[jimukr104]

(03-06-2014 12:39 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 03:44 AM)soup Wrote:  

Hencredible.. this isn't about keeping pussy pure, it's about money.

To the governments involved and big business, sure.

But to the guys on the forum, I think it's about pussy primarily.

I don't think there'd be this level of engagement if Ukraine wasn't a place with high quality women.

Well I don't want my flat in Odessa to become a scene from Stalingrad.
Yes if Ukraine goes west..its the end of Pussy paradise in Europe. Russia might even make it harder to get visas.

[Blunt]

The hypocrisy of the State Department is really shocking.

John Kerry quoted as saying "Crimea is Ukraine" in Rome. It is subtle, but he just adopted the line from "Kosovo is Serbia" (Kosovo je Serbia) which is chanted at football games by supporters of Serbia across Europe.

It isn't surprising that they are being hypocritical on this issue but choosing those words is essentially a taunt.

Or I'm just

[Tex Pro]

(03-06-2014 03:04 PM)Blunt Wrote:  

The hypocrisy of the State Department is really shocking.

John Kerry quoted as saying "Crimea is Ukraine" in Rome. It is subtle, but he just adopted the line from "Kosovo is Serbia" (Kosovo je Serbia) which is chanted at football games by supporters of Serbia across Europe.

It isn't surprising that they are being hypocritical on this issue but choosing those words is essentially a taunt.

Or I'm just

Kerry is a buffoon. I wouldn't read too much into what he says.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(03-05-2014 11:35 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 10:22 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

Kosko - Syria is not a pussy paradise (Muslim country). This is a game forum. How this power struggle affects the behavior of women that live in one of the last European holdouts from significant western influence is the primary concern IMO.

Agreed..and this conflict and its WW3 possibilities affects multiple Pussy paradises like Russia, Poland, Romania, etc. Who knows might be a lot of lonely women in these countries after this Apocalypse!

Poland and Romania are already done. They are pro-western and pro-American societies (both being NATO and EU member states). According to Roosh and others, there are already signs of degradation among women in parts of these countries (at least in Poland), so the cancer is already present as far as how women take care of themselves.

Interestingly, being an American is mini-celebrity status - or at least looked well upon - in many parts of the world, including this one.

Don't hold your breath on Ukraine.

(03-06-2014 01:52 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 12:39 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 03:44 AM)soup Wrote:  

Hencredible.. this isn't about keeping pussy pure, it's about money.

To the governments involved and big business, sure.

But to the guys on the forum, I think it's about pussy primarily.

I don't think there'd be this level of engagement if Ukraine wasn't a place with high quality women.

Well I don't want my flat in Odessa to become a scene from Stalingrad.
Yes if Ukraine goes west..its the end of Pussy paradise in Europe. Russia might even make it harder to get visas.

Well, the fact that you have financial interests at stake in Ukraine, and being married to an FSU gal, your treasonist posts somewhat make sense haha. I think you're the exception rather than the rule among Russophiles on this forum. That's why I repped you the other day.

Just don't let your deep biases cloud objectivity my friend.

If you look at the the situation from a western pov, Russia is done. Look at the arc of modern Russian history and it's easy to tell.

Outside of the energy sector, Russia is in a much weaker geopolitical position - by every metric - as a successor state to the USSR, not just to the US but even within its own region.

There are many Americans alive today who vividly remember participating in "bomb drills" while in grade school out of fear of the Soviet nuclear threat, especially during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

At the time, the USSR was a fundamental threat to the American way of life - a place that has historically emphasized the primacy of the individual over the interests of the state.

The Soviet model being widely exported among societies throughout Europe, Africa, Asia, and even the Americas (Cuba, and even Chile before a successful CIA coup ousted its Communist leader) was simply unacceptable if the US wanted to maintain its status as a cultural, military and economic world leader.

Think of how far we have come since those times. Today, anywhere Russia looks in its neighborhood there is the projection of American power. Only weak states like Belarus (which is popularly referred to as "Europe's last dictatorship") and Armenia (which has long held Russian bases on its soil to protect itself from its arch-enemy and regionally powerful neighbor, Turkey) are completely within Russia's control and influence.

Russia has fallen so hard that even its invasion of a territory where it holds military bases, was historically Russian territory, and where the majority of people are ethnically Russian and support being part of Russia is an international issue that calls for the strongest punishment and which Russia has to be careful in treading.

