Putin:

I know you spew nonsense every day, but today's nonsense is particularly nonsensical.
Wrong medicine?

No on this topic he just lives in a fantasy world to justify his love for a murderous dictator

Pray for the rebels, they will still need it

I dont agree with Putin much, but he is not far from the Truth here.

yes of course, Libyan rebels are purely Al Qaeda committing genocide on black africans (besides the ones dancing in the streets with them) and Ghadaffi was a sweet old man who would never hurt his subjects. Got it. Not far from the truth.

I wonder if Gadafi's support for the IRA terrorists provides an explanation for some residual support for him?

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

and more recently

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Colonel-Gaddafi-sent-millions-of-dollars-in-cash-to-Real-IRA-last-June-130553498.html

LOL. So while Fulham would otherwise support Gaddafi because it'd mean he's anti-American, he can't because Gaddafi helped quite a bit in the Irish liberation struggle.

"yes of course, Libyan rebels are purely Al Qaeda committing genocide on black africans (besides the ones dancing in the streets with them) and Ghadaffi was a sweet old man who would never hurt his subjects. Got it. Not far from the truth."

And the whole media and intelligence reports are lying about ethnic cleansing/racist violence because Santa posted a picture and his "common sense" tells him the rebels have their right in the right place but lack discipline and have little to do with Al Qaeda.

Who needs analysis when you have Santa's "gut feeling".

*heart

I am not anti-American, but i can see the writng on the wall. As America spends much more than it can realistically afford on its military and racks up credit with China I am reminded of what Beaverbrook said about WW2:

"The Japanese are our relentless enemies, and the Americans our un-relenting creditors."

Time for the Chinese to send a lorry to collect some gold from Fort Knox I think! Bit like the USS Louisville docking in Simonstown in 1940.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200203/cmhansrd/vo031014/text/31014w06.htm

This extract from Hansard is interesting too, I am somewhat surprised that the UK was still reimbursing the USA as late as 2006!

Right, your absurd sympathies for the Confederacy and 9-11 conspiracy theories aren't anti-Americanism, they're just you hoping America meets Britain's fate.

But anyway, are you going to inject you random anti-Irish tirades in every thread now?

What sympathies for the confederacy, be specific. All I have said is that I believe that tarrifs were a cause of the civil war. Note the ''a'' prefixing cause. Give me the reference where I have expressed any pro-confederate sympathies. My record is there for you to see. Put up or shut up.

I have never posted on 9-11. My record is there for you to see. Give me the reference. Put up or shut up.

Nothing I have said is anti-Irish in any way. I am critical of the IRA and de Valera, together with fascist nut-jobs such as Russel and O'Duffy. That's it. Again my record is there for you to see. Give me the reference. Put up or shut up.

"And the whole media and intelligence reports are lying about ethnic cleansing/racist violence because Santa posted a picture and his "common sense" tells him the rebels have their right in the right place but lack discipline and have little to do with Al Qaeda.

Who needs analysis when you have Santa's "gut feeling". "

As usual our eyes are lying to us and instead Putin's penchant for exaggeration and refusal to back down carry the day.

"Democracies don't go to war. HA! That wasn't even true when i was in college, before Georgia and Russia went to war. Only time i ever really debated my professor in class. "

Russia V Georgia- Russia isn't really a democracy. It's an oligarchy or a one party system run by Putin

Finland V UK- Finland and the UK went to war during WWII, the UK launched a few missiles and Finland backed off. They only declared war so Germany wouldn't feel the need to invade them

Give me an other example. Perhaps it will be disproved at one point, but for now, democracies have not gone to war

Yeah see whenever you point out democracies fighting each other, it's always "they're not really a democracy".

US v UK - war of independence; US v UK war of 1812 (the only two democracies in the world at the time, lol); Spanish-American war; Germany prior to WWI was praised for its democratic constitution by Wilson; the US civil war was between two "elected" governments. The Indo-Pakistan war of 1965 was between two elected governments. The 1999 Kargil war was between two democratic governments at all levels. The Cambodia-Thai skirmish in 2008 was between two democratic governments. Israel invaded Lebanon despite the latter being a democracy in 2006. Indeed Israel fought Lebanon on a state-to-state level in 1947-1948, and again in 1967. The Turkish invasion of Cyprus was a war between democracies. The Polish-Lithuanian war of 1920 was a war between democracies.

