• Attention All Comstar Customers, Due to unexpected interference by suspected Word of Blake operatives, the HPG systems update was *not* successful. No data was lost due to our careful and extensive backups; however, we will need to try again next weekend. Sincerely, Comstar Precentor Dune

Russia(gate/bot) Russia-Ukraine War Political Discussion

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
23,625
Yeah sorry, if it's a choice between state ownership of land or complete private land ownership, I'm leaning towards state ownership.
Further supporting evidence that you are a leftist. I don't recall what you actually profess to be in regards to political alignment; what do you call yourself?
 

King Arts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2021
Reaction score
2,366
Further supporting evidence that you are a leftist. I don't recall what you actually profess to be in regards to political alignment; what do you call yourself?
Dumbest thing I’ve heard in a long time. I’m not a leftist just cause I’m against letting globalists and rich assholes rule everything. Anyway I’m conservative, because I see that conservatives generally support more Christian things like the sanctity of marriage, protecting unborn babies. Even if they seem to fail sometimes by being ducks for the wealthy.
 

DarthOne

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Reaction score
16,105
Location
Pennsylvania
Are you actually willing to argue that widespread state ownership of land is a great policy and as such privatizing it is bad, or are you just mindlessly reposting Russia favoring sources from Russia friendly countries?

It's especially interesting that at the same time you seemed against state taking ownership of private land in case of Netherlands.
So which one is it? Is it better if more land is state owned or sold to private individuals and businesses?
Im just sharing what I found. As far as I’m concerned, it’s a battle between a pair of corrupt nations being used as a money laundering scheme by the establishment.
 

Husky_Khan

The Dog Whistler... I mean Whisperer
Founder
Sotnik
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Reaction score
33,216
Location
The Drakwald

Going, going, gone!
The Video is Shit. There's like ten seconds of substance relating to the actual title and no citations I can find beyond TFI Global itself stating so and the World Socialist Worker website spouting the same things.

So you support foreigners buying up all the land, and basically a return to feudalism?
It looks like Foreigners aren't allowed to purchase the land.

Also there are limits already in place which AFAIK aren't going to be affected by this Law:

- Individual Ukrainian citizens, state and communities will be allowed to purchase agricultural land in Ukraine, up to a limit of 100 hectares for individuals. This limit will stay in place until January 1, 2024.

- State and community-owned land will be banned from sale until 2023. This ban will be lifted on July 2023.

- As of January 1, 2024 only Ukrainian Companies will be allowed to purchase agricultural land. Restrictions on land sizes will be moved from 100 hectares to 10,000 hectares.

- People and companies who rent agricultural land will be given the priority right to buy it from its original owner - but these pre-emption rights can be transferred.

- Banks will also be able to own land, but only for short periods of time. Banks can seize land if it was seized as collateral for a loan. However, banks are required to sell any land obtained this way within a two-year span at auction.

- Foreigners, people without citizenship, foreign companies, and companies whose ownership is impossible to determine (for example, shell companies registered in offshore zones) will not be able to purchase land. Only an all-Ukrainian referendum can allow foreigners to purchase Ukrainian agricultural land.



Yeah sorry, if it's a choice between state ownership of land or complete private land ownership, I'm leaning towards state ownership.
That's a false dilemma as no sources are stating that it's a binary choice between state ownership and "complete private land ownership."

Furthermore there's a monetary limit to the properties that are to be auctioned:

The New Voice of Ukraine said:
Significant changes have also been made to the procedures for large-scale privatization – this concerns the sale of assets with a book value of more than UAH 250 million ($6.8 million). All such auctions have been transferred to the ProZorro.Sale government system.

"This makes it impossible to have outside influence on auction participants, saves the state money, and eliminates corruption risks regarding the completeness of providing information about assets," the Cabinet of Ministers said in its post.
It looks like online auctions will be used for large scale privatization as another article refers to this measure to build on previous Land Reform that has been occurring since 1991.

The New Voice of Ukraine said:
The official added that the Cabinet is launching grant programs to motivate businesses and people to create jobs as much as possible.

"Small-scale privatization, especially in regions where people in villages and towns know about facilities that have been standing (idle) for years (or) are inefficiently used, is designed to provide an opportunity to buy these premises at a fair price and start work," Shmyhal said.