That is quite a distance!

It's also hard to tell what Putin's end game is. Sanctions could prove crippling to Russia's economy, especially if our Euro partners get on board, turning Russians (both ordinary people and oligarchs) against Putin.

If Crimea joins Russia, then Ukraine is free to join the EU (which requires that there are no territorial disputes between two sovereign nations, which is why Georgia is unable to join - Russia's occupation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia) and NATO.

More problems on Russia's doorstep and a Ukraine that so far seems more than willing to join the West, evidenced by the billions of dollars in loan packages being assembled by the EU, US, and IMF.

I think if we're being honest we have to accept that Ukraine is going the direction of Poland and Romania by and large. It's not a matter of if, but when and how. Just giving the real deal Holyfield so that you don't get taken by surprise.

(03-06-2014 01:41 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

As predicted the Russian economy is taking a heavy hit.

The growth was already panning out since a few years back. Consumer confidence is shot. Even China is backing off, general capital flight is under way.

The most damaging aspect though is a continued brain drain. The country has problems holding onto its best and brightest.

Absolutely. Though Russians have pride in their high culture (i.e. literature, performing arts, etc) the most anti-Russian (government) people I have met are none other than Russian immigrants and Russian-Americans.

That's another metric by which Americans can say they won the Cold War and are continuing to win against Russia, not just among ordinary Russians but among oligarchs as well (who live and raise their families in the West).

[Blunt]

@Hencredible Russia's influence before Ukraine was experiencing a slight bump after bailing Obama out in Syria and helping to negotiate with Iran.

This crisis could certainly reverse any gains made by Putin recently. Even though this crisis was instigated by EU meddling, no former FSU countries will look kindly upon the annexation of Crimea, which is why Putin's administration itself is denying that as a possibility. Even Belarus fears that their ethnic Russians could be used against them.

As a cold war history enthusiast yourself, you know that Krushchev's number one priority was exaggerating the strength of the Soviet forces by refusing the Open Skies agreement or any kind of agreement for robust neutral observers. They leveraged British and French fears against the Americans and jumped on any opportunities to declare their superiority (Sputnik).

In reality they were always weaker than the US, despite managing to close the gap at times.

Even their influence among Communist allies in the third world was only good if the money was flowing. Nasser and others played both sides to get the better deal.

My point being that their power was exaggerated to begin with so any decline at this point is more of a correction in international perception.

[Hencredible Casanova]

Totally agree, Blunt. Putin's move is increasingly looking strange. "Drunk on Sochi" as Khrushchev's granddaughter said in that Nat Geo interview I shared.

His previous gains on the diplomatic front, Snowden, and others had done a lot for Russia's perception on the world stage - and even won many admirers in the West. Those were very intelligent decisions.

But using force to invade Crimea with no internationally justifiable pretext (Crimean lives weren't ever at risk and Crimea does belong to Ukraine regardless of what people there think) is a whole different ballgame.

He's really overplaying his hand at a time when he doesn't even need to (his power and influence was not at risk).

He would have been better off exerting Russian influence behind the scenes - which could have met his goals just as effectively - just as the US had doing for the pro-west Ukrainians.

[Icarus]

(03-06-2014 05:18 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

But using force to invade Crimea with no internationally justifiable pretext

Just because we don't understand Putin's rationale, it does not mean he's irrational.

My hypothesis: Putin occupied Crimea to play the role of the "mad man", to demonstrate that he is capable of and willing to use military force against Ukraine, which makes it impossible for Ukraine to join NATO.

[Blunt]

Yeah this may be just a bargaining ploy.

Like "look they want to be part of Russia but we respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine so we will settle for a federated government system throughout Ukraine and a recommitment to our Black Sea base".

[Hencredible Casanova]

(03-06-2014 05:26 PM)Icarus Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 05:18 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

But using force to invade Crimea with no internationally justifiable pretext

Just because we don't understand Putin's rationale, it does not mean he's irrational.

My hypothesis: Putin occupied Crimea to play the role of the "mad man", to demonstrate that he is capable of and willing to use military force against Ukraine, which makes it impossible for Ukraine to join NATO.

I was talking about international law when I said "no internationally justifiable pretext;" as in, the invasion of Crimea was a violation of Ukraine's sovereignty.

