₦airaland Forum

Actually, I don't think so. Because as I stated, nothing is going to change, the script has already been written by the CIA, the elected president is only going to apply the script.

joshkke:
In a strategic sense, it would be a misstep for the Russian government not to care who leads in a nation acclaimed to be their biggest rival militarily and despite the new Russian democracy, even ideologically

joshkke:
But if it as you say, why the keen following of all updates about the US elections by the highest levels of Russian government.

What you are saying is subjectif and whatever it means, you have no proof for it.
It is required that diplomats get information about other countries, so I would guess that russian diplomats assigned to the USA would take an interest in USA elections.

joshkke:
Unless it's reverse psychology: endorse someone hoping the USA's voting public's knee jerk reaction to a traditional foreign adversary drives them in the opposite direction.

I think what you fail to see is that Russia doesn't give a hoot about who becomes president of the USA. It is the USA's paranoia and guilt which keeps making up that Russia is manipulating USA's elections. The americans project their sins upon Russia. Whoever wins the USA elections will be following the CIA script which doesn't depend on the elected leader.

I guess it is fair if I come to your family neighbourhood and enter the house of your brother and push him and his kids into living only in his garage while I take the rest of the house for myself.

Then I can just point out that your family has the remaining 22 houses of the neighbourhood and mine has only one house. So it is fair, right ?

With that same logic, if all your family members have money and a thief steals all your own money, I guess the police should exempt the thief, because the rest of your family has all that money and the thief only has your own money, right ?

Uprightness100:
Colonialism

Amir T

Kid, in my field there is no Nobel prize, rather we have Fields medals which I have no respect for. But anyways it is totally irrelevant.

You are a kid trying to debate an adult and your designated authoritative source is at the level of the adult whom you are trying to debate. All you have done is expose yourself as a kid trying to debate an adult.

The debate should be between me and your authoritative source. You don't belong in this conversation.

Guestlander:
LMAO, I don't doubt you at all judging by all the scientific breakthroughs and the Nobel prizes you have to your name.

Here we go again. It seems you are at the level of a secondary school student. I'm at the level of the guys who wrote the paper which you want me to read. I could debate those guys whom you see as your masters of thought.

This is like a toddler debating a physicist about atomes and then the toddler brings out a quote of his father as proof.

Guestlander:
https://online.norwich.edu/online/about/resource-library/who-were-manhattan-project-scientists

Read this and let me know the exact time the technology was stolen.

Look, I wasn't insulting you. I was objectively describing you and what irritated me about you:
1. You ignore logic
2. You have a learning disability

Notice how I didn't call you "half baked idiots", nope I'm not interested in insulting you.

It is pointless for me to continue the conversation with you, you need a tutor who has time and energy to invest in you, and a special tutor who gets paid with disrespect and insults 😅

Guestlander:
Here comes the insults. One of the risks of chatting with half baked idiots on the internet.
Here you are saying with confidence that it was Albert Einstein was the one who told the US government about making a nuclear bomb and then the technology was stolen the Germans?

You may have a learning disability. Didn't you just read where I said that Albert Einstein informed the USA president about the bomb ?

It is quite hard to have an educated conversation with people who seem to ignore logic.

Guestlander:
What you said is untrue though. How can one argue with this pedestrian analysis. The nuclear bomb came about as result of many scientists. Some from the UK, Germany, France and the USA.
How can you conclude it was stolen from the Germans?

You guys just like to argue. Respect yourself guys, when you don't know about a topic, reserve your comments and go and educate yourself before commenting.

I even remember Albert Einstein's letter to the USA president in which Albert Einstein informs the USA president about the atomic bomb

Guestlander:
I basically repeated what you said. That statement is absolutely not true.

I hope you are not one of those people whom are basing what they say upon what they saw in a Hollywood movie. I've known about the history of the atomic bomb since I was a kid, more than 25 years ago.

I even remember Albert Einstein's letter to the USA president in which Albert Einstein informs the USA president about the atomic bomb

Guestlander:
I basically repeated what you said. That statement is absolutely not true.

Guestlander:
What a load of nonsense. German scientists discovered nuclear technology and was stolen from them!
Right.

Correct your sentence, I don't understand what you said.

