Obama: Russia doesn't make anything
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Sissyk (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).
Source: Yahoo news
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama dismissed Russia as a nation that "doesn't make anything" and said in an interview with the Economist magazine that the West needs to be "pretty firm" with China as Beijing pushes to expand its role in the world economy.
Obama has tried to focus U.S. foreign policy on Asia, a response to China's economic and military might. But for months, that "pivot" has been overshadowed by a flurry of international crises, including Russia's support for separatists in eastern Ukraine.
Russia is the world's third-largest oil producer and second-largest natural gas producer. Europe relies heavily on Russian energy exports, complicating the West's response to the Ukraine crisis.
Obama downplayed Moscow's role in the world, dismissing President Vladimir Putin as a leader causing short-term trouble for political gain that will hurt Russia in the long term.
"I do think it's important to keep perspective. Russia doesn't make anything," Obama said in the interview.
"Immigrants aren't rushing to Moscow in search of opportunity. The life expectancy of the Russian male is around 60 years old. The population is shrinking," he said.
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-russia-doesnt-anything-west-must-firm-china-201843411.html
Wow! Don't recall Obama being this blunt before. He seems to be getting tired of Putin's and Russia's act.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
bigdarryl
(13,190 posts)I hate hearing the President talk like this it's as if there trying to provoke Russia into doing something.He sounds like a rightwinger talking like that
4b5f940728b232b034e4
(120 posts)Where own?
jmowreader
(53,166 posts)According to http://atlas.media.mit.edu/profile/country/rus/, Russia's top 5 exports are crude petroleum, refined petroleum, petroleum gas, coal and semi-finished iron. They are the top exporters of raw aluminum, semi-finished iron, nitrogenous fertilizers, sawn wood, mixed mineral and chemical fertilizers, copper wire, raw nickel, rough wood, precious metal compounds and pig iron.
And if I remember right, they have a hell of a titanium industry.
But as far as manufactured consumer goods...who buys those? Not even the Russians, that's who.
LisaL
(47,420 posts)Aren't most of our goods made in China?
All this time I thought people who lived in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
jmowreader
(53,166 posts)America's manufacturing base fell apart because it's cheaper to pay a Chinese woman $3 per day (plus lunch) to run a light bulb machine than it is to pay an American woman $15 per hour (lunch not included) to run the same machine. Russia's fell apart because most of the crap they made did - after eighty years of ugly, shoddy merchandise the last thing in the world the newly-capitalistic Russian wants to spend his or her money on is anything that says "made in Russia" on the side of it.
LisaL
(47,420 posts)
hack89
(39,181 posts)airplanes, high end computers, high tech medical equipment, factory machinery, etc.
You are right - we don't make low cost consumer goods.
I agree Big D. Even if it were true, seems to be no time for inflammatory rhetoric( if it is election year politics, I fear he has misread the electorate). Besides, Russia is a MAJOR producer of natural resources and military hardware. Always a market.... Peace
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)Just posted this last Tuesday. Talk like this only unites the Russian people and boosts Putin support within. Not sure who the hell is writing the President's script these days but it does indeed seem he is 'scripted' as of late and I don't like it. 
NOVO-OGARYOVO, July 28 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s defense industry is capable of producing all parts and military hardware on its own, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Monday.
“Some things are evident for all of us. First of all, we are absolutely capable of doing everything on our own. Absolutely everything,” Putin said at a meeting devoted to import substitution.
“Our task is to insure ourselves against risks of non-compliance with contracts by our foreign partners,” the president added. “We need to ensure reliable and timely supply of required components and monitor their quality closely.”
Putin said that although he saw no particular risks for the Russian defense industry, “all difficulties should benefit us, because we should launch our own production where it did not exist before.”
more...
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140728/191399561/Putin-Says-Russias-Defense-Industry-Absolutely-Self-Sufficient.html
msongs
(73,715 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)The full transcript doesn't change that.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2014/08/barack-obama-talks-economist
Alhena
(3,076 posts)it's pretty clear Russia's foreign policy is largely based around kicking the US in the shins every chance it gets. I expect that has to get old for a US president after 6 years.
I see that statement as Obama letting out his frustrations, which doesn't make it a helpful statement, but the guy is human.
amandabeech
(9,893 posts)Putin has an enormous chip on his shoulder about just about everything. I strongly, strongly disapprove of Russia's actions in Ukraine--and I think that there are many. On the other hand, Russia has been relatively constructive with respect to Iran and moving at least some of the chemical weapons out of Syria. In the event that the Ukraine situation can be settled in a matter satisfactory to Ukraine, we might again look for constructive Russian action. Gratuitous comments like these simply do not make settling current disputes and setting the stage for future constructive action any easier.
