"When it's a question of action against the Slavs, you can always count on Romania," Antonescu stated ten days before the start of Operation Barbarossa.
Almost all those interned in transit camps in Hungary and Rumania escaped between the autumn of 1939 and the summer of 1940 and amounted to 15,978 officers and other ranks to Britain with another 1,378 from other countries. Under pressure, the Hungarian and Romanian governments became anti-Polish while the people remained largely supportive and assisted in escapes.
In Rumania as the camp head counts diminished, Rumanians officials regularly falsified returns with 'ghost' numbers to avoid the wrath of their German paymasters
It was a strategic error, and the warnings of Paulus and Manstein who said to Hitler that the front was empty north of Stalingrad for more than 100 km did not have any visible result. I have thinking a lot about that specific battle. The best conclusion that I come with is that they should have been sending the Romanian Armies to fight inside the town while using the armored German Armies to attack North and South of Stalingrad over Volga. This would have been encircling the Russian artillery that bombarded the city during the entire operation and in case of a counteroffensive the Germans would have been holding the line
EU brings to other states enslavement, financial debt and Islam. EU = the death of nations and the extinction of the European population.
I only hope that Russia doesn't really want Global War.
My domain is political science, in particular international relations and security studies.
Now, I could live in a dream world like my Belgian friend, but unfortunately, I don't.
Is it plausible that education today isn't truthful, as it is based on lies in the first place?
Is it plausible that -- and you can find instances of this online -- that professors who seek to teach contemporary politics are fired, removed from tenure and seemingly made to look like "tin foil hat wearing" kooks?
Is it plausible that political journals, which is being used as a basis for argument, can be rife with bias?
Obama does want WW3. They're broke. They're trillions of dollars in debt. You know how you fix that? You create a phoney war.
Tomorrow... I think I'll hang out with myself again,
Maybe even sport someone else's skin.
So if you hear some other cat kicking my rhymes,
Just remember his intestines might just be mine.
Cause any one of these 6 billion civilians could very well be this reptilian.
No matter how resilient or brilliant you think you are,
If i decide that i need a new host,
Somebody's pretty little shell's gonna get a new ghost.
Also, I'm worried about all those RIghtSector dudes, they are armed and unpredictable, and their dream is an ISIS-type scenario (on a Nationalist rather than Religious basis).
theire upset cause some ultras got arrested like that fatfuck stotnik(captain) Mykola
Its better for them to split apart and live the way each group wants to, they dont seem to be able to find a common language anymore and just live together
refuse to see what could possibly be the truth
Is Ukraine getting help from the West?
The US says it is supplying Ukraine with non-lethal military equipment, including radios, vehicles and "non-lethal individual tactical gear".
Do you even know the premise of the first Gulf War?
Or why the US armed Iraq in the first place?
you don't sell weapons then sink all the profits in starting a war with your buyers, especially when you can sell weapons just fine in peace time too.
Bill Hicks was an awesome comedian, but he's just that.. a comedian.
It's not US fault that "balance of power in the world" is off. It is Russia who fails to keep up in the economic and arms race - so you should blame Russia first.
You should blame USA first, because they violate balance of power in the world, not Russia.
I blame USA the same as Russia.
It was not a dream border.
Hard work makes me proud also. But Poles are hard workers, mostly. All around the world.
Still, I don't know where you are living.
1. It was agreement between USA and USSR/Russia also. And it is also natural that Russia will act something like now.
b) Is a gypsy hellhole where horse is the chosen form of transport and some pimp can beat the fuck out of Alexandra Stan in broad daylight
@ Commentators west of the iron curtain:
Also kindly shut the fuck up about idiot commies being brain-fed propaganda considering your chosen print publication or news TV station/program is a Hearstonian/Murdochite hammer on the brain in-between ads and airings of whatever reality TV show is big now.
Nikolas Kozloff Become a fan
Author, 'Revolution! South America and the Rise of the New Left'
Putin isn't the enemy. Ukraine isn't the enemy. Countries in and of themselves are not the enemy. Leaders, their cronies, and the decisions they make are the enemy.
I never brought up a single protest. So your presumption is based on nothing and pretty stupid.
Now, your second part... are you actually trying to tell me that Russia is the only country in this world supplying other countries (or groups) with weaponry? I mean, you can't be, can you? Because that would make me, and almost anyone with a brain, think you're an idiot and incapable of objective thought. The USA supplies plenty of regimes with weaponry, "legally" and illegally. This is fact. Russia has supplied many countries with weaponry, you're right. However, if the separatists are to be assumed to be "Russian-supported" due to this, I guess you could say the Ukrainian army is also "Russian-supported." The Kiev government has purchased millions and millions of dollars of Russian built military weaponry. Another fact is that the DPK/LPK have taken many Ukrainian military bases in the areas of their control. This isn't unknown. It's then obvious to assume, at least to someone who isn't blinded by really poor "journalism", that these people have taken control of many military weapons. However, if you do enough digging you can find that this has also been confirmed by Kiev regarding weaponry/vehicle losses to the east.
