I think this is Poland, not Russia.

Tak

If you wouldn't re-militarize the Rhineland and invade Poland, you probably shouldn't be uploading Cat/Dog videos.*

>> ^CrushBug:

You know what else used to be provocative? An African-American walking through a "white" neighborhood.
I don't give a shit how anyone dresses, nobody has the right to do anything to anyone regardless of how they look or are perceived. Nobody is ever asking for it.


Valid point...there are still people who would say it's the African-Americans fault for walking through that neighborhood. Or saying that the Jews knew what was going to happen and should've left Germany and Poland before things got really bad.

I'm not really sure what to say about those arguments because I know if I was black...or jewish I would be very wary and mad at myself for risking it. However I find it very very difficult to justify criticizing others for lack of forethought about something which should never happen in the first place. I don't know I buy insurance but I don't kill myself because I know one day I will die.

It's complicated...I do know though anyone who "has the answer" doesn't and should just shut up.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

I did, but it seemed like you said the reason we shouldn't care about Libya is because of Iraq. And then turned around and said this isn't like Iraq, even though it is clearly like Iraq. In other words, you were mad because this is just like Iraq, and because it isn't like Iraq.



I'm sorry, but equating the current situation in Libya with the almost-decade-long debacle in Iraq is completely retarded. In no way did I say the two were alike. In no way at all did I even imply that the two were alike in any way. You said that. I didn't.

Iraq was brought about by post 9/11 crazy-fervor. Donald Rumsfeld flat out lied to America by saying that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The administration did everything they could to imply that Iraq was even somehow responsible for the World Trade Center attack and the vast majority of this country bought into it. Even supported it while somehow managing to feign complete ignorance of the whole Saudi Arabia issue. Remember the coalition of the willing? England and Poland and a long list of tiny countries with no military power whatsoever? How about the fact that there have been massive amounts of troops stationed in Iraq since the very beginning? Or that our then president Bush was informed, by God, via revelation that it was time to attack Iraq?

Meanwhile, this year in Libya, in a time of protests all over the world, we have reputable sources (not government investigators) reporting that not only are people in Libya protesting and trying to overthrow the government (a movement which never got off the ground during Saddam's regime) but that the dictator of the country is encouraging anyone on his side to kill any civilians who disagree with him. Now remember, this wasn't a secret plan carried out by word of mouth, it was a major news broadcast. And you have a problem with the fact that the president wanted to do something about it? I'd think that standing up for the basic human right to not be killed for your opinion would be seen as meritorious. Unlike the last president who needed a lame excuse.

As yet, there are no troops on the ground. The motive is not some concocted story. No one is even arguing over the motive for going in. It's been very clearly established. The US isn't even doing the largest portion of the work. Our partners include actual countries (no offense to Mauritania and the glorious country of Pitcairn Island) who are taking part in the assault as well.

Maybe this too will be proven to be a lie but the fact is people's lives are allegedly in danger NOW. And it's not like we're invading the country any time soon. We're not even trying to strike directly at troops. Sorry, but it seems like complete ignorance to me to claim that these to events are similar in any way. It seems like people are just looking for a way to blame the current president for the state of the world.

War on poverty?

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^gwiz665:
Not by germany.
>> ^Yogi:
Isn't this Channel called "Russia Today" or something like that. Look where this is being reported...not CNN not MSNBC...not even Fox the Obama Haters are going off on this.
I'd also like to point out that no war or military action that the United States has ever endeavored upon has pure Humanitarian reasons. Name one, I'll be glad to shoot it down for you.
Just to stop you on World War 2 right off the bat...we were attack first, we did not enter it for Humanitarian reasons.


When we declared War on Japan, Germany declared War on us. While there was a humanitarian result, wasn't at all the objective. You can look up the history of ignoring the Jewish plight in Germany and Poland and the denial of the stories of the camps as well as the denial of taking in fleeing Jews.

>> ^gwiz665:

Not by germany.
>> ^Yogi:
Isn't this Channel called "Russia Today" or something like that. Look where this is being reported...not CNN not MSNBC...not even Fox the Obama Haters are going off on this.
I'd also like to point out that no war or military action that the United States has ever endeavored upon has pure Humanitarian reasons. Name one, I'll be glad to shoot it down for you.
Just to stop you on World War 2 right off the bat...we were attack first, we did not enter it for Humanitarian reasons.



When we declared War on Japan, Germany declared War on us. While there was a humanitarian result, wasn't at all the objective. You can look up the history of ignoring the Jewish plight in Germany and Poland and the denial of the stories of the camps as well as the denial of taking in fleeing Jews.

Not many realize that Ostriches are native to Poland and merely introduced to Australia, along with the Cane Toad, Koala, Panther and Dingo during the wave of Polish colonization throughout the world in the mid 18th Century.

*blocked in Poland

I can confirm that this is, in fact, Poland! And yeah, they're most likely both wasted.

>> ^nanrod:

According to comments on College Humor it's Poland.>> ^mxxcon:
they are NOT speaking Russian so the clip's title is incorrect

possibly, but it's not russian since i couldn't understand a word they were saying.

According to comments on College Humor it's Poland.>> ^mxxcon:

they are NOT speaking Russian so the clip's title is incorrect

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

^ Well, that's a good question that gets down to the meat of it - Sometimes people drop a reference in a comment - that makes people go "what?" Here's some example VideoSift trivia that is kind of interesting and involves people:

>> ^quantumushroom:

The Top 200 Chomsky Lies.
Oh, that's right, it's FOX that has an agenda.


Let's look at the very first "lie" in that list:

The "Lie": “in comparison to the conditions imposed by US tyranny and violence, East Europe
under Russian rule was practically a paradise.”

The "Truth": The communists murdered 4 million people in the Ukraine; 753,000 in Poland;
360,000 in Romania; 300,000 in Belarus; 200,000 in Hungary; 100,000 in East Germany;
100,000 in Lithuania; 70,000-100,000 in Yugoslavia; 30,000-40,000 in Bulgaria; 20,000 in
Czechoslovakia; and 5,000 in Albania. Other atrocities included the murder of over 500,000
POWs in Soviet captivity and the mass rape of at least 2 million women by the Red Army.

I don't have to know anything about the context of the quote to see that the response is nonsense. Nowhere in that quote does Chomsky say that the Russians did not commit any atrocities. He also did not claim that the US committed more genocidal acts than the Russians. He said "conditions", which most people would understand meant things like running water, sewage removal, food and shelter availability, employment availability, and such. So the whole list of atrocities is missing the point of his statement entirely.

Now maybe the conditions were arguably better under US control. I certainly don't know. But the fact that the very first "lie" is so poorly refuted, and the fact that there is absolutely no context around Chomsky's quote given, makes this list entirely pointless.

And I would also ask what you think Chomsky's "agenda" is.

Whoa. He said "b" but Poland was "c", and then he said "d" was correct?

Pick up the knife, stab it in the neck, bury it in the yard.

I just saved Poland.