In the above it states the Law actually deals with this:

New Voice of Ukraine said:
  • A substantial shortening of the terms for holding privatization auctions and preparing assets to no more than two months from the auction announcement to the signing of a contract;
  • Minimization of risks through payment before concluding a sales contract;
  • Unblocking the privatization of state-owned enterprises with property seizures and encumbrances (including the already adopted decisions on the privatization, there are 115 such entities), while preserving the rights of creditors;
  • Carrying out large-scale privatization via online auctions;
  • The transfer of all permits and licenses to new owners, instead issuing them with a full set of new permits and licenses;
  • The digitization of key privatization processes, with online auction announcements.
So it's changing the way things are sold and more will be sold to private entities but it doesn't appear to significantly change the legal or land codes for purchasing and owning said property.
 

Hlaalu Agent

Nerevar going to let you down
Founder
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
6,221
Location
Rethan Manor
Further supporting evidence that you are a leftist. I don't recall what you actually profess to be in regards to political alignment; what do you call yourself?
He, honestly, doesn't sound like a leftist to me. He sounds like he is sick and tired of the centralization of power in the hands off the few and foreigners buying up people's countries from under them. Such things are definitely things subscribed to by people on the right, and at least some brands of conservatives.

He is probably some brand of right populist given his comments.

Dumbest thing I’ve heard in a long time. I’m not a leftist just cause I’m against letting globalists and rich assholes rule everything. Anyway I’m conservative, because I see that conservatives generally support more Christian things like the sanctity of marriage, protecting unborn babies. Even if they seem to fail sometimes by being ducks for the wealthy.
I agree, you sound like some sort of populist. Not quite sure if I fully agree on your take, but the rich should be treated like everyone else and power should be shared between the classes/segments of society. You know what men like Aristotle said.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
11,780
You are reading an awful lot into @DarthOne from him just posting a news clip without any actual mention of what his opinion is on what he thinks related to the posted news
It's a clip opinionated enough that there isn't a need for one. If he wanted to disagree with, well, no one stopped him.
So you support foreigners buying up all the land, and basically a return to feudalism?
Yeah sorry, if it's a choice between state ownership of land or complete private land ownership, I'm leaning towards state ownership.
Why foreigners? Why does it have to be all about foreigners? Seems like those are excluded anyway.
Ukraine happens to have so much state owned land due to the legacy policies left after Soviet Union, and all the richer, NATO\EU member ex-communist countries have already went through a wave of land privatization or two. If Ukraine was run like those it would have been done 25-30 years ago already, but better late than never.
Though I'd prefer private ownership with a requirement that if you want to own more than one small vacation home you must be a citizen. With limited exceptions for certain organizations like religions. So the church would be given a pass.
Churches are some of the worst offenders when it comes to doing shady things with privatized land, especially when they have tax exemptions.
Dumbest thing I’ve heard in a long time. I’m not a leftist just cause I’m against letting globalists and rich assholes rule everything. Anyway I’m conservative, because I see that conservatives generally support more Christian things like the sanctity of marriage, protecting unborn babies. Even if they seem to fail sometimes by being ducks for the wealthy.
"I'll support outright red favored policies to stick it to the rich assholes" is a very socialist policy. And it's not like religiously conservative socialists don't exist, see: South America. Not that they are a great example in running a country, especially in such economic matters, but that's a separate issue, going back to the point that socialism doesn't work.
Im just sharing what I found. As far as I’m concerned, it’s a battle between a pair of corrupt nations being used as a money laundering scheme by the establishment.
It's something that all the better run post-communist economies have already done a loooong time ago, so the implication of automatic corruption is very eyebrow raising.
 

King Arts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2021
Reaction score
2,366
The Video is Shit. There's like ten seconds of substance relating to the actual title and no citations I can find beyond TFI Global itself stating so and the World Socialist Worker website spouting the same things.



It looks like Foreigners aren't allowed to purchase the land.

Also there are limits already in place which AFAIK aren't going to be affected by this Law:

- Individual Ukrainian citizens, state and communities will be allowed to purchase agricultural land in Ukraine, up to a limit of 100 hectares for individuals. This limit will stay in place until January 1, 2024.