Furthermore, even if Russia was supporting the separatists, which there is really no proof of (and by Russians, I'm talking the Russian military, not people of Russian descent), why is Russia considered the horrible enemy, yet the USA/EU dictators who are dipping their fingers in the issue aren't at fault? If you want to blame Putin, in this regard, you should also be bashing every other country getting involved in something they shouldn't be.
"Bring war to a nation with a political problem", excuse me, but do you mean Crimea?
The question is, then, why do you believe that Russia is more to blame than the west/EU?
The west supports a democratically elected government, so even if they did anything it would be quite righteous.
They don't supply incredible weapons to the Ukrainians.
They don't have voluenteers recruited for money with a slogan "For the greatness of EU, come and fight!".
Most blame you could try and put would be during the peaceful Euromaidan protest
trying to somehow imply that it was a European organized protest. I guess we'll never know,
but it isn't a tenth as bad as what Russia is doing.They overthrew a corrupt politician that wasn't listening to his nation. He had come into power after the orange revolution electorate didn't work out, not because of it.
They support a movement that is working against a democratically elected government. They sparked the conflict (sparking it happened not with the protests in Maidan, it was a peaceful protest not anything comparable). They have their leaders leading the separatists. There are Russian soldiers ON RUSSIAN COMMAND in Ukraine. There are loads of Russian separatists, coming in from Russia barely trained, for Russian money, recruited via flyers that don't say "Come help your Ukrainian bretheren". They say "Come, for the greatness of Russia, other Russians are dying and you must help our side".
Denying that Russia is supplying the separatists with weapons at this point is ludicrous.
Russian soldiers commanded by Russians, instructed by Russian authorities to come there.
Sure, no regular Russian army. Voluenteers coming for The greatness of Russia, for Russian money. Screams Russian government organized all over.
Comparing the protests with the conflict in the East doesn't make sense to me. Who says a conflict had to spring at all? The guy I linked provided a lot of proof, in case you want to read up about him.
that US/EU should also stop pumping money and firearms
Sure Russia is not the best country to live in, but hey, at least we have somewhat sane government here, which is not killing their own people for money.
I know that neither Europe nor US is supplying weapons to Ukraine
It is well known that there are very prominent neo-nazi factions in Ukraine at this moment (Right Sector, Azov battalion, to name a couple). To consider the whole west as being neo-nazi would be the same ignorance you're showing to Russian's. I feel sorry for the west the most.
Sorry, I don't need to make a new thread on ESReality.
Confirmed. You actually don't read what I write.
And to somehow dismiss the west/EU as being irrelevant, again, is your idiocy and naivete on the subject.
Also, invaded by separatists? THEY'RE UKRAINIAN PEOPLE.
being invaded by Russian led separatists
You'd be right if proponents of those theories maintained that an increased competition in the roads business (because of higher prospective returns) wouldn't take away resources from other branches (those with lower returns).
[...] Fair play isn't even defined in economics.
1) the murder victim presumably has family members or friends
They select a number of judges offering their arbitration services on the market (presumably known for fair rulings in the past, otherwise either the defendant or the plaintiff would prefer another judge) If they make the effort of offering a number of judges and the suspected murderer refuses all of them without suggesting his judges, there will be widespread understanding that he's not willing to defend himself and the case can be ruled in absentia
If it does, case closed - murderer is put to jail or killed
The question of whether resources are scarce has nothing to do with the degree of competition in road building.
building a tunnel[...]helipad
The costs are: 1) the initial outlay for the road [...]
2) the lost revenue [...]
Moreover, the murderer's company would suffer a great loss in the future if it were known on the market to patronize murderers
And why would they even go through the trouble?[...]
Why would a judge decide to be unfair if it means it's the last ruling he'll be asked to make?
in fact what's been shown is that you're utterly unfamiliar with what you're trying to refute
It's as if I started speaking whatever springs to my mind to you about programming or engineering and didn't recognize your refuting my faulty arguments.
Let's assume the year is 1776. Would you please be so kind as to point out any documented example in the history of mankind where a negro thrived without the benevolent assistance of his master
A second objection is that the rich (or powerful) could commit crimes with impunity, since nobody would be able to enforce judgment against them. Where power is sufficiently concentrated this might be true; this was one of the problems which led to the eventual breakdo