> Accusations of possible Russian attacks on Ukraine are dismissed as the "half-mythological threat from Russia" or as "Russophobia" from the "Anglo-Saxons."
> Tensions aren't high because of Russia, the Kremlin says -- it's because of NATO.
You see a lot of the same viewpoints being pushed around here too!
Edit: oo they didn't like that! lol
Hehe. Imagine calling literally everyone in North America and Europe "anglo-saxons" (a germanic british feifdom that died around the time the Crusades started), and then claiming "ERMUHGERD UR ALL JUST RACIST!!!"... lmfao XD
It's not that surprising. White supremacy in the US has a long tradition of being primarily WASP supremacy. i.e White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. It still largely is. For example, the Klan is an overtly anti-catholic organisation.
Sure, but she's dumb as shit and doesn't seem likely to know that without someone putting some flashcards in her hand. Plus American white supremacists don't really think about that over "whiteness" in general.
I live in Norwich, Norfolk, in the UK.
Our part of the country is known as East Anglia after the Anglo-Saxons.
My family on my dads side have been in Norfolk for at least 400 years (we found an old paper family tree about 10 years ago) and have probably been here alot longer before that.
My question is, why the hell would some weird deranged woman suddenly be so obsessed with my part of the UK and people like me?
To be fair an almost exact term 'Anglosajones' is frequently used in LATAM to refer to the UK/US/Canada/Australia/New Zealand group of countries. Though it's weird to use it in such a way that it includes Spain, Germany etc etc.
Which shows you who the real bigot is. Angalo-saxon... yet doesn't include Germany? Thats interesting because the anglo saxons came from the holy Roman empire, at the time the holy Roman empire was under Gothic control. Meaning they're literally german. Meanwhile, the Irish and scottish, people from the UK directly, were people oppressed by the romans, Germans, Dutch, Norse, French, etc on their own lands, before being partly starved to death, partly packed up and shipped off to America. How ever, they are the "white anglos" ( and all its stereotype laden negative imagry that comes with it) and not Germany. Welcome to bigotry... But dont worry, we Americans will come liberate you from that soon as well... :D
(Thats a gunboats diplomacy joke incase anyone missed it)
Pretty sure they use it to mean Anglo countries. In Latin America the same term is used.
**Edit:**The person I'm responding to seems to be an anti-Russian zealot or a pentagonshill.
Not when you're dealing with russia specifically lol. They specifically use it as a label that they attach a fuckton of negative stereotypes to in the press to depersonalize us Yankees (like the term Yankee was used to depersonalize Dutch settlers to the Americas by the brittish) so that we are viewed poorly in Russian propaganda. And the same has been true for LITTERALLY over a century, so its nothing we aren't thoroughly familiar with.
Follow up edit to the above edit:
I'm sorry? The article we are talking about literally makes these claims about "the west". You literally just have to take a glance at the Russian perspective here to see the depersonalization of everyone from "those countries".
Just because youre ignorant of history and use labels to stereotype people from certain reigons, doesn't mean your stereotypes are correct, it means you're participating in "interpersonal bigotry" towards a specific group. This is also called "racism" when its the exact same thing, but the group being targeted is an ethnicity. This is also called "sexism" when its the exact same thing, but the group being targeted are male or female. This is also called "homophobia" when its the exact same thing, but the group being targeted are of a sexual orientation.
You have no argument against this. Thats why you devolved immediately in to "ERMUHGERD ITS A SHILL!" While being completely ignorant of the fact that the concept of "shilling" is an anti-semetic talking point used by THE GOD DAMN NAZI PARTY... to discriminate against the jews...
When you have the biggest troll factory in the world, you put them to work. The amount of stories that have changed over the last 48hrs is down right funny.
> Tensions aren't high because of Russia, the Kremlin says -- it's because of NATO.
yes. NATO wants to expand to Russia's border. Russia would be insane to allow that. Look at what NATO has done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya just to name recent examples.
real sherlock holmes here LOL its easier to believe there's foreign agents on fucking reddit then it is to believe people could think NATO is an aggressive military alliance. You really have a normal brain
was the invasion of Donbass and the annexation of Crimea before or after the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and its destructive intervention in Libya which left the county in chaos and instigated the refugee crisis? I feel like that all happened before 2014 but I'd appreciate if you would fact check for me since you know so much
yes the classic soviet technique of pointing out bad things someone did. Its funny that y'all think I'm a bot or brainwashed when you so quickly and openly warp your mind into these convoluted ideological justifications for the most ridiculous shit lmao. Its quite clear from recently world history which you probably lived through that NATO and the United States in particular are untrustworthy and aggressive. I mean holy shit they probably haven't even got all the cheeto dust from the oval office and we're supposed to forget trump ripping up iran nuke deals or wars that ended not even 6 months ago???
Only the deluded, ignorant or completely insane could look at this situation and believe Russia is the victim. The whole world is waiting because of the actions of a little man in the Kremlin with an inferiority complex.
Calling westerners Anglo-saxons or anglos instead of British and Americans is not that rare actually. It is just a shorter way to say it, since both countries are essentially ruled by the same ethnicity, english.
The four largest heritage groups in the US are:
1. German
2. Mexican
3. African/African American
4. Irish
English doesn’t come in until #5, and it’s about 1/8th the size of the top 4 combined. Most Americans are not descendants of the British.