- State and community-owned land will be banned from sale until 2023. This ban will be lifted on July 2023.

- As of January 1, 2024 only Ukrainian Companies will be allowed to purchase agricultural land. Restrictions on land sizes will be moved from 100 hectares to 10,000 hectares.

- People and companies who rent agricultural land will be given the priority right to buy it from its original owner - but these pre-emption rights can be transferred.

- Banks will also be able to own land, but only for short periods of time. Banks can seize land if it was seized as collateral for a loan. However, banks are required to sell any land obtained this way within a two-year span at auction.

- Foreigners, people without citizenship, foreign companies, and companies whose ownership is impossible to determine (for example, shell companies registered in offshore zones) will not be able to purchase land. Only an all-Ukrainian referendum can allow foreigners to purchase Ukrainian agricultural land.





That's a false dilemma as no sources are stating that it's a binary choice between state ownership and "complete private land ownership."

Furthermore there's a monetary limit to the properties that are to be auctioned:



It looks like online auctions will be used for large scale privatization as another article refers to this measure to build on previous Land Reform that has been occurring since 1991.





In the above it states the Law actually deals with this:



So it's changing the way things are sold and more will be sold to private entities but it doesn't appear to significantly change the legal or land codes for purchasing and owning said property.
Ahh the law looks fine then.

He, honestly, doesn't sound like a leftist to me. He sounds like he is sick and tired of the centralization of power in the hands off the few and foreigners buying up people's countries from under them. Such things are definitely things subscribed to by people on the right, and at least some brands of conservatives.

He is probably some brand of right populist given his comments.



I agree, you sound like some sort of populist. Not quite sure if I fully agree on your take, but the rich should be treated like everyone else and power should be shared between the classes/segments of society. You know what men like Aristotle said.
Yes in general I am a populist. Like I said earlier, my first though is Christian morals since I base what is good and evil on Christianity what God wants. But outside of that I believe in a Republic, all citizens are LEGALLY equal. Not financial equality, so if some citizens are gaining an undue ammount of influence and power then maybe certain measures need to be taken to check it. After all the reason the Roman Republic fell was because the Optimates allowed corruption to happen and turn a strong martial Republic into an oligarchy with a noble class who owned all the land and enriched themselves at the cost of the people. Then the people supported Julius Caesar overthrowing the Republic and the start of the Empire. If the Gracchi brother's land reforms were passed maybe Rome would not have become a monarchy/dictatorship and could have stayed a Republic.

Why foreigners? Why does it have to be all about foreigners? Seems like those are excluded anyway.
Ukraine happens to have so much state owned land due to the legacy policies left after Soviet Union, and all the richer, NATO\EU member ex-communist countries have already went through a wave of land privatization or two. If Ukraine was run like those it would have been done 25-30 years ago already, but better late than never.
Are you saying that foreigners should be allowed to own vast lands? Why? Let me ask you Marduk what is the point of a nation? I don't believe entirely in the enlightenment rights of man and a government being made to protect "rights" No, I believe nations are built by a collection of people. Nations are based off tribes, tribes are based off clans, clans are based off the basic family, and the family is individuals. In a complete state of nature an individual could do whatever they want, if I'm strong enough I could kill you and take your property and women. People aren't stupid and they won't just let a big strong guy get everything just because he is strong. So people form up together to protect their families, their extended family or clans watch out for them and a small tribe is born. If one man tries to break the "law" or take over everything all the other men can easily kill him and restore order. Small tribes are weaker and get their stuff taken by bigger stronger tribes. So tell me why should a tribe agree to protect someone not of their tribe? If that foreigner does not provide for the tribe? Why should they be allowed to share in the bounty of your land, be with your women, take your land? If another tribe tries to take your stuff will he stay with the men of your tribe and help you defend what is yours? If he WILL do that, then I don't think he should be considered a foreginer he should be considered one of the tribe, he can marry in or whatever, he lives here and his kids should be part of the tribe. But why should someone who lives in another tribes lands, own a vineyard in your tribes lands, and your fellow tribesmen should work the field, and he gets the profits, and relaxs in his own tribes lands? At that point if you can why not take that land yourself?