I agree with the President's comments with China, as well. But really, "face" is an issue with China. Why push it.
Cannot the President find some person with whom he can just vent other than a journalist?
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Putin wouldn't be a problem.
If Russians staged a coup in Mexico, how long will it be before we supply the Mexican rebels?
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)He didn't dwell on the issue, it was quite an aside, simple and factual observation. I think it is sad when people say this President said something stupid when it was just a fact.
Thanks for the link to the entire interview.
What exactly was a fact in that interview?
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)Humorous, isn't it? The President knows what he is doing, and when he makes statements like this, its for a reason. But, the doubters continues to wring their hands....
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Garthem
(128 posts)
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)We have the winning comment from Poster Garthem. 
former9thward
(33,424 posts)A nation with no end of resources. So much for that "reset"...
reACTIONary
(7,158 posts)... one of the more empty. Russian population is about half that of America.
Here is where they stand based on GDP (PPP) per capita:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita
former9thward
(33,424 posts)Both Napoleon and Hitler's armies were defeated in part because the supply lines were too long.
reACTIONary
(7,158 posts)... since those storied days of yore, they seem to have been able to build on that strength and substantially increase their emptiness quotient.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)That can be the only explanation for the post.
reACTIONary
(7,158 posts)... I have never been to Russia, or any of the states of the former Soviet Union.
I'm not sure what that has to do with understanding the population of, the population density of, or the history of decline in the population of the so-called "largest nation on the earth".
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Response to joshcryer (Reply #36)
LisaL This message was self-deleted by its author.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)joshcryer
(62,536 posts)I mean, if Putin would go after the alcoholism problem, which is the number one killer of males there, then they wouldn't be suffering a population decline as large as they have.
LisaL
(47,420 posts)
yurbud
(39,405 posts)amandabeech
(9,893 posts)How in the world can we really act independently with respect to China when they manufacture so much of what is on our store shelves and in our workplaces?
We are in the same place with respect to China that the Europeans are with respect to Russian gas and oil.
reACTIONary
(7,158 posts)... China's exports to America amounted to only about 20% of overall US imports. Most of this is electronic equipment - I bet we could get electronic equipment elsewhere if we really had to. It would be harder on them than it would be on us to forgo that trade.
Europe's dependance on energy, however, is probably of more fundamental importance to them than cheap TVs and stereo sets are to us.
Here is the breakdown:
1. Electronic equipment: $120.4 billion
2. Machines, engines, pumps: $103.3 billion
3. Furniture, lighting, signs: $26.6 billion
4. Toys, games: $22.8 billion
5. Footwear: $17.7 billion
6. Knit or crochet clothing: $16.2 billion
7. Clothing (not knit or crochet): $15.5 billion
8. Plastics: $14 billion
9. Vehicles: $10.5 billion
10. Medical, technical equipment: $9.8 billion
amandabeech
(9,893 posts)From where would the US populace get those items? If the machines used to make them could be moved out of China and reinstalled elsewhere, yes. Otherwise, no.
We were cut out of oil twice by middle eastern problems, and I remember it well. At that time, this country used oil much more for industrial processes and to heat homes, as well as for just about all transportation. And back then, we did not import all our oil from the boycotting nations.
You'd be surprised how a drop of 20% can affect many markets, and just how loud Americans can scream.
politicman
(710 posts)What ever happened to the Obama of 2008 and 2012?
Because this guy is increasingly sounding like the mirror image of Bush.
His 'folks', 'patriots, and 'sanctimonious' comments regarding torture sound like they could have come straight out of Bush's mouth.
His ridiculing of Russia and its economic strength are a page taken straight out of Bush's playbook, not the Obama of the past who was always careful not to exacerbate situations.
His silence and even tacit support for Israel during a time when Israel has murdered 1700 civilians and injured 9000 goes beyond even what Bush would allow Israel to do before putting intense pressure to stop the killing.
Seriously, I start asking myself if this is the real Obama or whether he has been replaced by a cyborg controlled by Bush, Cheney and their cabal?