Edit. I still don't know what you're talking about, but I hope you are not one of those people whom are basing what they say upon what they saw in a Hollywood movie. I've known about the history of the atomic bomb since I was a kid, more than 25 years ago.

shoodboi2:
That's true. It's been a while I heard it on this forum. Even Nairaland has slowed down on their anti-Russian propaganda.

Defeat is a bad thing. Slava Rossiya 🇷🇺🇷🇺

anti-Russia propaganda

Namaster:
Putin has SPENT $10 Million on RIGHT WING influencers like Tim Pool ...

Do you care to share evidence?

Guestlander:
Many countries were developing the technology around the same time including Germany.

False. German scientists discovered the technology and kept developing it in secret during WW2. But some German scientist who migrated to the USA managed to steal the technology and offer it to the USA. Out of nowhere the USA had up to date scientific data (discovered by Germany scientists) on nuclear bombs. The USA then only had to solve a few remaining problems and that was it.

To conclude with: the technology was stolen from Germany.

Point of correction: the nuclear bomb is a German discovery, German scientists who migrated to the USA stole that technology from their compatriots and gave it to the USA which developed it further.

To conclude with, the USA is also a thief of the nuclear bomb, just like Russia.

Guestlander:
What exactly is your point? The nuclear technology itself was stolen and copied from the US.

erniok:
Seems you do argue blindly. Was I contending what it was called before Hitler took over?

it seems you just want to argue. I'm not part of the trolling club. If you say something foolish, I will tell you. Again, we are not intellectual equals. Learn your place.

@eniok, just learn what I wrote here rather than ignorantly thinking you are smart and trying to debate reality away.

Ghostagain:
If by bloodshed you mean genocide then you would be right. But like the not very knowledgeable guy you are, you oversimplify things. The USA started as a settler-colony of Britain, the settlers rebelled against Britain and went on to expand their colony through genocide. Russia on the other hand, went through the usual steps of how a country comes into existence: expansion. From house to clan, from clan to village, from village to city, from city to kingdom, from kingdom to larger kingdom (or empire).

You still don't understand the meaning of colonisation and you keep confusing it with expansion. If you want to continue in this erroneous logic, tell me what made you say "the British didn't colonise any part of Africa" while seeing the British as a single bloc, not as a union of colony and coloniser ?
What I'm telling you is that the creation of Russia is not different from that of Britain,it is through expansion. Countries weren't created in heaven...do I really need to repeat the lecture again ? Or can you just read ?
Look, we are not equals, stop fooling yourself into believing you can outsmart or debate me, you are only making both of us lose our time. Read what I already wrote and learn from it. I'm tired of repeating myself for people who think they are smart.

erniok:
Seriously? You had to redefine colonize as expanding? Using your logic, it would be safe to say the brits never colonised any part of Africa, they just expanded their empire into Africa.

Apparently, you are the one that suck at history because the land poland got by force, it lost by force.

You are still sucking at history. Germany was known as Germany, Reich means empire if I'm not mistaking. But Germany was called Germany before Hitler ruled it, and was still called Germany while Hitler ruled it.

erniok:
and
Germany as at that period was known as the German Reich officially and also as Nazi Germany. Calling her what she was in no way absolved them of anything. Stop trying to play too smart please.

petesunday:
I understand the Americans were smartwr and more vicious in their assimilation process. With a lost heritage, identity and lack of cojesiom, the Indian tribes can never become a threat. Russia's subjigated tribes have retained a level of autonomy and can today, decide to be either a dependable ally or formidable enemy

Look at this guy praise genocide as if it were a medal of honour. Dude, Russia doesn't have subjugates "tribes". You guys see things through the lense of ethnicity to an unhealthy extent. You can't understand that the people you are calling "subjugated tribes" are Russians to the same extent as president Putin is. You want a part of Russia to be a "dependable ally" to Russia ? Or a formidable foe to Russia ? It is the same as wanting your right hand to be your ally or your foe. Russia is not only Slavs ! It is weird you guys have no problem seeing black, white and yellow americans as american, but for Russia, you seem to think only Slavs are Russians.

What you say about Russia, you can say exactly the same for France, the UK, Danemark... Any country which wasn't built through colonialism. Russia was not a settler-colony, stop confusing everything.

WriteerNg:
⚡Turkish media reports that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will participate in the BRICS summit, which will be held in Kazan.

