- Files: GIF, JPG, MP3, PNG, Maximum:5000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 1068 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply[ Reply ]
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 21829
who called me "Rasputin"? I don't understand. Explain, please.
|>>|| No. 21831
now I understood. It happens automatically. Funny. Who is then Raoul? Spaniard, I suppose?
|>>|| No. 21840
Actually there is one thing you can explain for
us me, Ruskilad.
Slav squatting. What is it for, why is it a thing, why do photographed slavs clearly feel much better with their bottoms closer to the ground, etc. Important questions.
|>>|| No. 21842
Not a Ruskie but my understanding is that squatting like that is pretty common throughout Eurasia, from Bangkok to Belarus.
|>>|| No. 21844
I would guess, from living here (expatlad), that it's because people have tiny shitty apartments which are often shared by an extended family, or in the case of Central Asian immigrants many more people. So most of the socialising it done outside (in sprint/summer/autumn) and it's an effective way of being comfortable outside when there isn't any street furniture or nice places to hang around. I don't know the situation outside Moscow/St Pt, but people tell me the smaller cities have fuck all parks and street furniture.
It's also pretty comfortable and natural once your body gets used to it. Apparently. It doesn't beat sitting down, but it beats standing around all day.
|>>|| No. 21845
>It's also pretty comfortable and natural once your body gets used to it. Apparently.
You're not going native on us are you, expatlad?
|>>|| No. 21847
Take into consideration, lad, that not every Ruskiy squats. Only some social group. And how explained expatlad, it is more comfortable to sit, than to stand around all day. I think, every country have such social groups. And let us talk about filters, not about odious things in different countries. Let us live in harmony!
|>>|| No. 21848
>I think, every country have such social groups
Nope, we have zero social groups known for electing to squat rather than stand over here.
|>>|| No. 21851
Thank you very much. Explain me, please, what does it means: "soul filter". Some kind of filter or may be phraseology?
|>>|| No. 21853
He means that it isn't all Slavs that squat. Only the social class that would be our equivalent to Chavs - poor people with little education, little money and few manners/culture. I've lived here for 2 years and, even in a fairly typical suburb, very very rarely see people squatting. You need to go to poverty-stricken industrial cities to find such people.
We are talking about people who spend all day outside, with no street furniture or parks, rather than spending a couple of hours in the evening hanging around outside a newsagent and pissing about on park benches. Squatting beats sitting on the floor, and it beats spending the day inside (in hot summer weather) with 4 other family members in a 3 room apartment.
I've knocked around Africa a bit too, and it's the default way of relaxing outdoors there too.
|>>|| No. 21854
You see, even in Western Europe there are such people, how explains expadlad. And somebody says "we have zero social class of that kind". The truth cannot be hidden. All countries have such social class. The desire to hand about is inherent in the human race.
|>>|| No. 21855
I've never seen anyone slav squatting except when I was in Moscow myself. I know it's common in Asia and Africa in general. Nobody's trying to hide it, if it is a thing here then people certainly aren't aware of others doing it.
|>>|| No. 21857
It's one of the most perfect representations of this website's culture that we have an international board for all nationalities, and then proceed to region filter using British slang that said foreigners can't understand.
Personally, I love it.
|>>|| No. 21858
Thank you for question about the subject of the thread. This filter is for water.
|>>|| No. 21859
I'm not sure that I've understood you. Could you please explain me what do you mean? (Perhaps in Russian, if you don't mind, for more clarity). Especially it's hard to understand your last phrase: "using British slang that said foreigners can't understand". But, it is desirable to translate your whole thought.
|>>|| No. 21860
Slang is say, words that are made up to refer to something else. Also a slang word might only be used in one part of the country, or maybe one region. Do you have differences in the Russian language in different regions? These would be examples of local slang.
|>>|| No. 21861
Это один из самых совершенных представлений культуры этого веб-сайта, которые мы имеем международный совет для всех национальностей, а затем приступить к области фильтра с помощью британского сленга, который сказал, иностранцы не могут понять.
Лично я люблю его.
|>>|| No. 21862
I suspect that he tried that himself, and found it unsatisfactory.