(by that last comment, I am not suggesting Obama has been 'literally' replaced, I am suggesting that the cabal has somehow managed to control Obama the same way that they would control a cyborg)
yurbud
(39,405 posts)I think Bush got the mood from the elite because they could credibly claim he was a retarded, rogue, loose cannon--even though hood recklessness was in pursuit of the same general goals of Papa Bush and Bubba Clinton.
reACTIONary
(7,158 posts)... but, hey, so does Pakistan.
Tom Ripley
(4,945 posts)
Wolf Frankula
(3,832 posts)Basing their economy on the sale of pieces to paper to each other?
Wolf
How about all those nuclear weapons it has? Obviously it made them.
shenmue
(38,597 posts)And some pretty good chocolate.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts) DocwillCuNow
(162 posts)an excellent ice skater if you didn't see her, be humbled by her flawless skill.
amandabeech
(9,893 posts)There were some iffy calls on under-rotation of jumps and of wrong-edge take-offs for a couple of Sotnikova's jumps that really knock points off the tech mark. There were even more questions about the sudden escalation of the presentation mark for Sotnikova at Euros and then at the Olys. Have you skated yourself or followed skating very closely for a good length of time?
Sotnikova showed early promise as a junior, but did not place all that well through in the senior ranks until this year. We'll see if she is a one-hit wonder or not. It takes more than one Olympic or World gold to be a true champion.
Yu Na Kim retired after the Olympics with an Olympic Gold, an Olympic Silver, two (?) World Championships and skads of other lesser medals. She leaves gigantic skates to be filled. Sotnikova may fill those skates or she may not.
The Russians who won pairs, Volosozhar & Trankov, proved themselves over and over, and deserve considerable respect in an extremely difficult skating discipline. Better that you put up their win rather than Sotnikova's.
Response to amandabeech (Reply #40)
amandabeech This message was self-deleted by its author.
LisaL
(47,420 posts)amandabeech
(9,893 posts)Liptnitskaya also did well in the junior ranks, but this was her first senior season.
Liptnitskaya has papers that say that she is 16, but she looks not more than 11, maybe 12. There are many young female skaters who do really well before the puberty monster hits them. And that's what it is called in skating: the puberty monster. The puberty monster turns skinny children into shapely young women. The physics of jumping and spinning do not allow for shapely young women to do the same things that they could do when they looked like children. Some skaters manage to make the transition--usually they are naturally fairly thin with "conservative" figures. Sotnikova, the gold medalist, at 17, has pretty much made the transition. Yu Na Kim, in her early 20s made it. Both had some really awkward years in between as they adjusted to a new center of gravity and a totally new body. Many do not make that transition. Liptnitskaya will grow in height and she will put on weight, which is healthy. What I don't want to see happening to Lip is what happened to Oksana Baiul in that her coach limited her calorie intake very severely and did not demand that what she ate was healthy so that she grew 3 inches and put on NO WEIGHT until after the next Olympics. When Baiul finally started eating, she had difficult turning the most difficult triples. And of course she fell apart psychologically due to her life story. It was awful to see, and still is. She is currently coaching in the NYC area.
Baiul did have skills on the ice other than jumping however. She was an excellent spinner and her basic skating skills were unmatched. I saw her in pro comps twice and I could just watch her stroke around the rink and do simply moves for hours. She was that good. She could also interpret just about any type of music. Had she not had a psychological meltdown, she would have had a much longer pro career and a better life now.
Lipnitskaya is not known for her musicality nor for her performance abilities. Her coach and choreographer were able to find her suitable music for the Olympic season that masked her weaknesses in these areas. We will see if Lipnitskaya skates as well in coming years as she did in her short program at the Olympics and at the World Championships. It is not a given, and I have seen too many very promising female skaters just disappear from the sport after a triumph in a child's body.
I stand by what I said about the pairs, however, which is a traditional Russian strength.
DocwillCuNow
(162 posts)
potone
(1,701 posts)At a time when all the news is so bleak, it is a joy to start the day by seeing a performance of such perfection and beauty!
Xolodno
(7,349 posts)Nothing significant yet...their auto industry is only the 15th largest right now and they are experiencing a growth in the electronics industry. And they are competing against the USA in the arms industry again...But when Hitler invaded they converted all their tractor factories to tank factories and due to the cold war and Yeltsin smoking the IMF loans crack...kind of hard to change and move in new directions. But they are indeed developing outside of energy exports...they aren't part of the BRIC for nothing.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)enterprises? Everywhere I go in and around the DC Metro area there are Russian families and in our local supermarket you hear very little English spoken but a hell of a lot of Russian and French.