Churches are some of the worst offenders when it comes to doing shady things with privatized land, especially when they have tax exemptions.
I believe that church and state should work together. Religion would dictate morality, as long as the Church is not corrupt and being righteous I don't mind if the Church has power over society.

"I'll support outright red favored policies to stick it to the rich assholes" is a very socialist policy. And it's not like religiously conservative socialists don't exist, see: South America. Not that they are a great example in running a country, especially in such economic matters, but that's a separate issue, going back to the point that socialism doesn't work.
See that's just a rino talking point look at Mitt Romney right now, he says:


"Sad to see what’s being done to bribe the voters. Biden's student loan forgiveness plan may win Democrats some votes, but it fuels inflation, foots taxpayers with other people’s financial obligations, is unfair to those who paid their own way & creates irresponsible expectations."

Americans do not want handouts, they want measured fiscal conservatism. Pay back your loans, get a job, and stand on your own two feet. It's called 'The Republican Way'.

Saying something like that is stupid, it will guarantee that people who are in certain economic straights will support the democrats. Yes many times socialistic policies are bad for the economy and should not be pursued. BUT sometimes they are good, many things are socialized and don't cause society to crash. Going lolbertarian is eye roll worthy.

The right should remember that it was the wealthy establishment bussinessmen that are supporting all the pride and tranny groomers thing. Yes the Soviets nationalized certain big companies and killed some bussinessmen. But let me ask you, why are you defending disney's financial rights when they are busy helping groomers and treating the right like a beaten dog who is expected to obey? Maybe if some progressive companies were nationalized it would be good. Yes nationalizing ALL bussiness is bad. But doing it to SOME companies to punish the leaders for certain actions, or if it is a national emergency and the costs warrant it is FAR diffrent.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
11,780
Are you saying that foreigners should be allowed to own vast lands? Why? Let me ask you Marduk what is the point of a nation? I don't believe entirely in the enlightenment rights of man and a government being made to protect "rights" No, I believe nations are built by a collection of people. Nations are based off tribes, tribes are based off clans, clans are based off the basic family, and the family is individuals. In a complete state of nature an individual could do whatever they want, if I'm strong enough I could kill you and take your property and women. People aren't stupid and they won't just let a big strong guy get everything just because he is strong. So people form up together to protect their families, their extended family or clans watch out for them and a small tribe is born. If one man tries to break the "law" or take over everything all the other men can easily kill him and restore order. Small tribes are weaker and get their stuff taken by bigger stronger tribes. So tell me why should a tribe agree to protect someone not of their tribe? If that foreigner does not provide for the tribe? Why should they be allowed to share in the bounty of your land, be with your women, take your land? If another tribe tries to take your stuff will he stay with the men of your tribe and help you defend what is yours? If he WILL do that, then I don't think he should be considered a foreginer he should be considered one of the tribe, he can marry in or whatever, he lives here and his kids should be part of the tribe. But why should someone who lives in another tribes lands, own a vineyard in your tribes lands, and your fellow tribesmen should work the field, and he gets the profits, and relaxs in his own tribes lands? At that point if you can why not take that land yourself?
Why should foreigners invest in your country if they can't own anything? Hello North Korea.
I'm not saying they should get shit for free. Or even with a discount. Hell, have them pay higher taxes than citizens even. But then they aren't "sharing in the bounty of your land", it's a fair deal, no different than selling oil, iron ore, or whatever. Don't care if he will help defend the land, the money he pays will help either way.
If you just take stuff from foreign investors, none will come in the future. They will go invest elsewhere, and you will be sitting there, wondering why other countries are richer than yours.
I believe that church and state should work together. Religion would dictate morality, as long as the Church is not corrupt and being righteous I don't mind if the Church has power over society.
But which church ;)
You basically need a mandatory, state run religion for that to not get ridiculous, and a free people don't exactly have a reason to want that.
I think Middle Ages have demonstrated well enough what happens to churches who get to take state power for granted, and how it's all around shitty both for countries and churches in question.
See that's just a rino talking point look at Mitt Romney right now, he says:


"Sad to see what’s being done to bribe the voters. Biden's student loan forgiveness plan may win Democrats some votes, but it fuels inflation, foots taxpayers with other people’s financial obligations, is unfair to those who paid their own way & creates irresponsible expectations."