Я думаю что, ему смешно использование британского сленга, на странице «междунонародной» этого сайта. Сленг-то исползовано «назвёт» использователев страницы («Cockernay», «Fairy» и.т.д.). Выбор имени зависет от региона откуда использовател.
Если мой перевод не яснее «Google»-а, не скажите всем пожалуйсто )))))
|>>|| No. 21865
My Russian isn't great. But I can try:
IP-адреса фильтруются по регионам и помечаются невразумительными жаргонными словами, понятными только британцам
|>>|| No. 21866
It is at times difficult to judge - especially in the grand theatre of the Internet - who is being amusing and who's just having a slow moment.
|>>|| No. 21867
In addition, can I ask - expatlad, how did you get yourself sent out there?
|>>|| No. 21870
Thank you all, who translated! The sentence became more clear. I know all the words in that sentence, but couldn't understand the meaning. I posted the picture of a filter, and somebody started to talk about filtering ip-s. That was the difficulty.
|>>|| No. 21875
We filter not only by geographical locus but also the so called soul filter which filters for ones own spiritual progression.
The soul units are divided up into either Buddah's or Jesus's. If you've accumulated say 23 Jesi then the soul filter will kick in and adapt to the level of positive chakral vibrancy that you are outputting. It's just a way for the supreme ruler of the site (known only by his colour for if you were to utter his real name your brain gloop would do a quad spasm and implode) to progress us on our path toward the one true light and salvation.
All pretty simple really.
|>>|| No. 21877
ROFL. To be honest i must say that i'm not from Russia, but from Belarus(Lukashenko, yep). Bulba = potato on our belarussian language. Name in the rught top corner makes me laugh, lol. Great. Seriously.
|>>|| No. 21878
Why do you think your nationality makes you automatically interesting or a suitable focus for questioning?
|>>|| No. 21879
Lad. I know this is /zoo/ but do try to have some sense of decorum.
Do you enjoy the sound of waves crashing onto a pebbly beach?
|>>|| No. 21882
Because of stereotypes. 95% of non-Russian people think that on our land you can meet white bear with vodka and balalaika. It isn't a truth.
Sorry mate. My English is not good as you can see. But I will try to improve it in the future.
|>>|| No. 21883
Being from a landlocked country doesn't necessarily mean you've never been to the seaside.
|>>|| No. 21884
No, most people don't think that. The worst case scenario is they either have no idea at all or just think that Belarus is basically USSR 2.0 where the Internet is banned and people can't tell jokes about Lukashenko in their kitchens without fear of being captured by KGB.
True. Belarusians usually go to Crimea for summer holidays. Not this year, though.
|>>|| No. 21886
So leaving the current situation aside, would you recommend a holiday to the Crimea?
|>>|| No. 21887
Not Crimea, but I'm going to Anapa this year for a week - to experience the sheer horror of a traditional budget Russian Black Sea all-inclusive holiday.
For Brits, it's like spending a week on the cheap side of Blackpool. Minus any semblance of entertainment.
|>>|| No. 21888
Forgot to add, I'll try take a trip to Crimea if my Russian Work Permit will be ok there. Just to see what's going on. I think they won't even have a border or check travel documents now?
|>>|| No. 21889
No. Unless you're into cheap wines and Tatar history. It's alright if you know precisely what you want to see and have a good place to stay, but there are thousands of places you better off with visiting instead.
You won't be able to get there from Ukraine and to get there from Russia is a lot of hustle.
|>>|| No. 21892
> I think they won't even have a border or check travel documents now?
They probably will. I've heard rumours that Russia has been mining the border between Crimea and the rest of Ukraine.
|>>|| No. 21893
Yeah, but I mean that I'm able to live/work/travel/leave/enter Russia when I want. I'm going down to Krasnodar Krai anyway this summer, so will my documents therefore now 'work' in Crimea?
Or is it a strange 'autonomous region' like Abkhazia where I don't think Britons can go because the UK doesn't recognise it as an independent region?