Double face trying to enter new agreements 🤔

Tito should have merged with the USSR as Stalin wanted. An action which would probably have saved the USSR and Yugoslavia long after both men died.

WriteerNg:
Serbia is just scared cuz they're surrounded on all sides by NATO, while Russia is far away from them.


Even if Russia wants to help, how can they get to Serbia?

Before they even get there, Serbia would be gone.

Faithti:
like quoting wiki is now haram or what 😀....am out of data and freebasics offers Wikipedia which also has a page on the topic.

Well you are acting like a 12 year old by plagiarising Wikipedia instead of using your own brain. As I already noted, you don't actually produce intellectual content, all you do is repeat after someone else.

Faithti:
bro the us got its own through bloodshed too

If by bloodshed you mean genocide then you would be right. But like the not very knowledgeable guy you are, you oversimplify things. The USA started as a settler-colony of Britain, the settlers rebelled against Britain and went on to expand their colony through genocide. Russia on the other hand, went through the usual steps of how a country comes into existence: expansion. From house to clan, from clan to village, from village to city, from city to kingdom, from kingdom to larger kingdom (or empire).

The USSR was not made up of 16 countries, it was just one country. It is the break up of the USSR which gave birth to several new countries which were just regions of the USSR prior to the break up.

You guys see history upside down.

Jovi10:
You're not getting the point. From the on set my convoy with him was not about the USSR but Russia. I already know all these, howbeit I'm talking about Russia vs the USA in Africa. The USSR is a different ball game. What part of this didn't you get?

It's irrelevant, it seems relevant only to you. But if you want to be right out of pride rather than take my advise, then carry on.
My advise was me extending a helping hand, but in Nigeria you guys have too much ego. The number of times I was corrected and advised in similar fashion is a very big number. I didn't do the "proud Nigerian", I learnt from those advises instead, that made my thinking better.

Jovi10:
I know , we started a convo where he Said Russia and the USA are the same in terms of what they did to Africa. Russia has only helped Africa since her existence as an independent state. I'm not talking about the USSR. That's another ball game.

That is an other mistake from you. Russian federation didn't exist before 1991and is the successor state of the USSR. It is not very smart to limit your knowledge to 1991-2024, he's only going to be running circles around you.

You are falling for his trap, you are being outsmarted by him. Don't reply when you are not properly educated on a topic, take the time to get the education on the topic before replying. The USSR was not the only state which supported Ethiopia, all the major powers did.

Jovi10:
Calm down to read my message again clearly. I said Russia not USSR o.. what evil did Russia do to Africa? Mention 1 I'm waiting sir or ma.

This guy just went and copied Wikipedia, after we already told him to stop repeating like a robot.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_conquest_of_Siberia

Faithti:
expansion...thats such a subtle word to use, isn't it.
The Russian conquest of Siberia took place during 1580–1778, when the Khanate of Sibir became a loose political structure of vassalages that were being undermined by the activities of Russian explorers. Although outnumbered, the Russians pressured the various family-based tribes into changing their loyalties and establishing distant forts from which they conducted raids. It is traditionally considered that Yermak Timofeyevich's campaign against the Siberian Khanate began in 1580. The annexation of Siberia and the Far East to Russia was resisted by local residents and took place against the backdrop of fierce battles between the Indigenous peoples of Siberia and the Russian Cossacks, who often committed atrocities against Indigenous Siberians. A second ideological pillar justifying Russian colonialism was the spread of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, although this pretext originated largely from explorers and settlers themselves as an ad hoc justification rather than being put forward by the Russian Orthodox Church itself.

By saying "the Nazis" instead of Germany, you are absolving Germany of it's past. Just say you are just copying other people's ways without understanding.

erniok:
FYI: never in my post did I absolve Nazi Germany of any blame. They were then, the king of land grabber.

You don't understand what the word "colonize" means. The USSR expanded. Citizens of eastern Poland weren't meant to be 3rd class citizens of the USSR. It was just a country getting bigger, and Mr man that part of Poland is still not part of Poland today, its called western Ukraine as we speak, why don't you take your hanger out on Ukraine and demand Ukraine return that land to Poland?

Also the dictator who took that land from Poland was a man from Georgia! But russian federation of today (not Georgia) gets the blame! History is not easy and you svck at it.

erniok:
So we can agree that at one point that they tried colonizing poland.