Xolodno
(7,349 posts)...because I didn't say things were "great" and actually implied they have a long way to go...as does the other BRIC nations of Brazil, India and China...of which you will see a lot of here in the US as well. My point was they do have industry outside of energy just not at a huge level yet.
mwooldri
(10,817 posts)Obama saying that Russia doesn't make anything is patently false. However he does have a point when it comes to consumer goods. Name me a Russian car brand that sells worldwide. Any Russian clothes brands? How about Russian consumer electronics or white goods? When was the last time you logged on and posted on VK?
The last thing that I know I acquired that came from that part of the world was so long ago it was called the USSR. A nice domino set with "Made in the USSR" on the lid. It's possible it was made in Russia. It was also a gift to me - early 80's I believe.
840high
(17,196 posts)xmas gifts. Beautiful.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)http://www.furhatworld.com/russian-hats-c-42_45.html
Now, most Russian imports into the US tend to be raw materials:
http://www.worldstopexports.com/russias-top-10-exports/2350
http://business.export.by/en/?act=s_docs&mode=view&id=9590&doc=64
Here is a paper on Russian Exports, and blames the lack of manufacturing exports on the "Dutch Disease" i.e. Russia is so rich with resources that it can export, that such exports keeps the currency artificially high so that manufacturing is to expensive to export. i.e. to much money from the sale of raw material for manufactured goods to be sold at a low enough price to exported. This is a common problem with countries that export a lot of raw material, mostly oil, but in the case of Russia other raw materials AND oil:
http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/59/04/49/PDF/wp200622.pdf
Do to the "Dutch Diereses" even investors from overseas wants to invest in companies that manufacturer for the domestic Russia market NOT for export.
More on the Dutch Disease:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_disease
"In economics, the Dutch disease is the apparent relationship between the increase in the economic development of natural resources and a decline in the manufacturing sector (or agriculture). The mechanism is that an increase in revenues from natural resources (or inflows of foreign aid) will make a given nation's currency stronger compared to that of other nations (manifest in an exchange rate), resulting in the nation's other exports becoming more expensive for other countries to buy, and imports becoming cheaper, making the manufacturing sector less competitive. While it most often refers to natural resource discovery, it can also refer to "any development that results in a large inflow of foreign currency, including a sharp surge in natural resource prices, foreign assistance, and foreign direct investment".[1]
The term was coined in 1977 by The Economist to describe the decline of the manufacturing sector in the Netherlands after the discovery of a large natural gas field in 1959.[2]
Thus because Russia can export oil and other raw material, it prices itself out of the market for manufactured goods and thus other exports are minimal compared to the sale of Raw Material (This is also one of the problems of Venezuela).
IkeRepublican
(406 posts)It happens from time to time.
amandabeech
(9,893 posts)His model was Finland.
I believe that Henry Kissinger said that same thing.
Frankly, I thought that both these guys would be more hawkish. Older but wiser, I think.
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)https://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/2277
freshwest
(53,661 posts)I wouldn's discount their employment with the oil and gas, though, which has seen many regions through tough days. Even though in the long run, it's not a good thing.
Russia still has a good educational system from what I know of people from there. Their main trouble has been holding in place areas that wanted to leave what was formerly in the USSR or were client states.
Now Putin appears to be trying to stir up national pride with his actions. Obama's not into that except on the domestic front, he's been in an unusual pacifist mode for a POTUS and thus is widely hated by those who profit.
I expect he means overall that Russia is not accepting the fact that the rest of the world is sick of the superpowers. The USA, Russia, China, the UK and France and other nuclear powers still have an important role to play, and as long as peace is the result, they will be accepted.
The problem I see is that peace in the terms we ususally think of it, that is, an absence of warfare like WW2, Vietnam, Iraq, etc. does not mean people will not be oppressed and slaughtered.
Neither has the reverse always been true, but the players we see running with no checks are now seen as worse. The major powers seem to be content to let the lesser powers and those in civil wars do as they please to each other.
JMHO. YMMV.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)Sure Putin is a jerk, but there is no need to insult Russia (even if what he said was mostly true).
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)this will make Putin more popular in Russia and make Russians rally around him. He will now use this to fire up his people sort of like coaches use opposing team's trash talk to fire up their players.
FormerOstrich
(2,885 posts)Kaspersky is a Russian company. The worlds largest privately-held software developer of security/threat management systems.
Think about that a moment. Kaspersky is running on countless servers and workstations worldwide.
Not long ago Russia's parliament passed a law requiring internet companies to store citizens' personal data.
As Russia seeks to gain greater access to user data isn't Kaspersky uniquely positioned to do great surveillance?
Never mind. Software isn't a manufactured good.
madokie
(51,076 posts)kicking ass and taking names
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)of vodka. Keeps 'em warm in winter.
Kuroneko
(42 posts)Going back to earth without russian spaceship will really be a challenge.
And by the way how things are going in Libya since the USA have supported the rebel to overthrow the government?
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)over Obama's comments and the lack of context they are given. The full quote of what was said about Russia with what was reported being emphasized by me:
Mr Obama: I don’t feel let down. We had a very productive relationship with President Medvedev. We got a lot of things done that we needed to get done. Russia I think has always had a Janus-like quality, both looking east and west, and I think President Putin represents a deep strain in Russia that is probably harmful to Russia over the long term, but in the short term can be politically popular at home and very troublesome abroad.
But I do think it’s important to keep perspective. Russia doesn’t make anything. Immigrants aren’t rushing to Moscow in search of opportunity. The life expectancy of the Russian male is around 60 years old. The population is shrinking. And so we have to respond with resolve in what are effectively regional challenges that Russia presents. We have to make sure that they don’t escalate where suddenly nuclear weapons are back in the discussion of foreign policy. And as long as we do that, then I think history is on our side.
I find it amazing how well the media has duped some DUers with their Fox like reporting. (Note: I am not referring to the OP, but responses to the OP).
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130912/183384782/Russia-Has-Second-Largest-Number-of-Immigrants--UN-Study.html
http://www.gks.ru/bgd/regl/b13_12/IssWWW.exe/stg/d01/5-01.htm
http://www.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat_main/rosstat/en/figures/population/
Cha
(318,868 posts)and Russia whether they "make anything" or not is.. his homophobic, journalist stomping, and internet censoring. Who would flock to that?
Not those who believe in free speech or human rights.
thanks, david
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)World bank.
Men have lower expectancy in Russia - alcoholism/smoking is leading suspect.
Or perhaps Mr. Obama forgets even Russia has internet access.
Cha
(318,868 posts)the internet, stomping on journalists who don't kow tow to him.. and his homophobic anti-Gay policies.
Fuck Putin and his lying ass.
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)Most Democrats posting here live in the US, so Mr. Obama's lies are more relevant to us. If you live in Russia, you have my sympathies.
Cha
(318,868 posts)internet only see what he wants them to see.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)
Igel
(37,516 posts)And they can be spun to mean something false.
Throughout the '90s life expectancy for Russian males plummeted. It was below 60--on average--at one point. This, of course, wasn't going to be true necessarily for the 3-year-old boy, but because the population of males that were in their 50s and 60s was shrinking quickly. Fat, drunk, smokers with a lot of stress who ate horrible food and who did stupid things. Drunkenness in Russia is a lot more dangerous than it often is in the US: You get drunk, sit on a park bench to sleep it off, and a few hours later you're frozen until spring.
The younger males have a problem with STDs, including HIV, as well as drugs. As an undergrad in the '70s and '80s as well as a grad student in the '90s, the general attitude was that summer school in Russia was a good way to relieve lots of sexual tension because the girls/women had what could be called a very, very laid back attitude towards sexual activity. Unlike American girls, who were frigid in the late '70s and in the '90s. ("Didn't have sex even by the end of the first date? Amazing!"
Cynicism and ennui do that to people.
Since then the economy's improved, a different cohort of males reached that age (over-eating, over-drinking, smoking, diet aren't dictated by culture and are largely *mindset* dependent), and the puritanical (okay, Orthodox) government has put in place all kinds of measures to limit and discourage smoking and drinking, even though Orthodoxy never made a big deal about such things for, oh, centuries. Even if both are still problems. Average life expectancy for males in Russia is now about 64, the 'nets tell me.
The changes in life expectancy for women didn't change all that much over the years.
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)People should be more interested in why the US (exceptional at everything) is behind Japan and France. Russians, like Republicans don't need our help solving their problems. Americans, like Democrats, have enough of our own to keep us busy.
Complaining about the other side doesn't count as improving the quality of life of your own.
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/radio_broadcast/no_program/274709350/
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Dude, go somewhere else. You sound trollish in nature and don't know what the hell you are talking about.
MattSh
(3,714 posts)Russia’s jobless rate fell to a record in May as businesses raised salaries faster than economists predicted, helping stem a three-month slowdown in real-wage growth.