The list goes on and on.

"Russia V Georgia- Russia isn't really a democracy. It's an oligarchy or a one party system run by Putin"

Saakashvili came to power thanks to a coup and has rigged elections. Russia is more democratic than Georgia. Russia has a sitting opposition who routinely blasts Putin.

Nice. Apparently Putin is willing to quote from bigoted 'right-wing' sources (americanthinker.com) that he would ordinarily turn up his nose at and condemn anyone else for using. Ain't hypocrisy great.

"All of this is false."

Bullshit. You should stick to preaching the glories of the Marxist ideal to your defenseless undergrads and leave history to the historians. There's a reason you didn't pull this crap from any kind of reputable source.

"Anyway, your Muslims declared scientific materialism to be 'unlawful'"

As do other religious traditions (aside from the Marx cult, of course). So what?

Your first long cite is full of crap and unworthy of response. Your second quote is from Bernard Lewis, who you should know (but apparently don't) is very controversial. I will address it, however, out of respect to Lewis:

"We know of no Muslim scholar or man of letters before the eighteenth century who sought to learn a western language,"

First off, the fact that Lewis did not know of any doesn't mean there weren't any. The lack of knowledge of western languages is largely because Muslims scholars and men of letters had no need to learn a western language; the flow of new knowledge and information was flowing from Islam to the West, like the Canon of Medicine written by Ibn Sina (Avicenna) in the 11th century that was still in use in western medical colleges in the 19th. Muslim rulers, however, did see a benefit to learning western languages - as we learn a few pages later:

"Mehmed II, the conqueror of Constantinople, is said by a contemporary Venetian visitor to have spoken Greek and Slavonic, as well as Turkish. He is also said to have entertained Italian humanists and shown interest in their work, and is accorded by his Greek biographer the title of philhellene."

It is becoming increasingly obvious that Putin is just a troll with a lot of free time and some googling skills.

The United States of America and the Confederate States of America. Both democracies.

The War of 1812 - The US declared war on the British Empire.

American Indian Wars

Yes, he's very controversial for being pro-Turkish and an Armenian genocide denier. The fact that he, one of the most respected historians of Ottoman history, if nothing else, can't seem to find what you claim to be true speaks volumes about the myths we've been told about the Islamic golden age. Lewis specifically mentioned the unnamed Venetian account who says Mehmet II was multilingual.

"It is unlikely the Sultan knew any non-Islamic language, but Greek was in common use among the early Ottomans, and Slavonic was widespread among the new recruits and converts who formed a large part of the Ottoman Establishment"

http://books.google.com/books?id=HWxwHXjWY6wC&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=bernard+lewis+no+muslim+scholar+or+man+of+letters&source=bl&ots=vK-_ccVJKx&sig=T6z_LOFc4OqRKwyyGRl7kmdKdX8&hl=en&ei=O82hTqm7KOyAsgLv4rWQBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

I can't win with you. Now I'm a troll because I provided conservative articles who cite pretty respected scholars on Islamic history. If I cited leftwing articles you'd say the same thing.

Still haven't gotten a reply about why we know nothing about the glory of Persian history because your beloved Muslims managed to destroy everything because they love culture and scholarship so much.

"Yes, he's very controversial for being pro-Turkish and an Armenian genocide denier."

And you quoted him knowing that he's a 'genocide denier'? Why, you evil Armenian-hating bigot!

That's not the controversy I was referring to, however. Keep reading that wikipedia page - it's in there, but below where you stopped.

""It is unlikely the Sultan knew any non-Islamic language, but Greek was in common use among the early Ottomans"

Wow. I had no idea Greek was an Islamic language. Learn something new every day! Would this mean that Greek is not one of those western languages that Muslim scholars and men of letters held in such disregard and didn't bother to learn? Apparently Putin can't figure out that Lewis is often inconsistent even when he's quoting two entirely contradictory statements that are just a few pages apart.