I know there's a double standard with respect to previous US behavior but that is a fait accompli within the international order, not a green light for other nations to do the same on their own volition.

[Orion]

(03-06-2014 05:18 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

But using force to invade Crimea with no internationally justifiable pretext (Crimean lives weren't ever at risk and Crimea does belong to Ukraine regardless of what people there think) is a whole different ballgame.

It's hard for great powers to find pretext for everything. However, leader of executive office of a great power has his hands tied by obligation to do whatever is necessary to ensure safety and independence of his own state.

That task is far easier for Obama and Cameron than for Putin. Sometimes there is no other option but to lose popularity.

Quote:

He's really overplaying his hand at a time when he doesn't even need to (his power and influence was not at risk).

He would have been better off exerting Russian influence behind the scenes - which could have met his goals just as effectively - just as the US had doing for the pro-west Ukrainians.

Yes but what happens when foreign power tries to penetrate your nuclear triad mechanisms (intercepting your strategic bombers patrols, raising missile shields, penetrating North Pole bastion etc...). Or when foreign power is reducing your strategic depth.

As a civilian it is easy for me to judge a nation's leader. But if i was Putin, I'd probably have no other choice but to do the same. Maintaining maximum defensive capabilities is not something that can be debated over.

Ultimately, it is easy for US and EU to play soft power. That is a privilege, not an option, and people must finally understand that. If it was that easy, everybody would be doing it.

[jimukr104]

(03-06-2014 05:26 PM)Icarus Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 05:18 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

But using force to invade Crimea with no internationally justifiable pretext

Just because we don't understand Putin's rationale, it does not mean he's irrational.

My hypothesis: Putin occupied Crimea to play the role of the "mad man", to demonstrate that he is capable of and willing to use military force against Ukraine, which makes it impossible for Ukraine to join NATO.

Remember his real excuse is the importance of doing this for his national defense.
All these war pretexts are only half truths. Regardless of its because of unfounded WMD, Kids taking Russian language 101, Bush"he shot my daddy", or a litter of fucking kittens.

For those who say we are biased..well regardless Russia has the same right as any world power to do what it is doing.
In history world powers do this type of shit including the USA. Hypocrisy and double standards maybe?

It should also be reminded we started this shit.Because we have bought off more allies doesn't make it right. USA and Israel numerous times have been voted by the U.N. as breaking international law..what sanctions?

I don't know Putin's agenda, after all I am 6 ft tall, but I do know that if everyone in his Duma approved(including the Jews) it must be considered damn important.
How it will end..I don't know!

But knowing that the Russians inherently don't believe in the concept of mutually assured destruction(M.A.D.) and do believe in the concept of "burning the village to save it" means they CERTAINLY AND ABSOLUTELY will take this much further than our leaders want it to go.
If they see this as the beginning of the end of their civilization (as Hen pointed out lol)than ALL BETS ARE OFF.
Just remember battlefield tactical nukes is well documented to be part of Red Army doctrine. In that case 1 tugboat has greater firepower than the whole U.S. fleet.Perfect time for China to grab Taiwan maybe?

[RexImperator]

This image has been going around on twitter

[jimukr104]

""Belarus fears that their ethnic Russians could be used against them"

Link that one please. The Dictator of Belarus use to bother Moscow about joining Russia and reforming the U.S.S.R.
I think countries like Uzbekistan are more scared since they discriminate against ethnic Slavs.
On the Brighton beach Radio they were joking around saying that Putin might invade Brooklyn .


Putins plan:

Russia's secret weapon:

[Hencredible Casanova]

Russia isn't a world power, it simply has the tone of one thanks to the image and decisions of its leader - an ex-KGB relic of the Cold War. Most political scientists consider Russia an emerging or re-emerging power, not even a potential superpower. Russia lost much of its potential power as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Even India and China are more likely to be potential superpowers than Russia.

Russia's only vibrant sector is energy, which is a commodity-based market, ensuring Russia will remain a slave to market forces.

That's why sanctions would really bite.

Just as Russia has leverages on Ukraine, the US/EU has leverages on Russia. Should the US lift the ban on its oil exports, helping meet European needs, then Russia is further marginalized.

That's why Putin's move seems crazy to me. Russia still has to work with the West on a whole host of issues. The West can afford reckless foreign misadventures and bounce back, but Russia doesn't have it like that, even in its own neighborhood.