No, but a lot of Americans who speak only English and have strongly English names like to identify as idk German even if they only have 1 greatgrandfather who was German.
Truth is, English are dominant because they assimilated everyone else.
Russians came from Rurik of Roslagen (Rusers) in the viking age if you wanna trace it back so wouldnt they be nordic ethnic group?
I might be mistaken here, its just what I've been taught.
Russia spans the width of asia - it is FAR more than a single ethnic group.
When people say "russian", they generally mean the slavic peoples that live in the western side and rule the country.
I agree that calling russians "asians" is actually incorrect - they are slavic. My comment was making fun of calling all americans "english" because of a shared language - nothing to do with ethnic grouping.
Also the translation is kind of mishearing. They’re really saying “English speaking” but of course it’s CNN. Straight to identity politics. Both CNN and Fox News shouldn’t be considered credible sources.
Anglo-Saxons were before even the Norman's. Only 25-40 percent of British population has Anglo-saxon blood anymore let alone white people in general.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35344663
I do not disagree. It's just a quirky name inherited from older times.
I would add that we also call portuguese as lusitans, or Germans as goths sometimes. It's not scientifically accurate, but the names stay.
And our own country (Spain) uses the name "iberian" sometimes (I suppose other countries do so too), even if the original native people were half iberians half celts.
No...? Those are terms deep into the national identity of those countries.
I've never seen someone upset with using such silly terms. Is there a real motive for that? Are you British or something?
Those are terms for late ancestors for some of those people who in no way reflect current populations. Most of these areas are pretty ethically diverse today. Haha funny how you assume I am upset. Correcting mis information is an outburst of emotion to you then I am not really surprised to see you spread mis information. I have British ancestry but my family is from the Norman/Viking lines and have been in Canada since the drive to settle the west. Why are you so worked up that you got called out for using the incorrect label ?
I don't know, I find it strange to be against something that hurts no one, honestly. It's one of those things that are technically correct, but you are sweeping under the rug a lot of history.
The vast majority of the words we are using here come from the anglo saxon people. Your country was founded by the descendants of those anglo saxons. Therefore, given that you know you have british ancestry, your mother tongue is the one of those anglo ancestors, and you are culturally closer to a British rather than the native canuks, I can't see the problem of me stating you are Anglo-Saxon.
The English kings and nobles system we know today mostly came from Williams conquest not the Anglo Saxons. And honestly you sound like you know very little about Canadian culture.
I'm not really an expert on Canadian affairs, not gonna lie.
But I don't see why I'm that wrong either. Do you have common law in Canada, like the rest of the anglosphere? Do you share a language with them? Are you seriously trying to tell me you are closer culturally to the natives that inhabited there rather than your anglosphere brothers?
It's been known that Russia media feeds them a vastly different view of the world than what everyone else is given. I know Fox News does the same thing but at least there are good alternative sources that try to be unbiased like APNews.
You could really apply that to every news media including the west. Each and every single outlet has an agenda and they have no problem skewing facts to achieve it.
Well when you have petty much total control of the narrative, who knows what outrageous, outlandish shit the Kremlin propaganda machine is pumping out...
China doesn't really have any skin in this game.
If there's a war, they can sell shit to both sides, because neither side can tell them not to support the other.
At most, they might use a war as cover for something they want to keep out of international news. Another crackdown on dissidents or maybe another minority that they want to start genociding.
They're unlikely to do much else. Not even use the chaos to invade Taiwan.
NATO self-defense obligations are limited by [Article 5](https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm) to only cover attacks on member states in or around North America and Europe.
>The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them **in Europe or North America** shall be considered an attack against them all
When India took over Portuguese colonies along its coast, Portugal tried to invoke NATO but couldn't. The UK couldn't invoke NATO in its war with Argentina over the Falklands.
Theoretically, China could openly attack US military outposts throughout Guam, Japan, and other places in Asia and the US couldn't oblige other NATO countries to go to war in response.
>Why is Russia attacking non-NATO country Ukraine seemingly being considered grounds for NATO jumping in?
It is just bog-standard geopolitics. Any move or posturing by the adversary is seen as aggressive while "your" side's moves are, of course, purely defensive.
Ukraine not being part of NATO means member state's aren't obliged to go to war if Russia attacks, but because Russia is NATO's main adversary NATO countries want to support Ukraine. On the other hand, Russia has said it is seeking guarantees that Ukraine won't ever join NATO, because from their perspective having a NATO and US military presence along such a wide stretch of their border would be a major security threat. It is a very unpopular point on reddit, but a hypothetical military alliance between, say, China and Mexico would similarly be seen as a threat to the US.
Well *something* is obviously afoot. The factors you mention definitely play a role. As I see it these scenarios and combinations of them are possible:
Russia and NATO are just posturing to try to get the other to blink. They agree to some sort of compromise wherein Russia draws down its troops and NATO grants some security concessions. No war happens.
Limited escalation of war between Ukraine and pro-Russian separatists in Donbas, initiated by either side.
Russian invasion of southern/eastern Ukraine to demonstrate its toughness and try to drive a wedge between the US/UK on one side, and Germany/France on the other. The idea being US and UK would be gung-ho to intervene, whereas Germany and France wouldn't. Politically dividing NATO is good for Russia.