Americans do not want handouts, they want measured fiscal conservatism. Pay back your loans, get a job, and stand on your own two feet. It's called 'The Republican Way'.

Saying something like that is stupid, it will guarantee that people who are in certain economic straights will support the democrats. Yes many times socialistic policies are bad for the economy and should not be pursued. BUT sometimes they are good, many things are socialized and don't cause society to crash. Going lolbertarian is eye roll worthy.
You're not gonna out-bid democrats in state handouts to indebted college graduates, forget it.
This is a roundabout subsidy for colleges, and you know what they favor ideologically.
Want to be clever with state power, make them lose money in favor of students in that deal, not taxpayers.

The right should remember that it was the wealthy establishment bussinessmen that are supporting all the pride and tranny groomers thing. Yes the Soviets nationalized certain big companies and killed some bussinessmen. But let me ask you, why are you defending disney's financial rights when they are busy helping groomers and treating the right like a beaten dog who is expected to obey? Maybe if some progressive companies were nationalized it would be good. Yes nationalizing ALL bussiness is bad. But doing it to SOME companies to punish the leaders for certain actions, or if it is a national emergency and the costs warrant it is FAR diffrent.
You need to think your ideas through better. Leftist Disney bad, fuck their property rights, but leftist colleges, fine, have your money, fuck the taxpayers?
>nationalized
See, the problem with that is that then the politicians get to run the thing. And you bloody exactly know that they would be no better at it at all. Possibly worse.
Disney's financial rights aren't the source of any problem, only a second order one at worst.
The real problems are in areas of quite less clear property rights territory, like diversity policy according to law and courts, ESG scores etc, which with some interpretations could be treated as violations of shareholder rights or such in themselves.
But hey, the very government which would run the hypothetically nationalized assets is the hand behind protecting, allowing or even pushing these kinds of stupid in the first place, to the point that Disney might have serious problems with the government if they weren't doing the stupid they are doing.
 

mrttao

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Reaction score
2,344
It's a clip opinionated enough that there isn't a need for one.
That would make all of us woke cultist democrats because we all posted clips of them speaking, to show others things "straight from the donkey's mouth".

Don't put words in other people's mouths like that just based on them merely linking a news article.
Further supporting evidence that you are a leftist.
How in the flying heck did you get that he is a leftist from his actual position of
"I want private land ownership. Between state ownership and Foreign Oligarch ownership I am slightly leaning towards state ownership, even though both are bad"
 

History Learner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 25, 2020
Reaction score
3,658
How in the flying heck did you get that he is a leftist from his actual position of
"I want private land ownership. Between state ownership and Foreign Oligarch ownership I am slightly leaning towards state ownership, even though both are bad"
It makes a lot more sense when you realize they're grasping at straws to justify a Pro Ukrainian position that is increasingly untenable to any claiming to be a Rightist.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Reaction score
37,444
It makes a lot more sense when you realize they're grasping at straws to justify a Pro Ukrainian position that is increasingly untenable to any claiming to be a Rightist.
based on real politic its pretty doable.

You have to drop the ego though and the self rightousness and admit your just doing it to fuck over a rival.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 25, 2020
Reaction score
3,658
based on real politic its pretty doable.

You have to drop the ego though and the self rightousness and admit your just doing it to fuck over a rival.
I have said it before and you've said it again for me: I would respect the position a lot more if they were just open about it in that aspect. It really grinds me gears when you have these obviously disingenuous reasons being given to support Ukraine.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
11,780
That would make all of us woke cultist democrats because we all posted clips of them speaking, to show others things "straight from the donkey's mouth".

Don't put words in other people's mouths like that just based on them merely linking a news article.
People usually post those with commentary.
It makes a lot more sense when you realize they're grasping at straws to justify a Pro Ukrainian position that is increasingly untenable to any claiming to be a Rightist.
Ah, yes, those damn leftist Ukrainians, with their... land privatization?
So... how about all that aid money vanishing without oversight?
Conversation kinda disappeared on that subject
Are they still printing even more money to send to Ukraine?
As it should have, it was a silly conversation that was giving little to no attention to the scale of numbers involved, which in case of a money discussion is quite silly.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Reaction score
5,196
The brits doing their best to escalate a regional conflict into a world war AGAIN for the third fucking time in a century.
Both wars was started by germans.And they should win both times,but lost thanks to their own stupidity.
So,they planned take over peacifully with Russia as ally this time - and Putin fucked it.
Well,this time germans would lost war,but thanks to their allies,not their,stupidity.