All I can say is Putin is certainly a Russian nationalist. He considered the collapse of the Soviet Union a "personal humiliation" according to his memoir.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/201...er-ukraine

Perhaps he's looking to strengthen his nation's hand - and righting what he sees as a historical wrong simultaneously (Crimea) - in the inevitable future negotiations that sees a dominant US/EU/NATO on its doorstep and the need for closer integration economically (even if Russians aren't European).

Russia is obviously a politically weak country internally. Any nation that depends on a single leader to keep it stable - Putin has ruled since 1999 (Medvedev is a puppet) - is by definition at risk of instability.

[Blunt]

@Jim http://m.belarusdigest.com/story/belarus...aine-17082

That was my interpretation of it, though I admit I'm not aware if there are concentrated areas of ethnic Russians in Belarus.

Lukashenko may be more concerned about Putin subverting him in particular in the future, especially since he has been to known to stage temporary rebellions against Putin.

[jimukr104]

(03-06-2014 07:35 PM)Blunt Wrote:  

@Jim http://m.belarusdigest.com/story/belarus...aine-17082

That was my interpretation of it, though I admit I'm not aware if there are concentrated areas of ethnic Russians in Belarus.

Lukashenko may be more concerned about Putin subverting him in particular in the future, especially since he has been to known to stage temporary rebellions against Putin.

Again identity has to do with passport and ones own Heart. Belarus culture mostly is subservient to Russian culture.Not as nationalistic as Ukrainians in the West....YET
My uncles family is technically from Belorussian...Pinsk. if you call them Russian you won't get punched.
Remember: Russians, Belorussians(means white Russians) and Ukrainians are ethnicity kievan Rus eastern Slav. All 3 are considered the same as an ethnicity.

[DaveR]

(03-06-2014 05:18 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

Totally agree, Blunt. Putin's move is increasingly looking strange. "Drunk on Sochi" as Khrushchev's granddaughter said in that Nat Geo interview I shared.

His previous gains on the diplomatic front, Snowden, and others had done a lot for Russia's perception on the world stage - and even won many admirers in the West. Those were very intelligent decisions.

But using force to invade Crimea with no internationally justifiable pretext (Crimean lives weren't ever at risk and Crimea does belong to Ukraine regardless of what people there think) is a whole different ballgame.

He's really overplaying his hand at a time when he doesn't even need to (his power and influence was not at risk).

He would have been better off exerting Russian influence behind the scenes - which could have met his goals just as effectively - just as the US had doing for the pro-west Ukrainians.

You have no idea..

Putin has played this like a boss. In the end Obama will look impotent for using his toughest language and being ignored. Russia will get a historical region back, a $20B discount on the construction of South Stream, no need to pay Kiev for leasing and the long-term ability block its steel exports (currently half the country's exports).

The EU doesn't have the money to integrate another large country, and the job will be twice as difficult this time because of the dilapidated state of Ukraine's infrastructure. Much of the country's housing was intended to be temporary and is structurally unsound, therefore has to be rebuilt. Above all that, the EU has no experience or proof of its ability to implement reforms in any of the core former-Soviet states.

From a Ukrainian perspective, the misfits who were in power from 2004 to 2009 are back and making the same mistakes all over again. They desperately need cash and their only option is to comply with the IMF's demands, which means raising utility prices and cutting pensions and subsidies. The clock is also ticking for Ukraine to pay back its gas debts, because in two years South Stream will go live, giving Russia the ability to cut gas delivery for non-payment. If you think they can hold onto power given all of those caveats, then you are delusional. Much of Ukraine's population is living on the poverty line and simply cannot afford any austerity or reform. They blew their chance in 2004-2008 and will now have to wait for the next global bull market for cash to be available.

By the way, gas installations can't simply be switched overnight. For starters, the US is far away and shipping oil adds a lot of cost, making shale oil uncompetitive in Europe. Industry would have to re-tool and all of the residential gas heating and cooking installations would have to be converted to electric. That would take years, and in the meantime Russia has $500 billion in foreign exchange reserves on its books. Compare that with the Eurozone having $750 billion and Russia's position doesn't look that bad.

[jimukr104]

(03-06-2014 07:52 PM)DaveR Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 05:18 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

Totally agree, Blunt. Putin's move is increasingly looking strange. "Drunk on Sochi" as Khrushchev's granddaughter said in that Nat Geo interview I shared.