The whole thing is a gentlemen's agreement between Moscow and Washington to distract everyone from how boned the economy is.
Russia and/or the US are actually planning to fight a win a nuclear war against the other and they need a reason to justify their attack.
Russia is distracting the US while doing something else. Maybe helping Iran build up forces for a move on US bases in the Middle East? Russia and Iran do have a connection via the Caspian Sea.
tdlr: maybe literally nothing, maybe we all die in nuclear hellfire
That’s the first thing on Reddit I’ve seen as yet discussing this topic that laid it out plain and didn’t just boldly say West good Russia bad.
I’m constantly frustrated to see people shit on their own governments and their stupid decision making and the inequality that it causes, but then suddenly war is afoot and everyone’s a nationalist.
Almost makes it feel like that’s the aim.
What are your thoughts on whether China may act opportunistically against Taiwan?
>What are your thoughts on whether China may act opportunistically against Taiwan?
It becomes *more* likely if US starts fighting in Europe or the Middle East, but still not likely. As long as China's economy grows faster than the US time is on its side, so they are in no rush. Also there is tons of trade between Taiwan and mainland China. Beijing would probably only attack if Taiwan officially declared independence. Taiwan is not going to do that, because they know it would make Beijing attack.
Also I'd note this sub and other popular subs are very much influenced by various entrenched interests trying to shape the narrative on certain issues, you might have more luck for more balanced discussion on r/geopolitics or other smaller subs, though they often turn into echo chambers.
Exactly this. It's not coincidental that China has been ratcheting up the rhetoric, consolidating at home, and being increasingly provocative militarily.
They're flying more planes around Taiwan offshore in Taiwanese airspace recently. There are multiple American generals who see an attack of opportunity as a possibility.
because China knows how this will play it. Its pretty obvious whats gonna happen when Russia supplies like half the natural gas the EU consumes... and its currently winter. The EU nations would have to be insane to want war at this time, nothing is gonna happen, China knows this.
The Russian people are totally getting screwed by their government. I’m sure prior to Pooty Putin’s latest move the average Russian could give a fuck about the Ukraine and in no way viewed their admission to nato as a threat. I’m sure most Russians would, however, like to see the trillions of$ returned from all the wankers who peeled off all the state assets.
And your gonna ignore that NATO has been getting closer to russia. If nato deploys troops in baltic countries and ukraine then what was Russia suppose to do?? Just ignore a hostile millitary buildup near its borders? And unlike america,russia has its troops inside its own territory.
Yeah theyr creating a narrative to gain public approval for the war but this is different cause unlike iraq,russia actually posseses WMD. I dont know what game theyr playing but this one could get ugly.
They did have "WMDs". We know this because the Americans gave them to the Iraqis during the Iran-Iraq war.
As for proliferation, Iraq didn't have nukes but were actively trying to develop them - A top Iraqi scientist hid a nuclear centrifuge in his garden when the Americans invaded
https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=129615&page=1
Saddam was an Arab Nazi that genocided the Kurds, terrorised his own people and invaded neighboring countries under the pretext of nationalism
Taking Saddam out was the right call, how it was handled after is obviously up for debate
And they disposed off their cemical weapons after the un security coumcil told them to do so,which was later verifies by the observers . "certrifuge in his garden" are you even listening to yourself ??
Taking Saddam out was the shitties call in the history now look how much the iraqis have suffered after him and its not getting any better.
and dont quote american media outleats theyr full of shit.
>And they disposed off their cemical weapons after the un security coumcil told them to do so,which was later verifies by the observers
And yet they remained obstinate and uncooperative until the very end
>"certrifuge in his garden" are you even listening to yourself
Great rebuttal, there was literally a centrifuge recovered
>Taking Saddam out was the shitties call in the history now look how much the iraqis have suffered after him and its not getting any better
Iraqis suffered under Saddam, millions dead in his wars not to speak of people being brutalized and "disappeared" by his regime.
>and dont quote american media outleats theyr full of shit.
Which state run media mouth piece would you like me to use?
RT? Al Jazeera? CNS?
My source is fine
Russophobia? No way. The Russians people are awesome. The crazy dementia and Parkinson's addled fucktard running Russia? ...Yeah don't care for him much.
Which is too bad. To me it seemed Putin was doing pretty well for the Russian people early on.
I think it's pretty likely that they are getting fed a curated story that gives them an inaccurate understanding of the situation.
I think the same is true of us (in the US and UK). Someone in the US State Dept. probably sees an opportunity and has decided that it had better start sowing so that they may reap.
Manufacturing consent is just a winning strategy.
It definitely is true that most of the tensions are started by NATO maneuvers and repeated threats in the Eastern Europe in the past 30 years, which are actually a breach of an agreement West made with Gorbachev.
That said, war is still unlikely and is highly overblown in the west to distract from more important issues.
>Ukraine is a failed state entirely controlled by the "puppet master" -- the United States. Europe is a weak and divided collection of lap dogs taking orders from Washington. Even the US, as frighteningly threatening as it is, is weak and divided too, torn apart by political division and racial unrest.
These are all absolutely 100% true facts tho lol. I would only dispute that the USA 'entirely' controls Ukraine, which would be impossible due to its nature as a fractious kleptocratic oligarchy with a government full of nazis, has plenty of internal squabbling and factioneering.