"Still haven't gotten a reply"

Excuse me for having better things to do than feed Trolls.

"Democracies don't go to war. HA! That wasn't even true when i was in college, before Georgia and Russia went to war. Only time i ever really debated my professor in class. "

Russia V Georgia- Russia isn't really a democracy. It's an oligarchy or a one party system run by Putin

Finland V UK- Finland and the UK went to war during WWII, the UK launched a few missiles and Finland backed off. They only declared war so Germany wouldn't feel the need to invade them

Give me an other example. Perhaps it will be disproved at one point, but for now, democracies have not gone to war "

How is Russia a one party state?This is the problem with the Democratic war theory. What is a democracy? Russia has elections and multiple parites there is no evidence those elections are rigged. It is a democracy. Now as most defenders of this theory do you point out every flaw the democracy has to state "well that's not really a democracy" bull shit.

Putin also quotes from this hate site: rense.com

Sorry I mean copies and pastes.

Hey Putin I am waiting for an answer to my last post. It seems as though when it comes to put up or shut up, you always go for the latter.

I didn't read his "wikipedia page". That's all you can muster, the wikipedia retort, when I rarely if ever consult wikipedia. Stop projecting your own habits onto me. I had to read Bernard Lewis in my mideast politics classes.

"Wow. I had no idea Greek was an Islamic language. Learn something new every day! Would this mean that Greek is not one of those western languages that Muslim scholars and men of letters held in such disregard and didn't bother to learn? Apparently Putin can't figure out that Lewis is often inconsistent even when he's quoting two entirely contradictory statements that are just a few pages apart."

If you read the chapter and stop selectively quoting him it isn't inconsistent at all. The reason why Greek and Slavonic were in use was because the people were Greek and Slavonic to begin with, they were new converts to Islam or working for the Ottoman authorities as Greek speakers. The whole point is that much of this translation work that Muslims get credit for was done by non-Muslims or new converts who had knowledge of other languages before they were Turkified/Arabized.

"Excuse me for having better things to do than feed Trolls."

Obviously.

"Hey Putin I am waiting for an answer to my last post. It seems as though when it comes to put up or shut up, you always go for the latter."

So it wasn't you who was peddling the crap about the Saudi evacuation, eh? That was someone else. It wasn't you who always plows into discussions about Lincoln to talk about how evil he was, and how evil Grant was, how evil Sherman was and basically the entire Union army, while ignoring the crimes of the Confederacy or how Lee brutalized young slave girls and how the Confederate states en masse openly stated that their cause was white supremacy. "It's all about the money" you said. It was about northern exploitation of the south. You peddle the same nonsense the Confederate apologists do, while trying to keep an arm's length. Nope, sorry, can't have it both ways. Can't recite pro-Confederate "Lost Cause" propaganda while claiming you don't have sympathy for those making these claims.

"Putin also quotes from this hate site: rense.com"

You're very outraged about near constant stream of plagiarism on here by others, right?And it was from pravda, not rense, and the point was to explain how one of your heroes is celebrated by white supremacists. But you'll ignore that, naturally. I've developed an allergic reaction to fish from all your red herrings.

LOL

did everyone miss the part where putin told a venuezuelen that he knows more about venezuela because his friend visited there?
classic.

Good one, Siccy (My wife is my 'friend' I guess). I've worked with the Bolivarian Youth in Venezuela solidarity demos. They have more credibility than a guy who thinks two neoliberals were far-left socialists. I'm sure Ahmed Chalabi agrees with you, though. After all, he's an Iraqi, he can't possibly be wrong about what's going on inside Iraq. And if a non-American thinks Teabaggers are wrong about American history, they're just pompous elitists right. Teabaggers can't possibly be wrong about America, they live here. Never mind that they think the war of independence began in Concord, NH. Or that John Quincy Adams was a founding father.

....or that they can never be wrong about anything, marx is god, and everyone else is stupid

You know putin, I actually agree with alot of what you say. You just say it like such a condescending asshole I really have no choice to be in opposition to you. If it puts your mind at ease I'm usually not objecting to your actual points, just your egregious personality. Maybe if you could write a post not dripping with hostility I might take you more seriously.