His previous gains on the diplomatic front, Snowden, and others had done a lot for Russia's perception on the world stage - and even won many admirers in the West. Those were very intelligent decisions.

But using force to invade Crimea with no internationally justifiable pretext (Crimean lives weren't ever at risk and Crimea does belong to Ukraine regardless of what people there think) is a whole different ballgame.

He's really overplaying his hand at a time when he doesn't even need to (his power and influence was not at risk).

He would have been better off exerting Russian influence behind the scenes - which could have met his goals just as effectively - just as the US had doing for the pro-west Ukrainians.

You have no idea..

Putin has played this like a boss. In the end Obama will look impotent for using his toughest language and being ignored. Russia will get a historical region back, a $20B discount on the construction of South Stream, no need to pay Kiev for leasing and the long-term ability block its steel exports (currently half the country's exports).

The EU doesn't have the money to integrate another large country, and the job will be twice as difficult this time because of the dilapidated state of Ukraine's infrastructure. Much of the country's housing was intended to be temporary and is structurally unsound, therefore has to be rebuilt. Above all that, the EU has no experience or proof of its ability to implement reforms in any of the core former-Soviet states.

From a Ukrainian perspective, the misfits who were in power from 2004 to 2009 are back and making the same mistakes all over again. They desperately need cash and their only option is to comply with the IMF's demands, which means raising utility prices and cutting pensions and subsidies. The clock is also ticking for Ukraine to pay back its gas debts, because in two years South Stream will go live, giving Russia the ability to cut gas delivery for non-payment. If you think they can hold onto power given all of those caveats, then you are delusional. Much of Ukraine's population is living on the poverty line and simply cannot afford any austerity or reform. They blew their chance in 2004-2008 and will now have to wait for the next global bull market for cash to be available.

By the way, gas installations can't simply be switched overnight. For starters, the US is far away and shipping oil adds a lot of cost, making shale oil uncompetitive in Europe. Industry would have to re-tool and all of the residential gas heating and cooking installations would have to be converted to electric. That would take years, and in the meantime Russia has $500 billion in foreign exchange reserves on its books. Compare that with the Eurozone having $750 billion and Russia's position doesn't look that bad.

That's why they were afraid in Odessa. Taking Odessa, Nikoliev and kherson would completely shut ukraine from gas from the sea and port trade.

http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/new...r-for.html

[Hencredible Casanova]

^^ This is a classic example of a person cherry picking what information to emphasize - or ignore - based on where his sympathies or allegiances lie. I hope the Kremlin is paying you my friend.

Instead of talking about what we think might happen, lets talk about what has already happened. The ruble has already plunged and many objective sources indicate the Russian economy is taking a hit as a result.
How is that "boss?"

And that's before any sanctions have been applied. Just imagine when the full monty gets implemented. Asset freezes, visa bans, and all sorts of restrictions. Oh boy. Do you know how much Russian money is tied up in the West?

Russia is up against the most powerful country in world history. Do you really believe it's going to let Putin ride off into the sunset without paying a heavy price? The US has made examples out of leaders for far less.

Anyway, lets just see what happens. I don't think it's going to be pretty for Russia.

[Orion]

(03-06-2014 07:28 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

Russia isn't a world power, it simply has the tone of one thanks to the image and decisions of its leader - an ex-KGB relic of the Cold War. Most political scientists consider Russia an emerging or re-emerging power, not even a potential superpower. Russia lost much of its potential power as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Even India and China are more likely to be potential superpowers than Russia.

As a matter of fact, there will not be an emerging new superpower for next 20 years, it can be said with certainty. China views itself quite modestly compared to other world powers. India is out of debate.

Quote:

That's why sanctions would really bite.

Problem is, it is hard to find the line where European economy ends, and Russian begins. Economy is more than simple trade nowadays. Freezing country's entire assets including those of it's wealthy individuals is another word for theft. If they do it, then such move would be irreversible, if Russians retaliate. It would have far bigger implications for world than anything going on in Crimea right now.

Sounds like bunch of empty threats to me.

Quote:

Just as Russia has leverages on Ukraine, the US/EU has leverages on Russia. Should the US lift the ban on its oil exports, helping meet European needs, then Russia is further marginalized.

I don't think it's oil that matters, rather gas, petroleum and investments.