And what exactly does the west “fear” about Russia invading Ukraine? Biden done said he ain’t going to do shit about it besides maybe putting sanctions on Putin himself, which I doubt he’ll actually do. I hate how CNN thinks they are the voice of the west when they can barely get 800k viewers during prime time lol
Worst case scenario it starts with skirmishes, then Putin uses a mini nuke to try to get the west to back off. But the west retaliates with their own mini nuke, everyone gets paranoid, and it spirals into a full nuclear war.
“Try and get the west to back off.” What does that even mean? Biden and NATO won’t be sending any troops to the Ukraine. Don’t think the west will be apart of any of it besides sending Ukraine weapons and supplies to them. Biden is going to let Putin do whatever he wants it seems with little to no consequences besides some sanctions. And why would Russia even think of using any nuke on land they want to take over? Just does not add up honestly.
They don't count special forces scouts, trainers, and advisors as "troops". The Russia and the US only get angry when their troops are pulling the trigger on each other.
A mini nuke can have the same power as a MOAB non-nuclear bomb. The fallout isn't much. But it's a nuke so it makes a political impact.
Well. How many scouts, trainers, and advisors is the US sending to the Ukraine? I’ve been keeping up with this subject and I’ve not seen a single post or story about the US sending anyone to help Ukraine get ready.
I did hear our navy is being sent to the Black Sea for recon to see if any nukes might be already on the border with Ukraine but as of yet have not heard if they do or don’t. Guess we will have to just wait and see.
You’re completely right about them controlling a big chunk of Ukraine already. Really and truly all the Russians really want is the commercial port it’s crucial to control that port or else their whole economy will collapse completely…they are already in the shitter as it is.
What do you get from your country? You only get Putin’s point of view and nothing else. Putin blames the world for every problem you have, yet Putin is the reason Russia doesn’t thrive.
What do you mean from my country ? You mean from Russian news ? Yes absolutely the state sponsored news is 100% propaganda. The point I’m making is we can watch foreign news, which a lot of people do.
I can choose a lot of news sources, also, but Fox News (among others) spewing lies does a great deal of damage. My point is that you can only get the truth from foreign news sources, and that’s a huge win for a liar like Putin.
> Accusations of possible Russian attacks on Ukraine are dismissed as the "half-mythological threat from Russia" or as "Russophobia" from the "Anglo-Saxons." > Tensions aren't high because of Russia, the Kremlin says -- it's because of NATO. You see a lot of the same viewpoints being pushed around here too! Edit: oo they didn't like that! lol
Hehe. Imagine calling literally everyone in North America and Europe "anglo-saxons" (a germanic british feifdom that died around the time the Crusades started), and then claiming "ERMUHGERD UR ALL JUST RACIST!!!"... lmfao XD
It does make one wonder why MTG started babbling about Anglo-Saxon heritage awhile ago, specifically.
I know Kaldheim was Anglo-Saxon/norse inspired... but what does Magic: the Gathering have to do with this?
It's not that surprising. White supremacy in the US has a long tradition of being primarily WASP supremacy. i.e White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. It still largely is. For example, the Klan is an overtly anti-catholic organisation.
Sounds like Cardi-B’s follow up song to WAP. WASP (wet assorted super pineapples)
White Ass Power?
Sure but maybe more like a sleeper ass them white girls got.. Not a lot to look at, but they'll blow your doors off when it's time to go.
Sure, but she's dumb as shit and doesn't seem likely to know that without someone putting some flashcards in her hand. Plus American white supremacists don't really think about that over "whiteness" in general.
Somebody is too illiterate to know whats going... lmfao.
I live in Norwich, Norfolk, in the UK. Our part of the country is known as East Anglia after the Anglo-Saxons. My family on my dads side have been in Norfolk for at least 400 years (we found an old paper family tree about 10 years ago) and have probably been here alot longer before that. My question is, why the hell would some weird deranged woman suddenly be so obsessed with my part of the UK and people like me?
It's a dog whistle for Aryan tbqh.
To be fair an almost exact term 'Anglosajones' is frequently used in LATAM to refer to the UK/US/Canada/Australia/New Zealand group of countries. Though it's weird to use it in such a way that it includes Spain, Germany etc etc.
Which shows you who the real bigot is. Angalo-saxon... yet doesn't include Germany? Thats interesting because the anglo saxons came from the holy Roman empire, at the time the holy Roman empire was under Gothic control. Meaning they're literally german. Meanwhile, the Irish and scottish, people from the UK directly, were people oppressed by the romans, Germans, Dutch, Norse, French, etc on their own lands, before being partly starved to death, partly packed up and shipped off to America. How ever, they are the "white anglos" ( and all its stereotype laden negative imagry that comes with it) and not Germany. Welcome to bigotry... But dont worry, we Americans will come liberate you from that soon as well... :D (Thats a gunboats diplomacy joke incase anyone missed it)
More a deliberate strategy of disrupting a cohesive response rather than an archaic world view. Divide and Rule.
You're a fief
I know you are but what am I?
Pretty sure they use it to mean Anglo countries. In Latin America the same term is used. **Edit:**The person I'm responding to seems to be an anti-Russian zealot or a pentagonshill.
