The Student Room Group

Do you now consider Russia an enemy of the UK?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Rakas21
Lived with a Polish student last summer and i was shocked at how he truly despised Russia, not just the normal not liking, but pure hatred.


Someone once told me that the V bombers that carried the British nuclear deterrent in the 50s and 60s used to be piloted disproportionately by Poles. Most of the bombers were not expected to return from delivering their weapons over European Russia, but the Poles seemed not to mind that.
Hail Putin. If war breaks out America would do much more damage than Russia :tongue:
Original post by Observatory
Someone once told me that the V bombers that carried the British nuclear deterrent in the 50s and 60s used to be piloted disproportionately by Poles. Most of the bombers were not expected to return from delivering their weapons over European Russia, but the Poles seemed not to mind that.


My Polish friends face when I told them St Petersburg was beautiful. I thought I was going to end up tortured in a dark room.
The 'anti-war' people here, with respect, I don't think you're quite getting it.

I don't think hardly any of the 'pro' war people here are actually calling for any kind of immediate, armed attack on Russia. In such a circumstance it's obvious Russia would lose, badly, but there would be thousands, maybe millions, dead. Russia knows this, and so will never attack us directly. What it's known to be good at is undermining resolve by the death of a thousand cuts.

But what we do need to prevent a war is a firm presence in Eastern Europe to dissuade the Russians from attempting to undermine governments there.

The danger to our security isn't American missiles or a plot to capture St. Petersburg - it's the danger of Russia not taking our commitments to our NATO allies seriously and, piece by piece, little by little, over the span of years, gradually tearing down the internal stability of the Baltic States first, then Poland, Finland and the Balkans, by which point our credibility in the world will be utterly shot, and we will be without friends.

We can manage that without firing a shot, and making war less likely. It's by having a vibrant and active policy on upholding NATO to the letter, and by increasing defence spending by just a little.
(edited 8 years ago)
A very informative article by foreign policy magazine: Russia is already at war- it's just one we don't really recognise yet.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/05/05/how-putin-is-reinventing-warfare/
Original post by gladders
The 'anti-war' people here, with respect, I don't think you're quite getting it.

I don't think hardly any of the 'pro' war people here are actually calling for any kind of immediate, armed attack on Russia. In such a circumstance it's obvious Russia would lose, badly, but there would be thousands, maybe millions, dead. Russia knows this, and so will never attack us directly. What it's known to be good at is undermining resolve by the death of a thousand cuts.

But what we do need to prevent a war is a firm presence in Eastern Europe to dissuade the Russians from attempting to undermine governments there.

The danger to our security isn't American missiles or a plot to capture St. Petersburg - it's the danger of Russia not taking our commitments to our NATO allies seriously and, piece by piece, little by little, over the span of years, gradually tearing down the internal stability of the Baltic States first, then Poland, Finland and the Balkans, by which point our credibility in the world will be utterly shot, and we will be without friends.

We can manage that without firing a shot, and making war less likely. It's by having a vibrant and active policy on upholding NATO to the letter, and by increasing defence spending by just a little.


The mentality of American foreign politics explained:

US Senator Harry Truman' statement in 1941 : " If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, if we see that Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible"
Original post by DaniilKaya
The mentality of American foreign politics explained:

US Senator Harry Truman' statement in 1941 : " If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, if we see that Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible"


What's that got to do with the price of fish?
Original post by DaniilKaya
The mentality of American foreign politics explained:

US Senator Harry Truman' statement in 1941 : " If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, if we see that Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible"


That the US viewed National Socialism as bad as Stalinism is entirely fair and also exactly the same as Britain foreign policy.

Nowadays i am certain that the US would wholeheartedly support Liberal Germany against Authoritarian Russia.
Original post by Rakas21
I'm interested to know peoples attitudes towards Russia given events in Georgia and Ukraine (and suspected allegiance with Iran).

Once the cold war ended we had a much better relationship with Russia and the expectation was that they'd become closer to us i think, this has clearly not occurred.

So it's a simple question.. Do you now view Russia as an enemy of the British state.


Difficult Question, I'd say they are just about Neutral for now, however if things get any worse than they are now, then yes.

But in Russia minority groups are still being discriminated against, and the example last night from FIFA emphasizes the fact that yes, Russia is a tricky 'partner' to deal with. Although I am completely against the fact that Russia invaded Ukraine for no reason and has killed many innocent people.
Original post by Ser Alex Toyne
I agree with you, but I fear that most Westerners choose not to believe that.

Why is it this default thing to see the west as GOOD and Russia EVIL?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Because Russia was the one that annexed a neighbouring sovereign state. Or should I say yet another one.
Original post by MatureStudent36
Because Russia was the one that annexed a neighbouring sovereign state. Or should I say yet another one.