>Following an illegal referendum on 16 March, Russia illegally annexed Crimea on 21 March and tensions remain high.
|>>|| No. 21897
I'm hoping it is satire, and he put an American proxy on for extra comic effect.
|>>|| No. 21898
Maybe my detector is a little broken, but I'm not entirely sure what it's supposed to be satirising, if anything at all.
|>>|| No. 21899
The default stance of brilliant teenlads towards any foreign policy issue - "it's all about the resources innit".
|>>|| No. 21901
You might have a point if the Russians didn't already have a track record in this sort of thing.
|>>|| No. 21905
Yeah I'm sure the Russians with all of their natural resources would be willing to weather crippling sanctions and diplomatic isolation, as well as the risk of war, in order to siphon off the electricity generated by Ukraine's nuclear power plants. Seems perfectly cost effective.
|>>|| No. 21906
Yes, because clearly the stuff that powers nuclear power stations is worthless to the Russians, as is control over the energy infrastructure in Ukraine. I mean, it's not like they could extract more money from there by, say, quadrupling the price of gas flowing through there, right?
|>>|| No. 21907
Yeah I'm sure the Russians are in desperate need of more nuclear materials to add to their stockpile which contains enough to destroy the world several times over, despite actively working to steadily decrease it over past decades.
Ignoring the nonsensical implications, even if what you are arguing about it being in Russia's interests to take control of Ukraine's energy infrastructure by force in order to drain more money from the country were true, how would the large amount of electricity generated by Ukraine's nuclear plants present a motive for their actions, as the original poster suggested?
|>>|| No. 21908
>Yeah I'm sure the Russians are in desperate need of more nuclear materials to add to their stockpile which contains enough to destroy the world several times over
This is Russia we're talking about. As we've seen in South Ossetia and Crimea, what they've got is never enough. Putin is ex-KGB, and he looks awfully like he's pining for the Soviet era, and what good fortune for him that he's in a position to do something about that.
>how would the large amount of electricity generated by Ukraine's nuclear plants present a motive for their actions
No, lad. Controlling the energy supply would be the means. The motive would be a desire to reintegrate or dismember Ukraine.
|>>|| No. 21909
NATO is clearly muscling in on Russian interests, and Russia is on the defensive. Russian power has steadily retreated since the Soviet occupation of eastern Europe after the second world war. NATO was created for that very purpose.
|>>|| No. 21910
What are Russian interests though? As far as I can see they largely amount to bullying who they can. A Russian would reply with a typical whataboutist reply about how America does exactly that, and they wouldn't be wrong. Multipolar worlds, however, are unsafe worlds, especially in this nuclear age.
|>>|| No. 21911
All of Ukraine was a Russian interest until the US corrupted the opposition parties and backed a "popular" revolution. Russia is justifying its occupation of the more valuable territories in eastern Ukraine at home by appealing to Russian nationalism, which leaves a sour taste in the mouths of non-Russians, but as far as occupations go the Russian forces are justified in occupying the east.
In terms of influence, NATO has already conquered the entire front garden, and Russia is standing on the porch trying to bat the USA away from the windowboxes with a broom.
|>>|| No. 21912
Sovereign nations are free to act as they wish, whether next door to Russia or on the other side of the world.
|>>|| No. 21914
The 'rescuing ethnic Russians' vibe is actually a thing, not just propaganda. So many people I interact with in Moscow have family who are from/were born/have connections with Ukraine and Crimea. It's a pretty shit example, but it's sort of like how all the Irish Americans would feel if Britain invaded Dublin - but many fold more.
Having said that, it's mostly a popular appeal to nationalism as a personal ego trip for the big V, and a long-standing quest to remove the chip on the shoulder from losing the Cold War, sliding into irrelevance and failing to achieve a fair (and successful) democratic system.
|>>|| No. 21917
>All of Ukraine was a Russian interest until the US corrupted the opposition parties and backed a "popular" revolution.
|>>|| No. 21918
How would the amount of electricity produced by nuclear power have any bearing on this? I'm not disputing that the Russians are interested in maintaining influence over Ukraine, I just don't see how the large amount of energy they produce from nuclear plants is the motive for this, as >>21893 implied.