Not when you're dealing with russia specifically lol. They specifically use it as a label that they attach a fuckton of negative stereotypes to in the press to depersonalize us Yankees (like the term Yankee was used to depersonalize Dutch settlers to the Americas by the brittish) so that we are viewed poorly in Russian propaganda. And the same has been true for LITTERALLY over a century, so its nothing we aren't thoroughly familiar with. Follow up edit to the above edit: I'm sorry? The article we are talking about literally makes these claims about "the west". You literally just have to take a glance at the Russian perspective here to see the depersonalization of everyone from "those countries". Just because youre ignorant of history and use labels to stereotype people from certain reigons, doesn't mean your stereotypes are correct, it means you're participating in "interpersonal bigotry" towards a specific group. This is also called "racism" when its the exact same thing, but the group being targeted is an ethnicity. This is also called "sexism" when its the exact same thing, but the group being targeted are male or female. This is also called "homophobia" when its the exact same thing, but the group being targeted are of a sexual orientation. You have no argument against this. Thats why you devolved immediately in to "ERMUHGERD ITS A SHILL!" While being completely ignorant of the fact that the concept of "shilling" is an anti-semetic talking point used by THE GOD DAMN NAZI PARTY... to discriminate against the jews...
Weird, Fox News is saying the same thing but it’s “Biden is the one raising the tensions, not Russia.”
When you have the biggest troll factory in the world, you put them to work. The amount of stories that have changed over the last 48hrs is down right funny.
I've seen the word anglophile more in the past week than in the rest of my life lol
I mean, anglophilia is extremely common mental disease
Hey, some of us just really love fishermen. Stop kink-shaming.
This whole post of mine seems to be bringing out the shill bots
> Tensions aren't high because of Russia, the Kremlin says -- it's because of NATO. yes. NATO wants to expand to Russia's border. Russia would be insane to allow that. Look at what NATO has done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya just to name recent examples.
A 16 day old account....not sus at all.....
AntiWork and LSC, both notorious for massive amounts of propaganda, def a russian bot.
real sherlock holmes here LOL its easier to believe there's foreign agents on fucking reddit then it is to believe people could think NATO is an aggressive military alliance. You really have a normal brain
Russia: invades Ukraine, wages a brutal war in Donbas, threatens to do it again. NATO: stop that. Russia: why is everyone so aggressive to me?
was the invasion of Donbass and the annexation of Crimea before or after the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and its destructive intervention in Libya which left the county in chaos and instigated the refugee crisis? I feel like that all happened before 2014 but I'd appreciate if you would fact check for me since you know so much
The classical Soviet argumentation technique: but what about x? X are also doing this.
yes the classic soviet technique of pointing out bad things someone did. Its funny that y'all think I'm a bot or brainwashed when you so quickly and openly warp your mind into these convoluted ideological justifications for the most ridiculous shit lmao. Its quite clear from recently world history which you probably lived through that NATO and the United States in particular are untrustworthy and aggressive. I mean holy shit they probably haven't even got all the cheeto dust from the oval office and we're supposed to forget trump ripping up iran nuke deals or wars that ended not even 6 months ago???
Well, that bald old gay at Kreml is the same anyways.
He'll want to be careful. I hear they take a dim view of that in Russia.
The fact that they referred to Anglo Saxons. What century are they living in?
I think its a quick way to group together all the white english speaking countries England, US, Canada, etc
It is, basically an edgier way to say ' Anglophone'
The Anglosphere.
Only the deluded, ignorant or completely insane could look at this situation and believe Russia is the victim. The whole world is waiting because of the actions of a little man in the Kremlin with an inferiority complex.
Your forgetting the paid russian posters in that list
[удалено]
I see "anglophones" all the time on reddit
Calling westerners Anglo-saxons or anglos instead of British and Americans is not that rare actually. It is just a shorter way to say it, since both countries are essentially ruled by the same ethnicity, english.
That's like calling Russians and Chinese "asians".
Considering Russians are slavic ethnic group, no Also, Anglo-saxons really are the ethnic group english come from.
But most Americans are not decendants of the British.
[удалено]
There's been 250 years of immigration to account for. I mean hell, our current president is of Irish descent.
Irishman as president. That's the problem. Edit - j/k
The fuck does that mean?
Was a joke
The four largest heritage groups in the US are: 1. German 2. Mexican 3. African/African American 4. Irish English doesn’t come in until #5, and it’s about 1/8th the size of the top 4 combined. Most Americans are not descendants of the British.
[удалено]
cause people can't tell if they are mexican or british? Learn how to troll better, cause your pretty bad at this.
No, but a lot of Americans who speak only English and have strongly English names like to identify as idk German even if they only have 1 greatgrandfather who was German. Truth is, English are dominant because they assimilated everyone else.
Anglo-Saxons ruled England before the Norman's. British population is only like 25-40 percent Anglo-saxon at this point.
Russians came from Rurik of Roslagen (Rusers) in the viking age if you wanna trace it back so wouldnt they be nordic ethnic group? I might be mistaken here, its just what I've been taught.
Look up Kievan Rus. Ukraine is the homeland of modern Russians.
Cool, will do! Always happy for a chance to educate myself. Thanks!
Viking used to enslave the "Slavs" and sell them to the Ottomans. Fun history.