Unemployment slid to 4.9 percent in May from 5.3 percent a month earlier, the Federal Statistics Service in Moscow said today in an e-mailed statement. The median estimate of 16 economists surveyed by Bloomberg was 5.2 percent. Wages adjusted for inflation grew 5 percent after a revised 3.2 percent gain in April, topping the median forecast for a 1.5 percent increase in a separate poll.
“Such low unemployment while the economy is stagnating is caused by the worker deficit,” Oleg Kouzmin, an economist at Renaissance Capital in Moscow, said by e-mail. “We see a lack of employees even in sectors with high productivity.”
The unemployment drop is a sign of a growing labor shortage at a time the economy is beset by sanctions imposed by the U.S. and its European allies in the wake of President Vladimir Putin’s takeover of Crimea. Historically low unemployment is hobbling growth, with the demographic trends creating a long-term drag on the economy, the central bank said June 16.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-20/russia-s-unemployment-plunges-to-record-low-as-wages-grow.html
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Use the published title of the story as the title of the discussion thread.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)in the East and suffered immeasurably in doing so.
Indeed, from FDR to the US Civil Rights struggle to now, Obama has shown either ignorance of or disinterest towards history.
And American Presidents do not speak as though they were Op-Ed writers.
Igel
(37,516 posts)"The" nation was the USSR. Not Russia. It's a nice bit of revisionism--Putin's, actually--that it was all Russia's doing. That's mostly because it's necessary to say everybody else is either useless and Russians did all the real work or they're dangerous and Russians tolerated them.
Moreover, if Hitler hadn't had a lot of his forces tied up in the West and in N. Africa, Russia would have had a harder time.
And a second "moreover," the West while it was doing nothing was shipping food, supplies, and armaments to Russia at precisely the time Russia's western side was occupied and their industries were being dismantled and reassembled or when they were building capacity to produce all those katyushas and tanks that they'd have come on line ... years after the war started.
It's a bit of chauvinism and paranoia that says the West helped Hitler in order to destroy the Soviet Union, and sat back until it was clear they needed to fight if only to keep the West out of the Russians' hands; and more chauvinism to utterly dismiss the millions of non-Russian "Soviet citizens" killed, many of them in battle against fascism, in order to make themselves look good and those they consider inferior look, well, like inferiors.
Russia did suffer immeasurably. Ukraine lost a greater percentage and possibly number of people, between civilians and soldiers, even discounting the raging hordes of thousands of anti-Soviet fighters. (Out of a population of what, 25 million? Sorry, that's a rounding error.)
Obama not infrequently gets his historical facts wrong. When speaking off the cuff, he's even gotten facts about the Constitution wrong. And for the economy he often speaks in bullet points lacking a lot of useful detail to place them in context, but with anecdotes so you think you have a lot of context. He likes anecdotes.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)AND WTH DOES YOUR THIRD PARAGRAPH MEAN, AND DO YOU HAVE STOCK IN STRAW-MEN?!.
As for "speaking off the cuff," is someone forcing this on Obama? After JFK and Clinton, I'd think Obama would either not speak so, or read up ahead of time.
pampango
(24,692 posts)
http://www.chinausatraders.com/blog/
Russia's main exports are: petroleum and petroleum products, natural gas, metals, wood and wood products, chemicals, and a wide variety of civilian and military manufactures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Russia
US' main exports are: Capital goods, 28%; industrial supplies and materials (except oil fuels), 25%; consumer goods (except automotive), 12%; automotive vehicles and components, 9.4%; food, feed, and beverages, 8.6%; fuel oil and petroleum products, 7.6%; aircraft and components, 6%; Other, 4%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_States
candelista
(1,986 posts)Just saying.
Throd
(7,208 posts)jakeXT
(10,575 posts)When everyone is saying it, does it become true ?
Obama’s statement is a perfect example of why I so frequently write about a topic as seemingly obscure and boring as Russian demography: people from the US political elite almost always make huge mistakes when talking about it. Russia’s population is not shrinking, it is growing. The Russian population isn’t just growing in 2014, it also grew in 2013. And 2012. And 2011. And 2010. And 2009. Unless you get into a Bill Clinton-like debate over the meaning of the word “is,” it’s impossible to argue that Russia’s population is shrinking. It was shrinking in the past and it is likely to shrink in the future, but it is not shrinking at the present moment. Not a very complicated concept.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2014/08/04/3-things-barack-obama-got-wrong-about-russia/
Sissyk
(12,665 posts)One of the guidelines for LBN is that the title must match the source.