The choice to condone the killing of 50 thousand Chechen civilians in the 90s (equivalent to 7 million russian civilians being killed) and to reject their right to self determination. This was done by both Yulia Navanlnay and Maria Pevchih.
The choice to elect a KGB goon in 2000
The choice to reelect the same goon in 2004 when he shut down all mass independent media
The choice to near universally support the invasion of Georgia in 2008
The choice to support the comical seat warming exercise with Medvedev
The choice to allow the KGB goon to become leader for life in 2012
The choice to near universally support the annexation of Crimea, the beginning of the invasion of Ukraine
The choice to near universally support the full scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022
You cannot make any progress or claim to want to change russia’s political environment if refuse to admit these facts.
Instead we get victim-hood polemics, bullshit about “the west is actually to blame” or “NATO made us do this!”, almost threat-like statements saying that discussing these facts will only make things worse and comical bullshit about russophpobia (a concept that does not exist, when you act as a lying, murderous, scoundrel, you should expect people to treat you like shit, if you don’t like this then change).
Do you have something to say or are you “just asking questions”?
I am just curious, do you speak russian? Have you ever lived there? Can you state 3 bullet points about key developments in russia in the decade of 1900 (or say 1920) without doing a web search?
I still don’t feel like I understand - you outline all these choices the people made, fine, but … what are you saying the reason for those choices is and why is Kara-Murza somehow problematic with regard to this (these?) reason(s)?
You don’t think it is problematic for Kara-Murza (and the russian opposition) to ignore these issues? Or are you saying they do address them? If yes, can you provide a source?
The reason for these choices is something you should ask the russians and Kara-Murza.
I still am not totally clear what you are saying. That Kara-Murza has to explain why Russians have done this before he could be a positive alternative?
Uh … so what is the root cause you want to address?
Russian society; the choices russians make.
You cannot make any progress or claim to want to change russia’s political environment if refuse to admit these facts.
Instead we get victim-hood polemics, bullshit about “the west is actually to blame” or “NATO made us do this!”, almost threat-like statements saying that discussing these facts will only make things worse and comical bullshit about russophpobia (a concept that does not exist, when you act as a lying, murderous, scoundrel, you should expect people to treat you like shit, if you don’t like this then change).
Do you have something to say or are you “just asking questions”?
I am just curious, do you speak russian? Have you ever lived there? Can you state 3 bullet points about key developments in russia in the decade of 1900 (or say 1920) without doing a web search?
I am just asking questions. 🤷♂️
I still don’t feel like I understand - you outline all these choices the people made, fine, but … what are you saying the reason for those choices is and why is Kara-Murza somehow problematic with regard to this (these?) reason(s)?
You don’t think it is problematic for Kara-Murza (and the russian opposition) to ignore these issues? Or are you saying they do address them? If yes, can you provide a source?
The reason for these choices is something you should ask the russians and Kara-Murza.
I am not saying anything.
I still am not totally clear what you are saying. That Kara-Murza has to explain why Russians have done this before he could be a positive alternative?
I’ve been pretty clear in my statements.