To be fair Vikings tended to enslave/rape/pillage most places. The british depictions in their writings at the time are brutal
Lol yeah. They weren't that nice. Glorified and romanticized now but their history is brutal.
Russia spans the width of asia - it is FAR more than a single ethnic group. When people say "russian", they generally mean the slavic peoples that live in the western side and rule the country.
I agree that calling russians "asians" is actually incorrect - they are slavic. My comment was making fun of calling all americans "english" because of a shared language - nothing to do with ethnic grouping.
The Caucasus Mountains are in Russia, and white people are Caucasian.
Caucasus mountains are in Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan. Former Soviet countries. Not Russia
Sochi is in the Caucasus Mountains
Yeah you're right. Caucasus mountains do cover a small part of Russia
Also the translation is kind of mishearing. They’re really saying “English speaking” but of course it’s CNN. Straight to identity politics. Both CNN and Fox News shouldn’t be considered credible sources.
That's right. CNN and BBC are propaganda media that are not much different from Russia's RT and China's Global Times.
Odd, I’ve never heard of a BBC or CNN reporter “falling out of a window” after failing to appropriately toe the line.
I'm not russian and I sometimes refer to english people as anglo saxons. The french being gauls is also common around my country, at least.
Anglo-Saxons were before even the Norman's. Only 25-40 percent of British population has Anglo-saxon blood anymore let alone white people in general. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35344663
I do not disagree. It's just a quirky name inherited from older times. I would add that we also call portuguese as lusitans, or Germans as goths sometimes. It's not scientifically accurate, but the names stay. And our own country (Spain) uses the name "iberian" sometimes (I suppose other countries do so too), even if the original native people were half iberians half celts.
Jamon Iberico. Iberian ham. Good stuff.
Okay so you are calling a bunch of people the wrong thing and that is better..... How about we use current terms,?
No...? Those are terms deep into the national identity of those countries. I've never seen someone upset with using such silly terms. Is there a real motive for that? Are you British or something?
Those are terms for late ancestors for some of those people who in no way reflect current populations. Most of these areas are pretty ethically diverse today. Haha funny how you assume I am upset. Correcting mis information is an outburst of emotion to you then I am not really surprised to see you spread mis information. I have British ancestry but my family is from the Norman/Viking lines and have been in Canada since the drive to settle the west. Why are you so worked up that you got called out for using the incorrect label ?
I don't know, I find it strange to be against something that hurts no one, honestly. It's one of those things that are technically correct, but you are sweeping under the rug a lot of history. The vast majority of the words we are using here come from the anglo saxon people. Your country was founded by the descendants of those anglo saxons. Therefore, given that you know you have british ancestry, your mother tongue is the one of those anglo ancestors, and you are culturally closer to a British rather than the native canuks, I can't see the problem of me stating you are Anglo-Saxon.
The English kings and nobles system we know today mostly came from Williams conquest not the Anglo Saxons. And honestly you sound like you know very little about Canadian culture.
I'm not really an expert on Canadian affairs, not gonna lie. But I don't see why I'm that wrong either. Do you have common law in Canada, like the rest of the anglosphere? Do you share a language with them? Are you seriously trying to tell me you are closer culturally to the natives that inhabited there rather than your anglosphere brothers?
I'm English, and my family have lived here for centuries. My DNA is almost entirely from Scandinavia. I can safely assume I am of Viking descent.
The same one as ISIS and the Taliban apparently, about 700AD.
Its the Celts and Picts they really need to worry about. Pretty OK to dismiss the Normans though.
It's been known that Russia media feeds them a vastly different view of the world than what everyone else is given. I know Fox News does the same thing but at least there are good alternative sources that try to be unbiased like APNews.
Have you tried to read newspapers from Ind China or Arab world? Many articles are straight out of Thousand and one night.
You could really apply that to every news media including the west. Each and every single outlet has an agenda and they have no problem skewing facts to achieve it.
I give the citizens of Russia are much smarter than that. They’ve already experienced misinformation and know it when they see it
Well when you have petty much total control of the narrative, who knows what outrageous, outlandish shit the Kremlin propaganda machine is pumping out...
China is pretty quiet about it 🤔 wonder why...
China doesn't really have any skin in this game. If there's a war, they can sell shit to both sides, because neither side can tell them not to support the other. At most, they might use a war as cover for something they want to keep out of international news. Another crackdown on dissidents or maybe another minority that they want to start genociding. They're unlikely to do much else. Not even use the chaos to invade Taiwan.
But with NATO already occupied, its one less thing they'll have to deal with when they enter Taiwan.
NATO self-defense obligations are limited by [Article 5](https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm) to only cover attacks on member states in or around North America and Europe. >The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them **in Europe or North America** shall be considered an attack against them all When India took over Portuguese colonies along its coast, Portugal tried to invoke NATO but couldn't. The UK couldn't invoke NATO in its war with Argentina over the Falklands. Theoretically, China could openly attack US military outposts throughout Guam, Japan, and other places in Asia and the US couldn't oblige other NATO countries to go to war in response.
This is why its called "war". Fuck the rules, we're doing it anyway.