This is a far more reasoned explanation.
|>>|| No. 21919
>I just don't see how the large amount of energy they produce from nuclear plants is the motive for this
There's potentially two sides to this. On the one hand, Ukraine is almost entirely dependent on Russian supply for its nuclear fuel. There's the potential to basically do a land grab and use the price of this fuel, and consequently the cost of energy in Ukraine (remember, "three meals from anarchy" etc.) as leverage. The other side to this is that while most of the reactors are in the west, the largest reactor complex in all of Europe is in the east, in a province where a half the population consider themselves to have Russian as a first language. This complex provides a significant proportion of Ukraine's electricity, and taking control of this area, along with neighbouring Donetsk, would again put Russia in a position to leverage energy supply to a rump Ukraine. Remember that that Russia is potentially facing a ramping up of sanctions from named-person to whole-sector.
This may or may not make sense, but it does at least make "it's about resources" not an obviously silly statement.
|>>|| No. 21921
So you are essentially arguing that they are trying to take control of Ukraine in order to mitigate the sanctions which have resulted from them trying to take control of Ukraine?
|>>|| No. 21922
You are exactly right, that is why these actions aren't at all based on rational economic/resource-based objectives. Anyone who thinks so is an idiot. No cold and reasoned logical actor would think it was worthwhile losing tens (hundreds?) of billions of dollars in capital flight, missed investment and sanctions from an already ailing economy.
The actions of Russia in Ukraine are based on national egoism/patriotism and the desire to be powerful, as well as to 'protect' a shared cultural legacy with (and dominion over) Eastern Europe in the face of Western erosion.
|>>|| No. 21924
In for a penny, in for a pound. This might be the only way of saving face after finding themselves on the hook for what happened in Crimea. They can't back down without losing face (and as we all know, Putin doesn't do losing face). Putting the squeeze on Ukraine is now pretty much the only option that doesn't result in Russia's perceived power and might being reduced, which would seriously hamper the restoration of the superpower.
Remember that the Kremlin's ideas of what is logical and rational may not tie up with those of the reset of the world.
|>>|| No. 21925
I don't necessarily disagree with this, I was just opposing those who seem to think Russia's attempts to annex Ukrainian territory can simply be explained as "just another resource grab".
|>>|| No. 21926
So that's really it? The world's largest country is directing one of the most powerful militaries in the world because they're getting all emotional about not being bigger and more powerful? This is definitely true, even though there are far sounder tactical explanations?
You guys are loons.
|>>|| No. 21927
>You guys are loons.
No, they're not. Tactical explanations almost certainly come into it as well, but it also serves ego rubbing purpose. You forget how rabidly nationalist Russia is as a nation. Invading Crimea from their point of view has a huge number of positives. It cements Putins hold on the nation, Russia gets strategically important land, (plus the minor resources), it reunites Russia with Russian speaking Russian ethnics...
You're a fool to think that Russia isn't somewhat bumsore about the Soviet breakdown.
|>>|| No. 21928
Rescuing them from what? The Ukrainian government won't even mount a proper counter offensive because of the massive amount of Rashkans across the border and one could hardly imagine there's mass aggression against Russians in Finland, the Baltics, Balkans etc.
|>>|| No. 21929
Mate, it's propaganda, it doesn't have to be true. Russian media takes the Ukrainians not having Russian as an official language, bam, oppression of Russians - let's find other examples of why those Ukrainians are so evil...
|>>|| No. 21930
Maybe it's my skewed American perspective but I'd expect a certain degree of plausibility in propaganda.
|>>|| No. 21931
To a rabid nationalist a denial of Russian being considered an official language in a country where a huge number of people speak it has quite a lot of plausibility. Suppressing languages is a common tactic, Gaelic was illegal in the 1700s for example.
|>>|| No. 21932
There's not exactly a threat of Russian culture being exterminated in that situation, though. There's a difference between removing the "official" status of a language and punishing people for using a language altogether. An arguably oppressive minority losing some of their privileges as opposed to an opposed to an empire trying to homogenize a very small local population.
|>>|| No. 21934
One thing in favor of Russia is that it sometimes make me feel a tiny bit better about my own country.
|>>|| No. 21935
Believe it or not, that is most often the underlying motive for aggressive foreign policies. Even if there are material or tactical benefits for such actions, capturing these benefits are ultimately just a means by which to gain more power and satisfy the ego of leaders and nations.
|>>|| No. 21936
The USA has the most aggressive foreign policy, and I don't see any hint of ego in that. Just fierce realpolitik.
