Putin: America is a Parasite on the Global Economy

Speaking at a summer camp for a pro-Kremlin youth group, Vladimir Putin slammed America as a "parasite" on the global economy.

"They are living beyond their means and shifting a part of the weight of their problems to the world economy. They are living like parasites off the global economy and their monopoly of the dollar."

FULL ARTICLE

Old thread is old

American economists would agree. But I'm sure the patriots will talk **** anyhow.

Old thread is old

tenaka2

Darn! Really? I did a search for recent threads with "Putin" in the title and none of them seemed to pertain to this.

:(

And Putin and Russia seem to be parasites on moving forward into the next century where things like Communism and Russia will be a thing of the past.

Parasite is pretty badass.

I should also add the Russians would be speaking German right now without the U.S.KC_Hokie

nope and if we are refering to ww2 it was actually down to the russians being used to the adverse weather and the fact germany were ill equiped to fight in those conditions, thats what primarily turned the war in the allies favours.

SO actually if it werent for the weather then they would be speaking german, just saying.

I should also add the Russians would be speaking German right now without the U.S.KC_Hokie

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

Old thread is old

Stesilaus

Darn! Really? I did a search for recent threads with "Putin" in the title and none of them seemed to pertain to this.

:(

The truth is the truth.

[QUOTE="Stesilaus"]

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

Old thread is old

Big_Bad_Sad

Darn! Really? I did a search for recent threads with "Putin" in the title and none of them seemed to pertain to this.

:(

the man can bend frying pans he's easily the best xD he is a character and a half mind you he aint no Boris Yeltsin :(

American economists would agree. But I'm sure the patriots will talk **** anyhow.

Blue-Sky

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]I should also add the Russians would be speaking German right now without the U.S.razgriz_101

nope and if we are refering to ww2 it was actually down to the russians being used to the adverse weather and the fact germany were ill equiped to fight in those conditions, thats what primarily turned the war in the allies favours.

SO actually if it werent for the weather then they would be speaking german, just saying.

All 1st world countries exploit the 3rd world, america isnt the only guilty party.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]I should also add the Russians would be speaking German right now without the U.S.KC_Hokie

nope and if we are refering to ww2 it was actually down to the russians being used to the adverse weather and the fact germany were ill equiped to fight in those conditions, thats what primarily turned the war in the allies favours.

SO actually if it werent for the weather then they would be speaking german, just saying.

Where do you think the Russian got all of there equipment to even fight? KC_Hokie

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]I should also add the Russians would be speaking German right now without the U.S.KC_Hokie

nope and if we are refering to ww2 it was actually down to the russians being used to the adverse weather and the fact germany were ill equiped to fight in those conditions, thats what primarily turned the war in the allies favours.

SO actually if it werent for the weather then they would be speaking german, just saying.

Actually no, at the start of the war strangely Soviets had a pact with Germany and at the time fairly industrious at the time aswell :/ dunno where you get your sources from but by god they are off more than out of date cheese.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Where do you think the Russian got all of there equipment to even fight? Big_Bad_Sad

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

nope and if we are refering to ww2 it was actually down to the russians being used to the adverse weather and the fact germany were ill equiped to fight in those conditions, thats what primarily turned the war in the allies favours.

SO actually if it werent for the weather then they would be speaking german, just saying.

razgriz_101

Actually no, at the start of the war strangely Soviets had a pact with Germany and at the time fairly industrious at the time aswell :/ dunno where you get your sources from but by god they are off more than out of date cheese.

Where do you think the Soviets got all of the equipment after their initial equipment was all destroyed?

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Where do you think the Russian got all of there equipment to even fight? They were practically a third world country prior to WWII.KC_Hokie

Actually no, at the start of the war strangely Soviets had a pact with Germany and at the time fairly industrious at the time aswell :/ dunno where you get your sources from but by god they are off more than out of date cheese.

Where do you think the Soviets got all of the equipment after their initial equipment was all destroyed?

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

Actually no, at the start of the war strangely Soviets had a pact with Germany and at the time fairly industrious at the time aswell :/ dunno where you get your sources from but by god they are off more than out of date cheese.

UniverseIX

Where do you think the Soviets got all of the equipment after their initial equipment was all destroyed?