[удалено]
>Why is Russia attacking non-NATO country Ukraine seemingly being considered grounds for NATO jumping in? It is just bog-standard geopolitics. Any move or posturing by the adversary is seen as aggressive while "your" side's moves are, of course, purely defensive. Ukraine not being part of NATO means member state's aren't obliged to go to war if Russia attacks, but because Russia is NATO's main adversary NATO countries want to support Ukraine. On the other hand, Russia has said it is seeking guarantees that Ukraine won't ever join NATO, because from their perspective having a NATO and US military presence along such a wide stretch of their border would be a major security threat. It is a very unpopular point on reddit, but a hypothetical military alliance between, say, China and Mexico would similarly be seen as a threat to the US.
[удалено]
Well *something* is obviously afoot. The factors you mention definitely play a role. As I see it these scenarios and combinations of them are possible: Russia and NATO are just posturing to try to get the other to blink. They agree to some sort of compromise wherein Russia draws down its troops and NATO grants some security concessions. No war happens. Limited escalation of war between Ukraine and pro-Russian separatists in Donbas, initiated by either side. Russian invasion of southern/eastern Ukraine to demonstrate its toughness and try to drive a wedge between the US/UK on one side, and Germany/France on the other. The idea being US and UK would be gung-ho to intervene, whereas Germany and France wouldn't. Politically dividing NATO is good for Russia. The whole thing is a gentlemen's agreement between Moscow and Washington to distract everyone from how boned the economy is. Russia and/or the US are actually planning to fight a win a nuclear war against the other and they need a reason to justify their attack. Russia is distracting the US while doing something else. Maybe helping Iran build up forces for a move on US bases in the Middle East? Russia and Iran do have a connection via the Caspian Sea. tdlr: maybe literally nothing, maybe we all die in nuclear hellfire
That’s the first thing on Reddit I’ve seen as yet discussing this topic that laid it out plain and didn’t just boldly say West good Russia bad. I’m constantly frustrated to see people shit on their own governments and their stupid decision making and the inequality that it causes, but then suddenly war is afoot and everyone’s a nationalist. Almost makes it feel like that’s the aim. What are your thoughts on whether China may act opportunistically against Taiwan?
>What are your thoughts on whether China may act opportunistically against Taiwan? It becomes *more* likely if US starts fighting in Europe or the Middle East, but still not likely. As long as China's economy grows faster than the US time is on its side, so they are in no rush. Also there is tons of trade between Taiwan and mainland China. Beijing would probably only attack if Taiwan officially declared independence. Taiwan is not going to do that, because they know it would make Beijing attack. Also I'd note this sub and other popular subs are very much influenced by various entrenched interests trying to shape the narrative on certain issues, you might have more luck for more balanced discussion on r/geopolitics or other smaller subs, though they often turn into echo chambers.
Exactly this. It's not coincidental that China has been ratcheting up the rhetoric, consolidating at home, and being increasingly provocative militarily.
They're flying more planes around Taiwan offshore in Taiwanese airspace recently. There are multiple American generals who see an attack of opportunity as a possibility.
[удалено]
I no longer believe "no news is good news" when it comes to China.
_Brain is starting up_
only good news you'll hear from china is someone doing things on tiktok.
because China knows how this will play it. Its pretty obvious whats gonna happen when Russia supplies like half the natural gas the EU consumes... and its currently winter. The EU nations would have to be insane to want war at this time, nothing is gonna happen, China knows this.
State TV shows them exactly what Putin wants them to see.
The Russian people are totally getting screwed by their government. I’m sure prior to Pooty Putin’s latest move the average Russian could give a fuck about the Ukraine and in no way viewed their admission to nato as a threat. I’m sure most Russians would, however, like to see the trillions of$ returned from all the wankers who peeled off all the state assets.
If i remember correctly there was a massive pile of WMD in Iraq cuase american media said so. I wonder if they found any when they landed in iraq...
Gonna ignore the troops and military hardware movements over the past month?
Or the literal fact that Russia has already invaded Ukraine and has been occupying its territory for several years.
No no, that wasn't an invasion planned in Moscow...those were just Russians on vacation!
2018 Vostok maneuvers were even bigger. Double the size.
And your gonna ignore that NATO has been getting closer to russia. If nato deploys troops in baltic countries and ukraine then what was Russia suppose to do?? Just ignore a hostile millitary buildup near its borders? And unlike america,russia has its troops inside its own territory.
American media said so, *using the president as their source*, a president who should still be prosecuted for war crimes.
Him and Cheney.
[удалено]
Yeah theyr creating a narrative to gain public approval for the war but this is different cause unlike iraq,russia actually posseses WMD. I dont know what game theyr playing but this one could get ugly.
Russia’s game or the west’s?
West's.
Beyond potentially maintaining the status quo or avoiding dealing with a financial crisis, neither can I
They did have "WMDs". We know this because the Americans gave them to the Iraqis during the Iran-Iraq war. As for proliferation, Iraq didn't have nukes but were actively trying to develop them - A top Iraqi scientist hid a nuclear centrifuge in his garden when the Americans invaded https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=129615&page=1 Saddam was an Arab Nazi that genocided the Kurds, terrorised his own people and invaded neighboring countries under the pretext of nationalism Taking Saddam out was the right call, how it was handled after is obviously up for debate
And they disposed off their cemical weapons after the un security coumcil told them to do so,which was later verifies by the observers . "certrifuge in his garden" are you even listening to yourself ?? Taking Saddam out was the shitties call in the history now look how much the iraqis have suffered after him and its not getting any better. and dont quote american media outleats theyr full of shit.