So you support foreigners buying up all the land, and basically a return to feudalism?
Yeah sorry, if it's a choice between state ownership of land or complete private land ownership, I'm leaning towards state ownership.
Though I'd prefer private ownership with a requirement that if you want to own more than one small vacation home you must be a citizen. With limited exceptions for certain organizations like religions. So the church would be given a pass.
Agree.Selling land to foreigners never was good idea.
And,there is nothing wrong with feudalism,as long as farmers are free and feudals are loyal to OUR King.Not somebody in other country.
 

Aldarion

Neoreactionary Monarchist
Joined
Sep 16, 2020
Reaction score
5,347
Location
Kingdom of Croatia
Both wars was started by germans.And they should win both times,but lost thanks to their own stupidity.
First World War was technically started by Serbia and Hotzendorf... but yeah, Germany going onto colonial adventurism (and invading Belgium) had massive impact.

And,there is nothing wrong with feudalism,as long as farmers are free and feudals are loyal to OUR King.Not somebody in other country.
Historically, feudal lords were often more loyal to the country and the people than modern-day democratic parliaments are. You never see feudal landowners selling out the country the way modern parliaments do (well, Polish Sejm was the exception - but that is what happens when you let foreigners into your country's parliament).
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
23,625
Dumbest thing I’ve heard in a long time. I’m not a leftist just cause I’m against letting globalists and rich assholes rule everything. Anyway I’m conservative, because I see that conservatives generally support more Christian things like the sanctity of marriage, protecting unborn babies. Even if they seem to fail sometimes by being ducks for the wealthy.
Ethically, you are conservative, sure.

But you lack any kind of understanding of how your proposed policies about nationalization, more government control, theocracy, etc, would actually play out.

None of it would play out well. Nationalizing any industry is bad, for the same reason that nationalizing all industries is bad. Sure, it's less destructive than all, but it's still completely negative.

There's two main reasons that over the last thirty years, pretty much all of the big businesses have shifted into the leftist camp. The first and largest is because the universities that train the 'elite' are all now hardcore leftist training camps, so your leadership cadre from the Ivy League is getting taught not just leftist politics, but the the post-modern philosophy and theology that undergirds modern leftism.

The second is that the steady increase in government regulatory power and entrenchment of leftists within government bureaucracy, has made it so that using the power of government against your business rivals is definitively the easier model to business success, instead of creating a superior product at a better price.

Combine these with leftist values encouraging going to daddy government to solve your problems, and you end up with the increasingly corrupt business environment we now see.


The big question for you then is this:

How would nationalizing a corporation controlled by Ivy-League indoctrinated leftist businessmen, to instead be controlled by Ivy-League indoctrinated government bureaucrats, help anything?

Conversely, the model of getting the government out of business matters as much as possible, is based around the concept that allowing 'get woke go broke' to have companies go broke, and their competitors to defeat them, has shown that it works at least sometimes. As examples, the failure of 'Batgirl' to the point where they didn't even bother releasing it, and the success of Top Gun: Maverick, that at least approached demonstrating more traditional values.

Fundamentally, the political arm of American conservativism is based around recognition that you do not want to concentrate more power into the hands of government, because that guarantees that over time, it will become more corrupt, and make it harder to root that corruption out. This ideology is based out of a Biblical understanding of human nature.

Anyone who claims to be conservative or on the political right in America, and favors enlarged government, government bailouts, increased regulation, whatever, shows that they do not understand core tenets of conservatism.
 

Husky_Khan

The Dog Whistler... I mean Whisperer
Founder
Sotnik
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Reaction score
33,216
Location
The Drakwald
Soviet Monument Celebrating the Soviet Invasion of German Occupied Latvia is being torn down.


The Monument to the Liberators of Soviet Latvia and Riga from the German Fascist Invaders was erected in 1985.
 
Top Bottom