Posts from Forum

Good day, you should travel more! Somehow. I've only been to Minsk five times. And to Kyiv once, and to Odessa once. I didn't notice any significant differences from St. Petersburg anywhere...

I don't know, I think you can't come up with a better city than St. Petersburg. It's a pity that it can't be moved to Ukraine with all its museums and theaters :smile52: Although this eternally gray sky in summer and the cold are depressing, but at the same time it has its own charm.

Islam is evil, and I am already convinced of this.

Why do you say so?

Why is that?

It's a very long story; I'm going to specialize in Turkey and study Islam.
I'll just say, again, that we've all been deceived. How were we deceived?
Like this!
The fact is that in the 19th century, approximately in its last quarter, the British Empire decided to rewrite all of history regarding Islam. This was beneficial to them because they had the most colonies and needed to "be friends with Muslim countries." Following Britain, Europe and the United States did the same.
And the leaders of Islamic countries "asked" them to do this, just as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, etc., "ask" today. Not only do they ask, but they also send billions of dollars to the United States and Europe for the construction of mosques and other things.
How did Russia get involved in this? Very simply. The communists were multicultural; national identity was not important to them; they needed to mix everything together. Marxist teachers and scientists are mostly to blame for this; they rewrote it for us and taught us all that Islam is tolerant, peaceful, and so on.
The true history of Islam is insidious, cruel, and expansionist. It's jihad, gentlemen. A holy war against all of us. And the Quran is deliberately translated incorrectly into Russian because, in the original Arabic, the Quran calls for jihad.
Over the 1400 years of Islam's existence, more than 300 million non-Muslims have been destroyed, and more than 500 million non-Muslims have been enslaved and subjected to cruel abuse. No other religion or regime has such figures.

Saudi Arabia has sent and continues to send tens of billions of dollars to the West so that Christianity would tolerate Islam, so that all European and American states would write and speak well about Muslims, and remain silent about the bloody facts. Western historians were generally forbidden to speak badly about this religion. This began in the 2000s. Meanwhile, there are leaders among Muslims who openly declare that the goal of Islam is to conquer Europe.
Muammar Gaddafi, shortly before his death, said: "We don't need to draw our swords and go to Europe. It will die on its own in a few decades when our brothers multiply there."
Turkey still denies the genocide of Armenians and Christians in the Balkans.
What about Lebanon? A country where Islamists massacred Christians? Now, there are barely 13% Christians, although in the early 20th century, it was a Christian country.
In Turkey itself, the "right of the first night" still exists. Do you know what that means? It means that a Muslim can freely rape any girl.

In short, I've presented everything a bit chaotically; I just have a lot of thoughts on this topic, and I don't have time to present everything nicely.

I was going to give a sharp reply to the previous post (I strongly disagree with half of what was said), but then I saw the author's avatar... and realized that arguing is pointless.

Why is that?

We are preparing for a story about the invasion of Islam and the upcoming war of the white world against Islam.

"We all have a good neighbor, or acquaintance, or friend, who is a Muslim. You wouldn't think they could be dangerous to us. But in Islam, such people are called apostates, due to their favorable attitude towards Christians, and they are not true Muslims." (c)

Words of a great man, whose name I will not mention, for good reason.

The words of a great man, whose name I will not mention, for good reason.

Google doesn't want to show it either))))

Judging by the historian’s previous signature, this great man is Adolf G.

The fallen banner of Ariputra was picked up and proudly carried by Favio.