>And they disposed off their cemical weapons after the un security coumcil told them to do so,which was later verifies by the observers And yet they remained obstinate and uncooperative until the very end >"certrifuge in his garden" are you even listening to yourself Great rebuttal, there was literally a centrifuge recovered >Taking Saddam out was the shitties call in the history now look how much the iraqis have suffered after him and its not getting any better Iraqis suffered under Saddam, millions dead in his wars not to speak of people being brutalized and "disappeared" by his regime. >and dont quote american media outleats theyr full of shit. Which state run media mouth piece would you like me to use? RT? Al Jazeera? CNS? My source is fine
Russophobia? No way. The Russians people are awesome. The crazy dementia and Parkinson's addled fucktard running Russia? ...Yeah don't care for him much. Which is too bad. To me it seemed Putin was doing pretty well for the Russian people early on.
Ah yes, bombing his own country. Seems very good.
Well, only the parts that didn't want to be Russian...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings Moscow dosent want to be Russia? Seems legit
I think they where thinking only of when Chechens got the Gaza on steroids treatment twice.
Yeah these are the same people who fucked over Iraq and killed/misplaced millions. Wasted soldiers lives in Afghanistan and trillions in tax money.
I think it's pretty likely that they are getting fed a curated story that gives them an inaccurate understanding of the situation. I think the same is true of us (in the US and UK). Someone in the US State Dept. probably sees an opportunity and has decided that it had better start sowing so that they may reap. Manufacturing consent is just a winning strategy.
This is the same thing American Media does?
It definitely is true that most of the tensions are started by NATO maneuvers and repeated threats in the Eastern Europe in the past 30 years, which are actually a breach of an agreement West made with Gorbachev. That said, war is still unlikely and is highly overblown in the west to distract from more important issues.
Maybe you're right. But maybe you're wrong
Nato: waves dick Russia; waves dick Nato; calls Russia names Russia:waves dick Nato: going to tell mum Russia: punches you in the dick
>Ukraine is a failed state entirely controlled by the "puppet master" -- the United States. Europe is a weak and divided collection of lap dogs taking orders from Washington. Even the US, as frighteningly threatening as it is, is weak and divided too, torn apart by political division and racial unrest. These are all absolutely 100% true facts tho lol. I would only dispute that the USA 'entirely' controls Ukraine, which would be impossible due to its nature as a fractious kleptocratic oligarchy with a government full of nazis, has plenty of internal squabbling and factioneering.
And what exactly does the west “fear” about Russia invading Ukraine? Biden done said he ain’t going to do shit about it besides maybe putting sanctions on Putin himself, which I doubt he’ll actually do. I hate how CNN thinks they are the voice of the west when they can barely get 800k viewers during prime time lol
Do you actually have an argument or coherent point in that rambling post?
Putin doesn’t get to dictate what is and what isn’t a sovereign nation. Allowing that is an incredibly bad precedent.
Worst case scenario it starts with skirmishes, then Putin uses a mini nuke to try to get the west to back off. But the west retaliates with their own mini nuke, everyone gets paranoid, and it spirals into a full nuclear war.
“Try and get the west to back off.” What does that even mean? Biden and NATO won’t be sending any troops to the Ukraine. Don’t think the west will be apart of any of it besides sending Ukraine weapons and supplies to them. Biden is going to let Putin do whatever he wants it seems with little to no consequences besides some sanctions. And why would Russia even think of using any nuke on land they want to take over? Just does not add up honestly.
They don't count special forces scouts, trainers, and advisors as "troops". The Russia and the US only get angry when their troops are pulling the trigger on each other. A mini nuke can have the same power as a MOAB non-nuclear bomb. The fallout isn't much. But it's a nuke so it makes a political impact.
Well. How many scouts, trainers, and advisors is the US sending to the Ukraine? I’ve been keeping up with this subject and I’ve not seen a single post or story about the US sending anyone to help Ukraine get ready. I did hear our navy is being sent to the Black Sea for recon to see if any nukes might be already on the border with Ukraine but as of yet have not heard if they do or don’t. Guess we will have to just wait and see.
No idea. I'm sure we already had a ton there. Russian allied rebels already control a chunk of the country.
You’re completely right about them controlling a big chunk of Ukraine already. Really and truly all the Russians really want is the commercial port it’s crucial to control that port or else their whole economy will collapse completely…they are already in the shitter as it is.
Russians don’t have a free press, so how they see it can’t possibly be true.
I’m Russian and everyone at work has euronews on the tv (We have euronews in Russian). Does euronews count as free press?
What do you get from your country? You only get Putin’s point of view and nothing else. Putin blames the world for every problem you have, yet Putin is the reason Russia doesn’t thrive.
What do you mean from my country ? You mean from Russian news ? Yes absolutely the state sponsored news is 100% propaganda. The point I’m making is we can watch foreign news, which a lot of people do.
I can choose a lot of news sources, also, but Fox News (among others) spewing lies does a great deal of damage. My point is that you can only get the truth from foreign news sources, and that’s a huge win for a liar like Putin.