The Crimeans voted to be part of Russia again. 98% of its population is happy to be back.

Hell, the whole Crimea being part of Ukraine was a farce. It was always Russian. You're just crying because the west lost a strategic foothold on Russia.

Care to mention any of the war crimes perpetrated by the US and Europe in the past few decades? The number of civilian casualties caused? Now compare those to the ones in relation to Russia's military operations. We both know whose number is higher.
Original post by Ser Alex Toyne
The Crimeans voted to be part of Russia again. 98% of its population is happy to be back.

Hell, the whole Crimea being part of Ukraine was a farce. It was always Russian. You're just crying because the west lost a strategic foothold on Russia.


And 99% of North Koreans are happy to be under Kim Jong Un, I assume?

Crimea has been under control of the Ottoman Empire for centuries.

In 1954 it became part of Ukrainian SSR.

It has been part of Ukraine since 1991.

Since then, three international agreements were signed between Russia and Ukraine, in 1994 claiming Ukrainian territory should be respected, another in 1997 claiming co-operation and respect of national borders, and in 2003 by Putin himself, claiming that Crimea is a rightful part of Ukraine.

If we're going to argue about historical ownership, then Kaliningrad should be ceded to Germany, Karelia to Finland, Kuril islands to Japan, a large chunk of the Far East to China - etc.

You also claim 'the west lost a strategic foothold on Russia' - what, exactly? Crimea was never under the ownership of the West, it continued to field Russian military bases. Furthermore, NATO already has a foothold in Poland and the Baltic states.
Original post by Ser Alex Toyne
The Crimeans voted to be part of Russia again. 98% of its population is happy to be back.

Hell, the whole Crimea being part of Ukraine was a farce. It was always Russian. You're just crying because the west lost a strategic foothold on Russia.

Care to mention any of the war crimes perpetrated by the US and Europe in the past few decades? The number of civilian casualties caused? Now compare those to the ones in relation to Russia's military operations. We both know whose number is higher.


Crimea has been militarily annexed by a hostile nation.

The 'vote' has as much legitimacy as the nazis occupation of the Sudetenland.
Original post by Davij038
That the US viewed National Socialism as bad as Stalinism is entirely fair and also exactly the same as Britain foreign policy.

Nowadays i am certain that the US would wholeheartedly support Liberal Germany against Authoritarian Russia.


Why Russia is authoritarian?

Putin is the only president in the world who allows 13 opposition channel to be active inside Russia. He answers open public questions on live press conference for 3 hours
Original post by ALevelBro
And 99% of North Koreans are happy to be under Kim Jong Un, I assume?

Crimea has been under control of the Ottoman Empire for centuries.

In 1954 it became part of Ukrainian SSR.

It has been part of Ukraine since 1991.

Since then, three international agreements were signed between Russia and Ukraine, in 1994 claiming Ukrainian territory should be respected, another in 1997 claiming co-operation and respect of national borders, and in 2003 by Putin himself, claiming that Crimea is a rightful part of Ukraine.

If we're going to argue about historical ownership, then Kaliningrad should be ceded to Germany, Karelia to Finland, Kuril islands to Japan, a large chunk of the Far East to China - etc.

You also claim 'the west lost a strategic foothold on Russia' - what, exactly? Crimea was never under the ownership of the West, it continued to field Russian military bases. Furthermore, NATO already has a foothold in Poland and the Baltic states.


The agreements that you are talking about were illegal and did not reflect the opinion of the citizens

Putin said that Crimea was a rightful part of Ukraine for diplomatic reasons
Original post by DaniilKaya
Why Russia is authoritarian?

Putin is the only president in the world who allows 13 opposition channel to be active inside Russia. He answers open public questions on live press conference for 3 hours


When asked if Kazahkstan has any opposition parties, Kazakstans dictator president said "Of course! I created all of them!" Does that answer your question?
Original post by Davij038
When asked if Kazahkstan has any opposition parties, Kazakstans dictator president said "Of course! I created all of them!" Does that answer your question?


Pure western delusion.
Original post by DaniilKaya
Pure western delusion.


Pure eastern denial. :smile:
Original post by Davij038
Pure eastern denial. :smile:


Pure propoganda of "pure eastern denial".:biggrin:
Original post by Davij038
When asked if Kazahkstan has any opposition parties, Kazakstans dictator president said "Of course! I created all of them!" Does that answer your question?


Why the frick do you call Nusultan Azarbaev a dictator? Do you even know how much that man has done for his country? He literally brought it up from nothing to the modern country that it is today.

I personally find that he's genuinely a very nice guy. Always goes out for walks in the capital, takes photos with tourists, meets up with local schools.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending