburg), then Kiev until Mongols destroyed this city in 1240, later Moscow became the center of Rus/Russia and then St. Petersburg.
This "historical claim" is not owned by a particular city but rather by the Rus (Ukraine with Russia and Belarus as a whole). When Crimea was taken back by Russians about time of American Revolution it had little Christian population, the later migration was primarily from Russia and today majority of people in Crimea want to be part of Russia. And they would be if not Khrushchev gift.
43
posted on
12/07/2006 5:20:32 AM PST
by
A. Pole
(John McCain: "Pick lettuce!" - http://projectusa.org/sub/forums/lettucepatch/index.php)
To: A. Pole
They are part of Russia. Don't the Russian nationalists insist that Ukraine is Russia? Ukraine is Kievan Rus. They have an older claim to the name Russia than Moscow does.
To: Tailgunner Joe
Before Western Rus (Ukraine and Belarus) got under Lithanian/Polish rule the whole Rus was more or less one entity. The separate Ukrainie identity started to develop in XIX centure in the area around Lvov under Austrian rule.
Ukraine is Kievan Rus. They have an older claim to the name Russia than Moscow does.
The Moscow area was a part of Kievan Rus same way as Novgorod area (near St. Petersburg) or Kiev itself. You are projecting XX century politics into the past.
45
posted on
12/08/2006 6:54:21 PM PST
by
A. Pole
(Sun Tzu: "If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.")
To: Polak z Polski
Terrible is what got you to this impasse. It won't get you out of it, it will only dig in deeper.
More children are aborted in both Russia and the Ukraine than are born there.
Killing muslims won't help.
A people that don't love life enough to bear their own children won't keep a sixth of the world's land surface.
46
posted on
12/08/2006 7:09:25 PM PST
by
JasonC
To: Bokababe
Close all the doors you want, when there is nothing left but a cemetary the masses of the world will find a way in.
The first world is committing suicide by immorality. Neither immigration nor foreign ideologies have anything essential to do with it. There is a vaccum in the heart of the modern west, and it shows up in empty houses and murdered children.
All that needs to change is for people to decide they love life, their own future, and their children, more than they love their present vices and their idiotic cynicism. If they do, all the rest will be easy. If they don't, no extra dose of cynicism or ruthlessness will remotely help.
How can a people expect solidarity from each other in some fantasy version of a grand historical cause, when in their private living reality they literally flush their own children down the drain?
47
posted on
12/08/2006 7:15:15 PM PST
by
JasonC
To: JasonC
"All that needs to change is for people to decide they love life, their own future, and their children, more than they love their present vices and their idiotic cynicism."You have very valid points. But, it is also a psychologcally "a chicken & egg" concept -- "Is the Western world dying because we don't have enough babies?" Or, "Are we not having babies because we are afraid that our world is dying?" I think that the answer to both is "Yes". The question is how to stop this downward spiral -- not just individaully, but collectively, and quickly enough to recoup worldwide (or at least in the US) before it is too late.
48
posted on
12/09/2006 11:12:29 AM PST
by
Bokababe
( http://www.savekosovo.org)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson