Why russians are so evil?

Why russians are so evil?

  1. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    But that was the USSR, not Russia

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Moreover, none of that was either Russia or the USSR after the 'Stans got independence in '91. It's probably cheap anti-Russian propaganda that takes something mostly done by the family of the Uzbek president post-independence and tries to spin it into Russia... le bad!

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >nooooooooooo muh environmentttt!!!
        Degenerate bourgeois mentality. Nature is to be dominated by man and adapted to his needs as he sees fit.

        >By liking the USSR you support the actions of post-communist nepotists in post-USSR Uzbekistan
        Most sane anti-Russian.

        ... when neither surrounding country has been part of the USSR for 30 years?

        The Aral Sea dried up over the course of decades, most of it after the fall of the USSR.

        If your analogy was accurate, the Uzbekistan would not only be aware of the bomb but also the ones who blew up the house while profiting from it.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea#Irrigation_canals
        The Aral Sea evaporated because Russian bureaucrats sent from Moscow decided to replace the local fishing economy with a cotton farming economy by redirecting the flow of all the rivers that fed into it. The Russians knew exactly what they were doing and what would happen to the Aral, and they made no attempt to hide that.
        >"It was part of the five-year plans, approved by the council of ministers and the Politburo. Nobody on a lower level would dare to say a word contradicting those plans, even if it was the fate of the Aral Sea."
        Ironically

        >nooooooooooo muh environmentttt!!!
        Degenerate bourgeois mentality. Nature is to be dominated by man and adapted to his needs as he sees fit.

        has the mentality down pat of the officials of the time:
        >Some Soviet experts apparently considered the Aral to be "nature's error", and a Soviet engineer said in 1968, "it is obvious to everyone that the evaporation of the Aral Sea is inevitable."
        The only reason the Aral Sea did not evaporate under the Soviets (heirs to the Russian Empire) is because they collapsed and splintered before the damage was irreparable. From the 90s onward, the Uzbeks had two options: undo four decades of cotton infrastructure to save their already crumbling fishing economy or watch their largest water resource disappear to save their cotton economy.
        Now their largest contributor to south central Asia is a Mad-Max wasteland populated by brutalist Soviet architecture.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Left: Aral sea 1989
          Right: Aral sea 2014

          I accept your concession.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not even really sure you read my post

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Didn't read the post
            Vatnik Zoomer attention span.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            >OP accidentally proves the stans were better under Moscow rule
            Uh oh!

            >doesn't understand how evaporation works

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Severely underestimating the participation of non-Russians in USSR politics/bureaucracy after 1920

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >most multicultural country in modern history
          >people from literally who ethnicities had some of the highest ranking positions
          >it wuz muh russians
          Typical amerifat logic to blame everything USSR on Russians because their mcgrease brains can't comprehend that 1 country can have ethnicities instead of all being mutted into a singular frankenstein monstrosity. I don't know exactly the situation with Aral sea but I know about the one for invasion of Warsaw pact Czecho-Slovakia, which you amerifats alongside your judeo-Polish trannies like to spread around as a Russian thing.
          >18 august 1968 meeting of the polytburo of the highest Soviet took place in Moscow
          >after a short evaluation of the situation the voting about invasion took place
          >12 members of the polytburo were present, voting ended in 10:2 in favour of the invasion
          >7 Ukrainians, 1 Belarussian, 1 Kazakh and 1 Kyrgyz voted in favour of
          >1 Russian voted against
          >1 Lithuanian passed on the voting
          And here's your Russian bureaucrats, you dumb retarded nagger.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          I can't find any rivers from Russia feeding the Aral before or After the canal projects (http://www.cawater-info.net/aral/index_e.htm, https://www.freeworldmaps.net/asia/central/centralasia-physical-map.jpg). Correct me if I'm wrong about that, but if I'm right, how many decades before it becomes the responsibility of the Stans in the Aral's drainage basin, rather than of Russia? What, another 3? Or is it Russia's fault how the Stans run themselves in perpetuity, but also Russia doesn't have a right to govern them? Is it a sort of quantum state where Russia is simultaneously responsible for everything that happens in the Stans but also needs to respect their sovereignty at the same time... ?
          I could be wrong, but it feels to me like this is typical anti-Russia motivated reasoning that's come out of the West a lot lately because the Westoid fears the Russgolian warrior. Because Russians represent a sort of existential threat as powerful Europeans who are at the same time not Western and even *gasp* Asian.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Cope.

        Our black trans granddaughters will twerk on top of Lenin's mausoleum.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      And modern russians view themselves as the heirs of the USSR

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >By liking the USSR you support the actions of post-communist nepotists in post-USSR Uzbekistan
        Most sane anti-Russian.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >put bomb in house
          >Sell the house
          >Bomb goes off and kills the new inhabitants
          >"Wasn't my fault, I didn't own the house when it blew up"

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            The Aral Sea dried up over the course of decades, most of it after the fall of the USSR.

            If your analogy was accurate, the Uzbekistan would not only be aware of the bomb but also the ones who blew up the house while profiting from it.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Most literate vatnik

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        According the USA and NATO Russia isn't the USSR

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Looks at the difference between 1999 and 2022.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        ... when neither surrounding country has been part of the USSR for 30 years?

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      The USSR was just Russia and its wrangled tards.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      And modern russians view themselves as the heirs of the USSR

      There is literally no difference between modern day Russia with late cold war USSR.
      There is absolute 0 meaningful distinction between the two, this war was just a pitiful attempt form Putin to save a country which's death has been sealed for almost 100 years.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Except for all the non-Russians in the USSR

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Why do russians larp as the USSR all the time then? Waving USSR flags around and using phrases like we will repeat?

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Because it's a LARP

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Russia died in 1917, the rotting corpse today is just a reduced ussr

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Tell Russia to stop waving the gay communist flag around then

  2. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >nooooooooooo muh environmentttt!!!
    Degenerate bourgeois mentality. Nature is to be dominated by man and adapted to his needs as he sees fit.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      If you are not a good steward to the land, your shit out of luck.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >>Be man
      >>In your hubris claim doninion on earth.
      4th largest lake for le short term profit

      MFW when you destroy the feedback that feed the water to your crops. Ruining you home permantly. Changeing fertile soil in to a sand desert

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Be commie
      >Don't understand the ideas of cooperation and long term goals
      Thanks God for making me a free marketer.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Degenerate bourgeois mentality. Nature is to be dominated by man and adapted to his needs as he sees fit.
      Man isn't competent enough to correct any mistakes that may arise with that mindset but sure go ahead and double down on bravado.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >[

        >Man isn't competent enough to correct any mistakes that may arise with that mindset
        Source?

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Source?
          The decline of fish population for one and the sorry ass attempt to mitigate it with farm raised fish.

  3. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    It was USSR, for all the difference it realistically makes, but they didn't destroy it intentionally, it was through gross mismanagement and one guy with weird grudge against it, although I might be remembering the last part wrong

  4. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Uzbekistan can overturn it any moment.
    Of course, it will ruin their irrigation system and with that - a cotton produce, the only export of their useless country other than fucking street cleaners, but hey, they have means to restore ecology.

  5. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Kind of sad the stand could literally reverse this tomorrow but but King Cotton does crazy things to people's minds, just look what it did to the South.

  6. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    FUCKING SILT naggerS RUINING EVERYTHING AGAIN

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >humans begin to grow crops near a local stream's end
      >OH GOOOOOD I'M SIIIIIIILTIIIIIIIIING
      >three hundred years later
      >village is 150 yards inland in the middle of the desert

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Explain exactly what the lake was worth for without sounding like a white woman in her 20s that is sexually attracted to fishes

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        You should watch the video in the OP, it gives an explanation.
        >lake has temperature moderating effect on the region, keeping it warmer in winter and cooler in summer, so its not literally Saharah; no lake means it turns into a real desert
        >cold northern wind passes over the lake, which evaporates rapidly, and then crashes into the mountains south, creating the only regular rain in the region; no lake means no such rain
        >a huge lake entirely evaporating means all the chemical pollution and accumulated salt is now dry on land, and the northern wind will pick it up to carry it over the cotton and the people
        Unfortunate.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >lake has temperature moderating effect on the region
          Bullshit, it is/was an incredibly shallow lake.
          Please provide actual proof not a stupid youtube video.
          Also the region was always desertic, the temperature being milder doesn't raise precipations.
          >cold northern wind passes over the lake, which evaporates rapidly, and then crashes into the mountains south, creating the only regular rain in the region; no lake means no such rain
          Is this what actually happened?
          >a huge lake
          It was not huge, you disingenous retard. The entire reason it was destroyed by human usage is that it was a very shallow lake.
          >a huge lake entirely evaporating means all the chemical pollution and accumulated salt is now dry on land, and the northern wind will pick it up to carry it over
          Source?

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            >the third largest lake in the world
            >"It was not huge, you disingenous retard"
            Source is Google, btw. As in, look up these material facts. I charge by the hour for private lessons.

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              Largest by area, by volume it was twelveth.

              >The Aral Sea is considered an example of ecosystem collapse.[41] The ecosystems of the Aral Sea and the river deltas feeding into it have been nearly destroyed, largely because of the drastically higher salinity than seawater.[6] The receding sea has left huge plains covered with salt and toxic chemicals from weapons testing, industrial projects, and pesticides and fertilizer runoff. Due to the shrinking water source and worsening water and soil quality, pesticides were increasingly used from the 1960s to raise cotton yield, which further polluted the water with toxins (e.g. DDT).[42] Industrial pollution also resulted in PCB and heavy metal contamination.[43]
              >Due to the minimal amount of water left in the Aral sea, concentrations of these pollutants have risen drastically in remaining water and dry beds. This results in wind-borne toxic dust that spreads quite widely. People living in the lower parts of the river basins and former shore zones ingest pollutants through local drinking water and inhalation of contaminated dust.[44] Furthermore, due to absorption by plants and livestock, toxins have entered the food chain; many of these bioaccumulate and are not easily broken down/excreted by the liver and kidneys.[43] Inhabitants of the surrounding areas often suffer from a shortage of fresh water and health problems are widespread, including high rates of certain forms of cancer and lung diseases. Respiratory illnesses, including tuberculosis (most of which is drug resistant) and cancer, digestive disorders, anaemia, and infectious diseases are common ailments. Liver, kidney, and eye problems can also be attributed to the toxic dust storms. All of this has resulted in an unusually high fatality rate among vulnerable age groups: child mortality stood at 75 per 1,000 in 2009, when maternity death stood at 12 in every 1,000.[45][46]
              Siltnaggers will tell you the desolation of your ancestral homelands is necessary while they poison you
              All for King Cotton

              >Liver, kidney, and eye problems can also be attributed to the toxic dust storms. All of this has resulted in an unusually high fatality rate among vulnerable age groups: child mortality stood at 75 per 1,000 in 2009, when maternity death stood at 12 in every 1,000.[
              What's their control group?

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >What's their control group?
                ...presumably the national average?

                The real question is why are you simping for Soviet mismanagement? A mortality rate of 75 per 1,000 is nearly 1 in 10, that's some turn of the century industrialization shit.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >A mortality rate of 75 per 1,000 is nearly 1 in 10, that's some turn of the century industrialization shit.
                Child mortality of 7.5% is low by pre-industrial standard, very low in fact.
                Again, what's the control group and how does it compare?

  7. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >the science is settled, turning the region into a cotton farmland will not cause the Aral to dry up and the region to aridify in an ecological disaster
    >if you disagree you're anti-science and you'll go to a gulag
    History of politically sponsored academia in every field, no matter the year.

  8. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not like this liberalist bros... Not like this...

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      I will kill all silters

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Silting is based when it happens to artificial lakes. KILL ALL DAMnaggerS

  9. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Cotton is the root of all evil

  10. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >the same video but Russia bad

    Why is he like this

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because 4 years ago climate change was the big current thing (see WE on the video title, implying humanity was collectively responsibly for the aral sea)
      Now Russia bad is the big trend

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      One video is 6 minutes, the other 26. I'm guessing he got better at making these, so he wants to revisit his old material to update it to his new standard.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        And apparently discovered Russia was responsible for everything bad that happened in the Soviet Union?

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Uzbeks aren't the only people there. The water situation is recreating that hated parable The Tragedy of the Commons. If Uzbeks scale down, the other *stans will just scale up. All available water will be used regardless.
        The "solution" is for Uzbekistan to invade and conquer the other *stans on the rivers, and once in control of the whole lot, to then commit economic suicide by reducing it's primary industry.
        Or China. Or Russia. Or a global government. But it won't happen during this warlords period of petty states.

        Why would they?
        Russia wants a weak broken central Asia. Don't need much water to use it's mineral wealth.

        fur ants

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          fur you

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        A new emotive narrative.

  11. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    They arent inherently evil they're just dumb as shit

  12. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Getting raped by the Mongols changed something in them. It made them the way they are.

  13. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't the sea by itself a result of destruction of some drainage systems in the middle ages?

  14. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    A lake existing is morally neutral, and removing it is morally neutral too.
    If not, why aren't you making more lakes right now? Are you evil?

    It is shit for the local economy though. Central Asia is a future desert. Very inland, entirely reliant on glacier melt for river water, and on intense agriculture for money. Bad combo.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Uzbeks needs to find something other than cotton to export if they want aral sea to exist and it's not that easy

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Uzbeks aren't the only people there. The water situation is recreating that hated parable The Tragedy of the Commons. If Uzbeks scale down, the other *stans will just scale up. All available water will be used regardless.
        The "solution" is for Uzbekistan to invade and conquer the other *stans on the rivers, and once in control of the whole lot, to then commit economic suicide by reducing it's primary industry.
        Or China. Or Russia. Or a global government. But it won't happen during this warlords period of petty states.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Or the countries of the region can work together to revive the northern river reversal project.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why would they?
            Russia wants a weak broken central Asia. Don't need much water to use it's mineral wealth.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Uzbeks scale down, the other *stans will just scale up.
          I can't think if how they could do that. Can you please elaborate a bit about how exactly it would work?

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            Rivers flow

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              They draw water from the rivers that fill the lake, not from the lake itself. The lake is shrinking, because its in a desert and evaporates fast, and not enough river flow reaches it to replenish it.

              Yes, rivers flow in certain places. I don't get how one country would use the water from another country's river.

              But, it doesn't seem like there is anything to save anymore, and this isn't that unusual either, what makes it unusual is that the rivers ended up in a lake which dried up, while it doesn't cause any visible effects when a river (I think it's Colorado for example) no longer reaches the ocean.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            They draw water from the rivers that fill the lake, not from the lake itself. The lake is shrinking, because its in a desert and evaporates fast, and not enough river flow reaches it to replenish it.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Changing the size of a water body is… Le BAD (when China or Russia do it mostly)
      Tbh in Australia our greens party also has a psychotic foundational obsession with stopping Le dams, which means that we continue to have both flood areas and deserts, huge rivers in places and vast unfarmed areas covering most of the country
      What makes the situation even odder is that we already have a working case example that you can literally drill a hole from the wet side of our eastern mountains to their dry west side and it greened the deserts of a huge swathe of Australia
      But the political will seems blocked by the greens

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Oh fuck off, while yes the Greens bitch and moan, they haven't had the power you're claiming in the past. What fucks us most is water theft allowed by the Coaliation by cotton farms in the Murray-Darling Basin and nearby rivers, making rivers less stable so when the we do go through La Nina like now, all the banks fucking burst and are filled with black water.
        The best you can do is turn the Outback in grazing land by introducing megafauna like cattle to more parts in a proper way so that they aid flora growth.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Changing the size of a water body is… Le BAD (when China or Russia do it mostly)
      Tbh in Australia our greens party also has a psychotic foundational obsession with stopping Le dams, which means that we continue to have both flood areas and deserts, huge rivers in places and vast unfarmed areas covering most of the country
      What makes the situation even odder is that we already have a working case example that you can literally drill a hole from the wet side of our eastern mountains to their dry west side and it greened the deserts of a huge swathe of Australia
      But the political will seems blocked by the greens

      Environmentalists operate 90% of the time by the naturalistic fallacy*, sometimes that fallacious thinking leads to correct conclusions but often times it doesn't.

      *only insofar as nature is concerned and not humans, at that point humans are a asexual blank slate.

  15. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    uzbeks destroy everything they touch; its in their nature, created as they were in the deepest of chingiz' dungeons, twisted from the fair form the sarts and aryans of old once bore, into dark shapes, clay forming stumpy, short bodies of what was once crafted by ahura mazda of the stone as the sly, low vulgarity driving the infernal mind of the fell men, so that they would by nature seek to corrupt the world of men, for they were crossbred with demons from the depths of the altai and imbued with the dark soul of their great Khan, and to this day the memory-wind of the frosty steppe breathes into them a fetid unlife, that drives their envy and their rage, to fuel such rapine urges as to empty the inner sea, and drag salt across once fertile lands to spite and haunt those arya have had not yet departed to the havens in the west, a reminder to all of arda marred...

  16. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    That title and thumbnail are very amusing to me, imagine a video being all like
    >how the Brazilians (not the state, not the government or corporations, the people) are DESTROYING the Amazon rainforest
    Dude doesn't even try to hide it's some war-time propaganda shit

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      One day that homosexual might actually do that, fuck gringos.

  17. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Aral Se-

  18. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    That looks much worse than it is and blaming Soviet irrigation projects too much is a bit misguided. You're not looking at an ancient lake disappearing. You're looking at a formerly populated plain next to a lake not being flooded anymore. There had been ancient irrigation systems there for literal millennia. The eastern part of the Aral sea was an area that was flooded when those irrigation systems fell into disrepair and failed following the 5th century Hun invasions that depopulated the region. Then there was a brief reconstruction period where some of the systems were rebuilt, the Aral sea receded again, and then the Mongol invasions destroyed THAT and it was flooded once more.

    The "big" Aral sea was, in a way, a post-apocalyptic landscape. There are ruins of settlements all over what used to be the eastern part of the Aral sea, which was very shallow in any case (that's why it receded so quickly). The western part that survives now is the actual "proper" lake, which is quite deep.

    By redirecting the water for agriculture once more the Soviets restored the Aral sea closer to the shape in which it spent much of its time in the past several thousand years, when the area wasn't depopulated by brutal invaders.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      10/10

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Either the best joke ITT, or the worst post ITT.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      nothing that you said is true, the Aral was not a product of the destruction of some ancient system, it formed at least 2.6 million years ago

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        2.6 million years ago there weren't humans around. The Aral sea has spent most of the last five thousand years in its current "small" form, partly because of natural variation, but also because diverting the Jaxartes for irrigation is the most obvious thing to do and every organized civilization in the area did it. In historic terms it was only in periods after a total economic breakdown (Huns, Mongols) that the Aral sea became big. We have both clear geologic evidence for this, and written records about both the Huns and the Mongols deliberately destroying the infrastructure and flooding the area, and even medieval Muslim texts bragging about how they've managed to rebuild some of the infrastructure and how the Aral sea is receding.

        It's only drooling retards whose consciousness jumps from 2.6 million years ago to the 1960s that think the Soviets destroyed 2.6 million years of natural beauty.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      2.6 million years ago there weren't humans around. The Aral sea has spent most of the last five thousand years in its current "small" form, partly because of natural variation, but also because diverting the Jaxartes for irrigation is the most obvious thing to do and every organized civilization in the area did it. In historic terms it was only in periods after a total economic breakdown (Huns, Mongols) that the Aral sea became big. We have both clear geologic evidence for this, and written records about both the Huns and the Mongols deliberately destroying the infrastructure and flooding the area, and even medieval Muslim texts bragging about how they've managed to rebuild some of the infrastructure and how the Aral sea is receding.