Quote:

That's why Putin's move seems crazy to me. Russia still has to work with the West on a whole host of issues. The West can afford reckless foreign misadventures and bounce back, but Russia doesn't have it like that, even in its own neighborhood.

Putin might be wrong. But i don't think any state, no matter how centralized, is lead by one man. Putin cannot do something that would seriously damage Russian elite (composed of security big shots, oligarchs and army). It is only question about do they fear Putin more than west. My guess is that Putin is still more reliable Ally than west which flushed every single ally down the toilet

Quote:

Russia is obviously a politically weak country internally. Any nation that depends on a single leader to keep it stable - Putin has ruled since 1999 (Medvedev is a puppet) - is by definition at risk of instability.

Unfortunately, this is somewhat true. But again, Russia is much more stable than all surrounding states, but that is not much of a success. Still, there are some suggestions that Putin is about to form another party (Russian road towards dual party system ?). That would be a step forward, but they must really speed up the process of introducing pluralism (fake one, as everywhere else) in Russia, or at least make autocracy much more efficient.

However, even if some big change is about to happen, it is more realistic that it will be another chair rotation, than some street uprising.

[jimukr104]

(03-06-2014 08:10 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

^^ This is a classic example of a person cherry picking what information to emphasize - or ignore - based on where his sympathies or allegiances lie. I hope the Kremlin is paying you my friend.

Instead of talking about what we think might happen, lets talk about what has already happened. The ruble has already plunged and many objective sources indicate the Russian economy is taking a hit as a result.
How is that "boss?"

And that's before any sanctions have been applied. Just imagine when the full monty gets implemented. Asset freezes, visa bans, and all sorts of restrictions. Oh boy. Do you know how much Russian money is tied up in the West?

Russia is up against the most powerful country in world history. Do you really believe it's going to let Putin ride off into the sunset without paying a heavy price? The US has made examples out of leaders for far less.

Anyway, lets just see what happens. I don't think it's going to be pretty for Russia.

Of course in RUBLES. I just watched "Americans" so it stirred some memories.

[Blunt]

@Dave You don't think that the EU could leverage Serbia to delay implementation of the South Stream if it was suggested as a tool against Ukraine?

I'm not sure who controls the pipeline or particular segments of it but it seems like Serbia has been pretty eager to go along with EU wishes during their accession.

[DaveR]

(03-06-2014 09:16 PM)Blunt Wrote:  

@Dave You don't think that the EU could leverage Serbia to delay implementation of the South Stream if it was suggested as a tool against Ukraine?

I'm not sure who controls the pipeline or particular segments of it but it seems like Serbia has been pretty eager to go along with EU wishes during their accession.

The thing about South Stream is.. EU countries have a 50% financial stake in it, and Russia has been successful in blocking any other gas pipeline projects. So while their politicians do a lot of chest-beating, they have a lot of vested financial interests behind the scene. To give another indication.. Germany's former Chancellor took up work at Gazprom a few months after leaving office.

[Roosh]

While it's not a big topic here, a couple people have used Poland as an example of the benefits Ukraine would receive if they joined the EU. Poland is doing better than Ukraine for sure, but it's still a poor nation. Every day in the dumpster outside my apartment I see people digging through it. Beggars are common in my city, and it's relatively prosperous. If you stay in the center of Polish cities, you have the impression that all is well, but if you look a bit closer you will notice that EU prosperity doesn't hit everyone equally, especially older people who have not learned skills necessary in a globalized economy. I'm still not convinced that Ukraine would do better in the EU than with Russia.

[jimukr104]

(03-06-2014 11:21 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

While it's not a big topic here, a couple people have used Poland as an example of the benefits Ukraine would receive if they joined the EU. Poland is doing better than Ukraine for sure, but it's still a poor nation. Every day in the dumpster outside my apartment I see people digging through it. Beggars are common in my city, and it's relatively prosperous. If you stay in the center of Polish cities, you have the impression that all is well, but if you look a bit closer you will notice that EU prosperity doesn't hit everyone equally, especially older people who have not learned skills necessary in a globalized economy. I'm still not convinced that Ukraine would do better in the EU than with Russia.

Ukraine will be more like Bulgaria in 15 years.. or Romania..certainly nothing to brag about.
You are right Poland is very poor when you minus that a large % have to send money home from working in other EU countries.
The infrastructure also has always been ahead of UA. Remember Poland was a western country until it was annexed as Warsaw pact.