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Where do you think the Russian got all of there equipment to even fight? They were practically a third world country prior to WWII.KC_Hokie

Actually no, at the start of the war strangely Soviets had a pact with Germany and at the time fairly industrious at the time aswell :/ dunno where you get your sources from but by god they are off more than out of date cheese.

Where do you think the Soviets got all of the equipment after their initial equipment was all destroyed?

they supplied raw materials to allies not equipmen ;) theres a diffrence.

But the weather played a much bigger role in the fight than the early battles which im sure were primarily fought in the Spring/Summer before the harsh siberian winters set in aswell.Those played a more crucial role and the fact that Germany divided its fronts up didnt help them either.

So to say yeah if it werent for America they would be talking German is bout as good as saying what Putin says, short sighted and narrow minded.

[QUOTE="UniverseIX"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]German equipment prior to WWII was far superior to what little the Soviets had. The Soviets got crushed in early battles.

Where do you think the Soviets got all of the equipment after their initial equipment was all destroyed?

KC_Hokie

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

Actually no, at the start of the war strangely Soviets had a pact with Germany and at the time fairly industrious at the time aswell :/ dunno where you get your sources from but by god they are off more than out of date cheese.

razgriz_101

Where do you think the Soviets got all of the equipment after their initial equipment was all destroyed?

they supplied raw materials to allies not equipmen ;) theres a diffrence.

But the weather played a much bigger role in the fight than the early battles which im sure were primarily fought in the Spring/Summer before the harsh siberian winters set in aswell.Those played a more crucial role and the fact that Germany divided its fronts up didnt help them either.

So to say yeah if it werent for America they would be talking German is bout as good as saying what Putin says, short sighted and narrow minded.

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]German equipment prior to WWII was far superior to what little the Soviets had. The Soviets got crushed in early battles.

Where do you think the Soviets got all of the equipment after their initial equipment was all destroyed?

KC_Hokie

they supplied raw materials to allies not equipmen ;) theres a diffrence.

But the weather played a much bigger role in the fight than the early battles which im sure were primarily fought in the Spring/Summer before the harsh siberian winters set in aswell.Those played a more crucial role and the fact that Germany divided its fronts up didnt help them either.

So to say yeah if it werent for America they would be talking German is bout as good as saying what Putin says, short sighted and narrow minded.

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

You seriously need to read up on your history.

Can't stress that enough if thats the sort of things you believe.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="UniverseIX"] IT doesn't mattered who armed the Russians. The Russians still had to pick up those weapons and fight. Your comment about Russians speaking German without the United States saving them in WW2... was ridiculous.UniverseIX

Historians agree the Soviets would have lost without U.S. military equipment and supplies.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

they supplied raw materials to allies not equipmen ;) theres a diffrence.

But the weather played a much bigger role in the fight than the early battles which im sure were primarily fought in the Spring/Summer before the harsh siberian winters set in aswell.Those played a more crucial role and the fact that Germany divided its fronts up didnt help them either.

So to say yeah if it werent for America they would be talking German is bout as good as saying what Putin says, short sighted and narrow minded.

stvee101

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

You seriously need to read up on your history.

Can't stress that enough if thats the sort of things you believe.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]German equipment prior to WWII was far superior to what little the Soviets had. The Soviets got crushed in early battles.

Where do you think the Soviets got all of the equipment after their initial equipment was all destroyed?

KC_Hokie

they supplied raw materials to allies not equipmen ;) theres a diffrence.

But the weather played a much bigger role in the fight than the early battles which im sure were primarily fought in the Spring/Summer before the harsh siberian winters set in aswell.Those played a more crucial role and the fact that Germany divided its fronts up didnt help them either.

So to say yeah if it werent for America they would be talking German is bout as good as saying what Putin says, short sighted and narrow minded.

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

Im not even gonna bother...you actually know literally nothing about the Soviet military hardware and a lot of stuff in WW2.

Also mindblowing fact most Soviet guns were designed to use diffrent ammunitions a trend which still continues to this day ;)

[QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Planes, tanks, artillery, trucks, locomotives, etc. were sent. So military supplies and equipment.

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

KC_Hokie

You seriously need to read up on your history.

Can't stress that enough if thats the sort of things you believe.

And you coming up with this BS? :lol:

The fact is the soviets manged to shift the vast majority of their factories and production facilities way east out of the Nazi's reach relatively early in the war.