Are you conflating reality with the propaganda you are used to? I don't think American propaganda is even vaguely realistic.
|>>|| No. 21940
This. While there is a land grab and potentially a resource grab, first and foremost the whole thing has been a massive dick-wave. Given everything that's happened in the last decade or so, I can't help looking at it and thinking that if I were President of Russia and wanted to restore the glory of the Soviet Union, then reversing Yeltsin's reforms, forming an effective one-party state, restoring the old Soviet anthem, cracking down on dissent, getting tough with the oligarchs, reasserting state control of the media and generally being contrary with the West is probably what I'd do too.
|>>|| No. 21942
Either or. American propaganda is not plausible, just like all propaganda; it's merely tailored to the psyche of national in question.
I keep seeing people saying that Russia's actions can be explained entirely by barminess, with any kind of strategic benefit some sort of happy accident. Strategically Russia's been doing everything right so far, so I rather think that their planners (who do not consist solely of Putin) are far from barmy.
|>>|| No. 21943
There's nothing barmy about stroking the damaged egos of the nationalists who keep you in power
|>>|| No. 21944
In what way have they been doing everything right so far?
I'm not sure many lads truly get the economic cost of this scrap/posturing. For an economy based heavily on resource export to scare your main export markets into desiring, and actively moving, to be energy independent of you, is not a smart move.
It's alright for me, I get paid in GBP and live in Russia, but for the average bloke on the street, the cost of basic living is dramatically rising. The cynic in me wants to suggest that stoking nationalism is 'their' idea of dealing with the economic situation - make people in Russia hate the outside (rich, happy, successful) world and therefore accept their own misery as something they should be proud of and grateful for.
|>>|| No. 21951
Yes but what is the purpose of this realpolitik? To maintain American supremacy in the international system in order to satisfy the ego created by the narrative of American Exceptionalism. Power isn't the means, it is the end.
|>>|| No. 21952
>To maintain American supremacy in the international system
Why can't you acknowledge that this could just be a rephrasing of 'to prevent Russian supremacy in the international system'?
I'm no great fan of the spams but better they're top dog than Putin and his polonium pals.
|>>|| No. 21953
>Putin and his polonium pals
I'd joke that this sounds like it would make a funny Saturday morning cartoon, but this is the internet and I'm afraid if I say it some twat will really make it, it'll receive several hundred thousand YouTube hits, the BBC will report on it like it's an actual thing and Putin will actually become a more likeable figure as a result.
Be careful when joking on the internet.
|>>|| No. 21956
Exactly. Nationalism is used as a tool to control the populace, and Putin has been playing it like a fiddle. Russian decision makers are not barmy.
Your cynic is right. Strategically, the population at home has been managed in order to make them more willing to accept the decisions of their government. Governments aren't there to benefit the people, they're there to govern them on behalf of the military.
|>>|| No. 21958
Why is it considered crazy for the Russians to hold off the eastern expansion of NATO?
|>>|| No. 21961
Maybe because the actions if independent nations have fuck all to do with Russia.
|>>|| No. 21962
That's not how hegemony works. And maybe you should write that on a placard and stand outside Westminster, since they managed to fuck with more independent nations than Russia has since the 1990s.
|>>|| No. 21963
congratulations, you've just used a fantastic propaganda tool used by the USSR and revived by Mr. Stalin himself.
|>>|| No. 21964
I do struggle to comprehend exactly why Russia views itself in direct opposition to NATO post-democracy. The EU I can understand - they seek to divert trade and cultural links away. Opposing NATO is surely tacit to admitting the Cold War is still on and that Russia and the US are forever incompatible, and are confirmed and sincere 'enemies' which is a strange and archaic position.
|>>|| No. 21965
I feel that there's quite a lot more in common between the US and Russia than the US and the EU.
|>>|| No. 21966
Just curious: where do the fairies of this board hail from?
> it would make a funny Saturday morning cartoon
Mirth. It would indeed.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]