By the way, gentlemen. I might surprise you, but calling Russia an empire is actually incorrect. We were all taught this in schools, it's written in textbooks, and Marxist professors referred to our country that way. Russia has never been an empire! Today, this is a relevant debate among many historians, and I support the view that it was not an empire.
Why? I'll explain!
An empire strives to expand through colonization; look at the history of any state, from antiquity to the 19th century. But what exactly did Russia colonize? Nothing!
Parts of Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic states, the Caucasus, Kazakhstan, etc., became part of Russia (the USSR) NOT as colonies! But rather as a full-fledged (almost) union of socialist republics. Why "almost," because Stalin centralized power.
If we go back to earlier times, the development of Siberia was NOT colonization. We did not force anyone.
The only exception is Central Asia. And even there, Russians were forced to defend themselves against Uzbeks, Tajiks, etc. Their endless raids did not allow peace, so they had to intervene. But again, the conquered lands in Central Asia were NOT colonies.
Russia has never been an empire! We were all raised and taught the opposite.
It's not for nothing that they say there is an accepted history, and there is the real history (c).

An empire strives to expand - that's correct, but everything else is not quite right. An empire can expand not only through colonies. There are two types of empires: continental and maritime (colonial).
The annexation of new territories can occur through violent (military) means, or it can be peaceful. In any empire, you can find examples of both continentality and coloniality, military and voluntary expansion.

The very core of an empire lies in imperialism, i.e., in expansion, in conquest. Therefore, there is a very fine line here. Today, it is customary to refer to colonial powers as empires – this is more accurate. By the way, for those who still don't believe me, here is some food for thought. One of the hadiths (stories) about the Prophet Muhammad. Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25; narrator Abu Huraira: The Apostle of Allah was asked, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad)." Then the questioner asked, "What is next (in goodness)?" He replied, "To participate in jihad (religious struggle) for the sake of Allah." In Islam, there is no "natural" sense of morality or justice that goes beyond the specific examples and precepts given in the Quran and Sunnah. Since Muhammad is considered the last prophet of Allah, and the Quran is the eternal, unchanging word of Allah Himself, there is also no development of morality that would allow for the modification or integration of Islamic morality with other sources. The entire universe of Islamic morality is built exclusively on the life and teachings of Muhammad. Added 8 minutes later

Judging by the historian's previous signature, this great man is Adolf G.

Hitler wanted to introduce Islam as the state religion for the Third Reich. He saw nothing wrong with it. So, no, there is no connection. And don't think that Nazi Germany continued the work of the Teutonic Order! That's a mistake. They perverted everything, these Nazis. The Teutonic Order fought against the infidels, defended the interests of the church, which, of course, were largely related to expansion and enrichment. And Nazi Germany, as everyone knows, fought against whom – Jews, Christians, first of all. Moreover, Heinrich Himmler called Christianity a plague, that is, he insulted all of us, and also insulted the cause for which all spiritual and knightly orders fought.

Good day, you need to travel more!

No, thank you.

Was the destruction of the One Ring a positive or negative event? Why was it done? Perhaps the reason was the foolish, youthful maximalism of Frodo Baggins.

Yes, Sauron fell, but was there a worthy candidate to replace him? Perhaps an even worse villain will come to power after this. Under Sauron, there was stability; all the inhabitants of Middle-earth had the opportunity to join him and live well at the expense of those who did not join. And what should be done now?

With their good intentions, foolish protesters plunged Middle-earth into the 1990s. By destroying the One Ring, they destroyed the barn that Sauron had been building for thousands of years.

Middle-earth will have to rebuild the barn and deal with the consequences of the revolution for a long time...

It turns out that I am not the only one who had this allusion in mind. Glory to Ukraine, freedom to Middle-earth!))

Turns out, I'm not the only one who had this idea! Glory to Ukraine, freedom to Middle-earth!))

So, here's the deal. The map is Isenford, with the best 1-1 balance. A convenient matchup – Mordor is well countered by Humans. We build 2 mines and 2 barracks and go for spam. We take the creeps, buy Boromir, and just keep producing units non-stop. We destroy farms and buildings. We attack from all sides. With skillful micro, it doesn't come to Aragorn, nor to the King Wizard :smile13:.

predictably reached an agreement
http://vz.ru/economy/2013/12/17/664755.html