Their productions figures were just enormous,the Germans didn't have a hope of matching them.US support was important but not decisive.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

they supplied raw materials to allies not equipmen ;) theres a diffrence.

But the weather played a much bigger role in the fight than the early battles which im sure were primarily fought in the Spring/Summer before the harsh siberian winters set in aswell.Those played a more crucial role and the fact that Germany divided its fronts up didnt help them either.

So to say yeah if it werent for America they would be talking German is bout as good as saying what Putin says, short sighted and narrow minded.

razgriz_101

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

Im not even gonna bother...you actually know literally nothing about the Soviet military hardware and a lot of stuff in WW2.

Also mindblowing fact most Soviet guns were designed to use diffrent ammunitions a trend which still continues to this day ;)

[QUOTE="UniverseIX"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]So billions of dollars (in today's money trillions) of military supplies and equipment were send to the Soviets from the U.S. and it doesn't matter? Are you **** serious?

KC_Hokie

Historians agree the Soviets would have lost without U.S. military equipment and supplies.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="stvee101"]

You seriously need to read up on your history.

Can't stress that enough if thats the sort of things you believe.

stvee101

And you coming up with this BS? :lol:

The fact is the soviets manged to shift the vast majority of their factories and production facilities way east out of the Nazi's reach relatively early in the war.

Their productions figures were just enormous,the Germans didn't have a hope of matching them.US support was important but not decisive.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="UniverseIX"] are you a soothsayer? I'd be interested in knowing how you can say you'd know what would have happened if the United States of American didn't intervene in WW2. Your proposistion that Russia was helpless without the United States is absurd.

UniverseIX

Historians agree the Soviets would have lost without U.S. military equipment and supplies.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Planes, tanks, artillery, trucks, locomotives, etc. were sent. So military supplies and equipment.

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

KC_Hokie

Im not even gonna bother...you actually know literally nothing about the Soviet military hardware and a lot of stuff in WW2.

Also mindblowing fact most Soviet guns were designed to use diffrent ammunitions a trend which still continues to this day ;)

yep, American tanks like the T-34which is widely credited for wining the war on the eastern front....

Seriously, if you have no idea what your talking about please dont resort to making things up, it just makes you sound like an idiot.

[QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]I have a Bachelor's in history.KC_Hokie

And you coming up with this BS? :lol:

The fact is the soviets manged to shift the vast majority of their factories and production facilities way east out of the Nazi's reach relatively early in the war.

Their productions figures were just enormous,the Germans didn't have a hope of matching them.US support was important but not decisive.

The Russians ended the war with one of the largest production capabilities of any country in the world.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Planes, tanks, artillery, trucks, locomotives, etc. were sent. So military supplies and equipment.

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

KC_Hokie

Im not even gonna bother...you actually know literally nothing about the Soviet military hardware and a lot of stuff in WW2.

Also mindblowing fact most Soviet guns were designed to use diffrent ammunitions a trend which still continues to this day ;)

But its interesting that the Russians never used allied combat veichles in any great numbers becuase their own creations were so superior.

[QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]I have a Bachelor's in history.KC_Hokie

And you coming up with this BS? :lol:

The fact is the soviets manged to shift the vast majority of their factories and production facilities way east out of the Nazi's reach relatively early in the war.

Their productions figures were just enormous,the Germans didn't have a hope of matching them.US support was important but not decisive.

Not sure if your trolling now or just that ignorant.

Planes, tanks, artillery, trucks, locomotives, etc. were sent. So military supplies and equipment.

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

KC_Hokie

So the US didn't help out of charity but out of interest, and there is nothing wrong with that but don't forget that the defeat of Nazi Germany was a joint effort in which the US and the USSR stood out the most, and neither country could have defeated the Axis forces on their own or if the other one was defeated.

[QUOTE="UniverseIX"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The Soviets were down to sharing rifles among multiple soldiers without American supplies. That's how pathetic they were.

Historians agree the Soviets would have lost without U.S. military equipment and supplies.

KC_Hokie

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

Im not even gonna bother...you actually know literally nothing about the Soviet military hardware and a lot of stuff in WW2.

Also mindblowing fact most Soviet guns were designed to use diffrent ammunitions a trend which still continues to this day ;)

cobrax55

yep, American tanks like the T-34which is widely credited for wining the war on the eastern front....

Seriously, if you have no idea what your talking about please dont resort to making things up, it just makes you sound like an idiot.

I also suggest you look at the GDP and overall productivity of the Soviets in the late 30s and 40s.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Planes, tanks, artillery, trucks, locomotives, etc. were sent. So military supplies and equipment.

The Soviets initial armies were all crushed or surrendered along with their initial equipment.

The Soviets would have been defeated without U.S. military supplies and equipments. Historians agree on this. It's a no brainer.

KC_Hokie

Im not even gonna bother...you actually know literally nothing about the Soviet military hardware and a lot of stuff in WW2.

Also mindblowing fact most Soviet guns were designed to use diffrent ammunitions a trend which still continues to this day ;)

I have and its actually mainly materials.

Im pretty sure you dont have a bachelors degree in history either considering you are stepping round a lot of issues of the russian army and thowing lend and lease which in the case of russia mainly talks bout materials not equipment in the case of the soviet union.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_tank_production_during_World_War_II

theres a start, all tank models produced within and used by Soviets in WW2 are derived from soviet design,along with most of their infantry weaponary and strangely the stuff you claim thats not great was actually adopted and widely popular with the Wermacht and said weapon is known as the PPSh-41 and the German military actually converted the design to the 9mm parrabelum cartridge which in turn became the widely used weapon known as the MP41.

So now then Soviet weapons were crap and they leeched American tech and it was America that won the war alone?

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="stvee101"]

And you coming up with this BS? :lol:

The fact is the soviets manged to shift the vast majority of their factories and production facilities way east out of the Nazi's reach relatively early in the war.

Their productions figures were just enormous,the Germans didn't have a hope of matching them.US support was important but not decisive.

cobrax55

The Russians ended the war with one of the largest production capabilities of any country in the world.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

Im not even gonna bother...you actually know literally nothing about the Soviet military hardware and a lot of stuff in WW2.

Also mindblowing fact most Soviet guns were designed to use diffrent ammunitions a trend which still continues to this day ;)

razgriz_101

I have and its actually mainly materials.

Im pretty sure you dont have a bachelors degree in history either considering you are stepping round a lot of issues of the russian army and thowing lend and lease which in the case of russia mainly talks bout materials not equipment in the case of the soviet union.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_tank_production_during_World_War_II

theres a start, all tank models produced within and used by Soviets in WW2 are derived from soviet design,along with most of their infantry weaponary and strangely the stuff you claim thats not great was actually adopted and widely popular with the Wermacht and said weapon is known as the PPSh-41 and the German military actually converted the design to the 9mm parrabelum cartridge which in turn became the widely used weapon known as the MP41.

So now then Soviet weapons were crap and they leeched American tech and it was America that won the war alone?

[QUOTE="cobrax55"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Their production capacity was a joke until they started pushing back the Germans with American equipment. KC_Hokie

The Russians ended the war with one of the largest production capabilities of any country in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II

strangely the soviet union was consistently in the 300 range apart from 2 actual war years.

On top of that scroll further down they produced both the MOST armoured vehicles and Aircraft over the space of the war.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Read into the Lend-Lease Act and Soviet Buying Commission. Then read into all the American equipment that was renamed and given Russian names.KC_Hokie

I have and its actually mainly materials.

Im pretty sure you dont have a bachelors degree in history either considering you are stepping round a lot of issues of the russian army and thowing lend and lease which in the case of russia mainly talks bout materials not equipment in the case of the soviet union.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_tank_production_during_World_War_II

theres a start, all tank models produced within and used by Soviets in WW2 are derived from soviet design,along with most of their infantry weaponary and strangely the stuff you claim thats not great was actually adopted and widely popular with the Wermacht and said weapon is known as the PPSh-41 and the German military actually converted the design to the 9mm parrabelum cartridge which in turn became the widely used weapon known as the MP41.

So now then Soviet weapons were crap and they leeched American tech and it was America that won the war alone?

do you even have proof for this or are you just stringing us along with pipedreams ? or it could be the fact that Stalingrad was actually a turning point and a crucial part of the war in the east, they never used American equipment except from limited form.

your only coming up with random things like you did in a similar topic where i got into an arguement with yourself on system wars bout a Suda 51 game and you eventually conceded defeat because the amount of facts that ended up being built against you.