      It's only drooling retards whose consciousness jumps from 2.6 million years ago to the 1960s that think the Soviets destroyed 2.6 million years of natural beauty.

      Based.

  19. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >The Aral Sea is considered an example of ecosystem collapse.[41] The ecosystems of the Aral Sea and the river deltas feeding into it have been nearly destroyed, largely because of the drastically higher salinity than seawater.[6] The receding sea has left huge plains covered with salt and toxic chemicals from weapons testing, industrial projects, and pesticides and fertilizer runoff. Due to the shrinking water source and worsening water and soil quality, pesticides were increasingly used from the 1960s to raise cotton yield, which further polluted the water with toxins (e.g. DDT).[42] Industrial pollution also resulted in PCB and heavy metal contamination.[43]
    >Due to the minimal amount of water left in the Aral sea, concentrations of these pollutants have risen drastically in remaining water and dry beds. This results in wind-borne toxic dust that spreads quite widely. People living in the lower parts of the river basins and former shore zones ingest pollutants through local drinking water and inhalation of contaminated dust.[44] Furthermore, due to absorption by plants and livestock, toxins have entered the food chain; many of these bioaccumulate and are not easily broken down/excreted by the liver and kidneys.[43] Inhabitants of the surrounding areas often suffer from a shortage of fresh water and health problems are widespread, including high rates of certain forms of cancer and lung diseases. Respiratory illnesses, including tuberculosis (most of which is drug resistant) and cancer, digestive disorders, anaemia, and infectious diseases are common ailments. Liver, kidney, and eye problems can also be attributed to the toxic dust storms. All of this has resulted in an unusually high fatality rate among vulnerable age groups: child mortality stood at 75 per 1,000 in 2009, when maternity death stood at 12 in every 1,000.[45][46]
    Siltnaggers will tell you the desolation of your ancestral homelands is necessary while they poison you
    All for King Cotton

  20. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >use water to grow cotton in the desert
    >this dries the lake
    >wind blows salt over your cotton from the dried parts
    >use more water to wash away the salt
    >this further dries the lake
    >more salty wind
    >more water needed
    >drier lake
    >more salty wind
    Siltbrains see no issue with this.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Can you provide proof that the economic damage offsets the economic gain? If it's so obvious why wouldn't the local governments stop doing it?

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Destroying the planet for short term economic gain is exactly what you'd accuse capitalists of doing, yet you defend it here. Typical tankie shit.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Not sure who you think I am, I'm an anti-"environmentalists"(AKA ignorant people with roastie-level thinking) siltCHAD

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Uzbeks don't give a shit since it's mainly Karakalpaks who live there and they like fucking them over and keeping them poor. Sincerely hope the Karakalpaks use their independence clause soon to save the area.

  21. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    russians ruin everything they touch

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Germany has been doing pretty well after they touched it.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Germany has been doing pretty well after they touched it.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      vgh... the raping fields of 18th century Transoxiana... home

  22. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    American western states want to to the same with great lakes and Mississippi river, just so some snowbird boomers can water thier golf courses

  23. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    eurasianism
    thankfully we're seeing a triumph of ethnic nationalism vs russian eurasianist cosmopolitanism

  24. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Silt bro's
    I don't feel so good
    just remembered I'm 60% water
    The Silt is trying to replace us

  25. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >OP accidentally proves the stans were better under Moscow rule
    Uh oh!

  26. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    IT'S "Why ARE Russians so evil?" YOU FUCKING ESL NITWIT SWINE, I CAN TELL YOU'RE A FOREIGNER EVERY TIME YOU MISPLACE YOUR VERBS YOU FILTHY GERMAN COCKROACH, WHY THE FUCK CAN'T YOU naggerS FIGURE OUT ENGLISH?

  27. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    I just don't know. Perhaps because the invaded Iraq, Syria, Vietnam and other sovereign countries illegally killing millions.
    Oh...wait thats the US

  28. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Please tell me that one day LULZ will stop being flagless /misc/ with dates
    Is that too much to ask for?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *