The US-Iran Beatdown

[Woodruff]

I'd have to say the old book has quite a bit of a reputation for fulfilled prophecy. http://100prophecies.org/ There is some pretty detailed and accurate prophecy regarding wars about specific nations. Take out all of the end of the world stuff and just focus on Russia and Iran uniting against Israel at least.

I don't remember the terms "Russia" or "Iran" being in the Bible. Did I overlook them?

No, you just didn't realize that the word didn't exist yet.

But you said that it was a "pretty detailed and accurate prophecy regarding wars about specific nations". How can it be "pretty detailed", "accurate", OR "about specific nations" if the nations themselves aren't actually referenced.

You may not find the word computer in The Bible either. Anyways, Magog is modern day Russian and Persia is modern day Iran.

And cheese is bologna.

I understand all of the permutations that you can go through to equate all of the things to make Biblical prophesies work. And I suppose that's fine until you state that the Bible's prophecies are detailed, accurate or about specific nations, in which case they need to actually be those things. The Bible's prophecies are not.

Hey Woodruff, I had you on for for some reason, but I took u off to read your post.

I'm not sure whether I should be insulted or pleased. <laughing>

How are they not? I posted my sources for what I was referring to with the scripture and details. You are simply just stating it isn't without anything to back up your claims. Which prophecy are you referring to?

I'm referring to any prophecy that uses the terms "Russia" and/or "Iran". PARTICULARLY Russia though, as at least Iran does have the Persian ethnicity behind it so I can much more readily accept "Persia" as being "Iran" without a lot of permutation to it.

[PROFITS]

I'd have to say the old book has quite a bit of a reputation for fulfilled prophecy. http://100prophecies.org/ There is some pretty detailed and accurate prophecy regarding wars about specific nations. Take out all of the end of the world stuff and just focus on Russia and Iran uniting against Israel at least.

I don't remember the terms "Russia" or "Iran" being in the Bible. Did I overlook them?

No, you just didn't realize that the word didn't exist yet. You may not find the word computer in The Bible either. Anyways, Magog is modern day Russian and Persia is modern day Iran. I don't think there is any debate over Persia being modern day Iran. Here is some info about Magog. IDENTIFYING RUSSIA AS THE LEADER OF THIS INVASION FORCE

"And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal: " (Ezekiel 38:1-3)

While it is true that the Bible generically identifies the evil forces opposed to God as 'Magog', and its leaders as 'Gog', there are etymological reasons for understanding that 'Gog' and 'Magog' may refer to what is called modern Russia. We see the name, Magog, first in Genesis 10:2, as one of the sons of Japheth, one of the grandsons of Noah. In that era, it was customary for tribal, and later, national names to evolve from the name of the original founder. "Apparently, the tribal name, Magog, moved northward from the Middle East. Josephus ... notes that Magog is called the Scythians by the Greeks ... who lived in the northern regions above the Caucasus Mountains, as forerunners of modern Russia."4

The term, 'Gog', above is translated from the Hebrew phrase, 'nesi rosh'5. While 'rosh' can be an adjective meaning 'head' or leader, it can also mean a proper place name, 'Rosh'. "The Hebrew lexicon of Brown, Driver, and Briggs indicates that Rosh here is the proper name of a people ... today's Russia."6

"'Tubal' and 'Meshech' were the fifth and sixth sons of Japheth, and their descendants settled south of the Black Sea ... The name, 'Moscow' derives from the tribal name, 'Meshech', and 'Tobolsk', the name of the principal state, from 'Tubal'.7

Therefore, it is proven conclusively that God was referring to modern Russia in this passage in Ezekiel 38-39. But, God lists one more identifying factor. In verse 38:6 and 15, and also in 39:2, God says that this attacking force shall come from the 'north'. But, the original Hebrew "gives the qualifier meaning 'extreme' or 'uttermost' to the term, 'north', all three times."8 When God gives direction in the Bible, it is always in reference to His Chosen Nation, Israel. In God's eyes, Israel is located precisely in the middle of the Earth. Therefore, what nation(s) lie to the 'uttermost north' from Israel generally, and Jerusalem specifically? Modern Russia lies directly north of Israel and Moscow lies directly north of Jerusalem.9 http://www.cuttingedge.org/News/n1037.html

What a bunch of poo. Seriously where do you nutters come up with this?


First of all the Russian people originated from viking groups known as the Varangians, with heavy cultural influences from Kievan Rus. The varangians dominated the tributaries centred around Moscow and were the forefathers of the duchy of Muscovy which expanded into the Russian state.

Secondly the scynthians disappeared around the first century BC. With all indications that they moved south east and not north, if they weren't destroyed by nomadic tribes moving west (Kazakhs) .

Rosh= Russ? are you kidding me? this isin't even how the Russians pronounce it which is much closer to "rue" as in "rue the day" or "Ruesskii" meaning the Russian people.

Moscow, the western bastardisation of "maskva" derived from the tribal name Meshech? Who the f*ck are the Meshech? I have studied allot about Russia not once have I EVER heard of these guys. SO what's your source for this previously unheard of tribe, who is the supposed origin of Maskva (which clearly has fino-urgic origins by the way)?

The Coming Russian Invasion Of Israel", updated, by Thomas S.
McCall & Zola Levitt, Moody Press, chicago, 1974, 1987,

Oh, the comming invasion of Isreal by Russia,,,, published in 1974.... any day now!!

Tubal?!? wtf. There is nothing resembling Tubal anywhere near Moscow.

I have found reference of Tubal and Meshech as being Georgian.

Holly shit realy? Russia the country that covers 1/6th of the planet primarily ringing the north pole is north of Isreal. MIND BLOWN.


Seriously I think this is some of the dumbest crap I've read in a while.

I'm sorry, but I'm choosing to go with countless historians with degrees opposed to some random dude who says he studied Russia "allot" and never heard of something. It's "a lot" btw. Israel is not spelled Isreal either btw. You say MIND BLOWN about Russia being north of Israel. Moscow is exactly north of Jerusalem. I was going to ask what you think Magog is since you seem to be an expert on history (enough to challenge people with phd), but I don't want to flood this topic.

[BigBallinStalin]

As OP, I declare ye can flood away this topic--until something very interesting happens with Iran.

[Juan_Bottom]

As OP, I declare ye can flood away this topic--until something very interesting happens with Iran.

It wont be an American invasion of Iran, I can tell you that much.

[BigBallinStalin]

As OP, I declare ye can flood away this topic--until something very interesting happens with Iran.

It wont be an American invasion of Iran, I can tell you that much.

If Israel were to invade, would you be shocked that US mercenaries were operating in Iran? How about US Special Forces in Iran?

[Baron Von PWN]

I'd have to say the old book has quite a bit of a reputation for fulfilled prophecy. http://100prophecies.org/ There is some pretty detailed and accurate prophecy regarding wars about specific nations. Take out all of the end of the world stuff and just focus on Russia and Iran uniting against Israel at least.

I don't remember the terms "Russia" or "Iran" being in the Bible. Did I overlook them?

No, you just didn't realize that the word didn't exist yet. You may not find the word computer in The Bible either. Anyways, Magog is modern day Russian and Persia is modern day Iran. I don't think there is any debate over Persia being modern day Iran. Here is some info about Magog. IDENTIFYING RUSSIA AS THE LEADER OF THIS INVASION FORCE

"And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal: " (Ezekiel 38:1-3)

While it is true that the Bible generically identifies the evil forces opposed to God as 'Magog', and its leaders as 'Gog', there are etymological reasons for understanding that 'Gog' and 'Magog' may refer to what is called modern Russia. We see the name, Magog, first in Genesis 10:2, as one of the sons of Japheth, one of the grandsons of Noah. In that era, it was customary for tribal, and later, national names to evolve from the name of the original founder. "Apparently, the tribal name, Magog, moved northward from the Middle East. Josephus ... notes that Magog is called the Scythians by the Greeks ... who lived in the northern regions above the Caucasus Mountains, as forerunners of modern Russia."4

The term, 'Gog', above is translated from the Hebrew phrase, 'nesi rosh'5. While 'rosh' can be an adjective meaning 'head' or leader, it can also mean a proper place name, 'Rosh'. "The Hebrew lexicon of Brown, Driver, and Briggs indicates that Rosh here is the proper name of a people ... today's Russia."6

"'Tubal' and 'Meshech' were the fifth and sixth sons of Japheth, and their descendants settled south of the Black Sea ... The name, 'Moscow' derives from the tribal name, 'Meshech', and 'Tobolsk', the name of the principal state, from 'Tubal'.7

Therefore, it is proven conclusively that God was referring to modern Russia in this passage in Ezekiel 38-39. But, God lists one more identifying factor. In verse 38:6 and 15, and also in 39:2, God says that this attacking force shall come from the 'north'. But, the original Hebrew "gives the qualifier meaning 'extreme' or 'uttermost' to the term, 'north', all three times."8 When God gives direction in the Bible, it is always in reference to His Chosen Nation, Israel. In God's eyes, Israel is located precisely in the middle of the Earth. Therefore, what nation(s) lie to the 'uttermost north' from Israel generally, and Jerusalem specifically? Modern Russia lies directly north of Israel and Moscow lies directly north of Jerusalem.9 http://www.cuttingedge.org/News/n1037.html

What a bunch of poo. Seriously where do you nutters come up with this?


First of all the Russian people originated from viking groups known as the Varangians, with heavy cultural influences from Kievan Rus. The varangians dominated the tributaries centred around Moscow and were the forefathers of the duchy of Muscovy which expanded into the Russian state.

Secondly the scynthians disappeared around the first century BC. With all indications that they moved south east and not north, if they weren't destroyed by nomadic tribes moving west (Kazakhs) .

Rosh= Russ? are you kidding me? this isin't even how the Russians pronounce it which is much closer to "rue" as in "rue the day" or "Ruesskii" meaning the Russian people.

Moscow, the western bastardisation of "maskva" derived from the tribal name Meshech? Who the f*ck are the Meshech? I have studied allot about Russia not once have I EVER heard of these guys. SO what's your source for this previously unheard of tribe, who is the supposed origin of Maskva (which clearly has fino-urgic origins by the way)?

The Coming Russian Invasion Of Israel", updated, by Thomas S.
McCall & Zola Levitt, Moody Press, chicago, 1974, 1987,

Oh, the comming invasion of Isreal by Russia,,,, published in 1974.... any day now!!

Tubal?!? wtf. There is nothing resembling Tubal anywhere near Moscow.

I have found reference of Tubal and Meshech as being Georgian.

Holly shit realy? Russia the country that covers 1/6th of the planet primarily ringing the north pole is north of Isreal. MIND BLOWN.


Seriously I think this is some of the dumbest crap I've read in a while.

I'm sorry, but I'm choosing to go with countless historians with degrees opposed to some random dude who says he studied Russia "allot" and never heard of something. It's "a lot" btw. Israel is not spelled Isreal either btw. You say MIND BLOWN about Russia being north of Israel. Moscow is exactly north of Jerusalem. I was going to ask what you think Magog is since you seem to be an expert on history (enough to challenge people with phd), but I don't want to flood this topic.

Listen buddy, I happen to have a degree in Russian History and was taught Russian history by a number of phds. Not once was this theory ever mentioned. I also have bookshelf full of Russian history and Russian politcal science books, never have I heard this nonsense. I can only conclude this guy is a crackpot.

Countless historians eh? Your webpage cites the bible and 4 other guys.

1.Tim lahaye has a doctorate in "ministry"
2. Thomas S. McCall has a "Th.M. in Old Testament studies and a Th.D. in Semitic languages and Old Testament"
3. Zola Levitt " held music degrees from Duquesne University and Indiana University (doctoral coursework completed), and an Honorary Th.D. from Faith Bible College"
4.Peter Lemessurier Qualifications unkown. I was unable to find anything about this guy other than he wrote a number of new age/religious books.

None of these people are historians, they are all theologians, actually one isn't even a theologian he was just handy with a flute, unless you don't need any formal education to be theologian. Also to be fair I have no clue who this Lemessurier guy is, I could find no info on him other than his book list.

So are the number of historians supporting this theory literally uncountable due to there being none of them?

So how are these people qualified to talk about who modern Russia is descended from? Their link seems to be Scynthians were geographically in the same area as southern Russia, and therefore the Russians are their descendants. An area not controlled by the Russians until 1500 by the way. As well as a handful of old Hebrew words they have decided are somehow linked to Russian places.

Lol what?


Moscow is "Exactly" north is it? if it is they should share the same longitude. Let's check that out shall we. Jerusalem Longitude 34,48 Moscow Longitude 37,36 hmmm.

The origin of the Russian people has been pretty heavily researched and there are two competing theories. Either they originated from Vikings who then mixed with the locals(favoured theory) or from the south slavs of Kievan Russ.

This website is the first I have heard of this "theory".

[BigBallinStalin]

The origin of the Russian people has been pretty heavily researched and there are two competing theories. Either they originated from Vikings who then mixed with the locals(favoured theory) or from the south slavs of Kievan Russ.

WAT

Why is the the viking theory favored over the Kievan Russ theory??

[Baron Von PWN]

The origin of the Russian people has been pretty heavily researched and there are two competing theories. Either they originated from Vikings who then mixed with the locals(favoured theory) or from the south slavs of Kievan Russ.

WAT

Why is the the viking theory favored over the Kievan Russ theory??

Because the Russian state grew around the principality of Moscow, which was taken over by these viking dudes the Varangians way back. They followed the River systems of Russia to the Moscow region and established themselves there. Kievan Russ was further to the south around Kiev and supporters of the theory have always been vague as to how they moved north. One of the big reasons the Kievan Russ theory is still around is because it was favoured by the Soviet elites who didin't like the idea of Viking "aristocratic" types being the founders of the Russian state, and prefered the idea of Slavic peasant culture that Kievan russ supported.

Either way it is clear Kievan Russ had heavy influences on Muscovy but they were not the source of Moscocy. That was the Varangian line.

[Neoteny]

I don't remember the terms "Russia" or "Iran" being in the Bible. Did I overlook them?

No, you just didn't realize that the word didn't exist yet. You may not find the word computer in The Bible either. Anyways, Magog is modern day Russian and Persia is modern day Iran. I don't think there is any debate over Persia being modern day Iran. Here is some info about Magog. IDENTIFYING RUSSIA AS THE LEADER OF THIS INVASION FORCE

"And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal: " (Ezekiel 38:1-3)

While it is true that the Bible generically identifies the evil forces opposed to God as 'Magog', and its leaders as 'Gog', there are etymological reasons for understanding that 'Gog' and 'Magog' may refer to what is called modern Russia. We see the name, Magog, first in Genesis 10:2, as one of the sons of Japheth, one of the grandsons of Noah. In that era, it was customary for tribal, and later, national names to evolve from the name of the original founder. "Apparently, the tribal name, Magog, moved northward from the Middle East. Josephus ... notes that Magog is called the Scythians by the Greeks ... who lived in the northern regions above the Caucasus Mountains, as forerunners of modern Russia."4

The term, 'Gog', above is translated from the Hebrew phrase, 'nesi rosh'5. While 'rosh' can be an adjective meaning 'head' or leader, it can also mean a proper place name, 'Rosh'. "The Hebrew lexicon of Brown, Driver, and Briggs indicates that Rosh here is the proper name of a people ... today's Russia."6

"'Tubal' and 'Meshech' were the fifth and sixth sons of Japheth, and their descendants settled south of the Black Sea ... The name, 'Moscow' derives from the tribal name, 'Meshech', and 'Tobolsk', the name of the principal state, from 'Tubal'.7

Therefore, it is proven conclusively that God was referring to modern Russia in this passage in Ezekiel 38-39. But, God lists one more identifying factor. In verse 38:6 and 15, and also in 39:2, God says that this attacking force shall come from the 'north'. But, the original Hebrew "gives the qualifier meaning 'extreme' or 'uttermost' to the term, 'north', all three times."8 When God gives direction in the Bible, it is always in reference to His Chosen Nation, Israel. In God's eyes, Israel is located precisely in the middle of the Earth. Therefore, what nation(s) lie to the 'uttermost north' from Israel generally, and Jerusalem specifically? Modern Russia lies directly north of Israel and Moscow lies directly north of Jerusalem.9 http://www.cuttingedge.org/News/n1037.html

What a bunch of poo. Seriously where do you nutters come up with this?


First of all the Russian people originated from viking groups known as the Varangians, with heavy cultural influences from Kievan Rus. The varangians dominated the tributaries centred around Moscow and were the forefathers of the duchy of Muscovy which expanded into the Russian state.

Secondly the scynthians disappeared around the first century BC. With all indications that they moved south east and not north, if they weren't destroyed by nomadic tribes moving west (Kazakhs) .

Rosh= Russ? are you kidding me? this isin't even how the Russians pronounce it which is much closer to "rue" as in "rue the day" or "Ruesskii" meaning the Russian people.

Moscow, the western bastardisation of "maskva" derived from the tribal name Meshech? Who the f*ck are the Meshech? I have studied allot about Russia not once have I EVER heard of these guys. SO what's your source for this previously unheard of tribe, who is the supposed origin of Maskva (which clearly has fino-urgic origins by the way)?

The Coming Russian Invasion Of Israel", updated, by Thomas S.
McCall & Zola Levitt, Moody Press, chicago, 1974, 1987,

Oh, the comming invasion of Isreal by Russia,,,, published in 1974.... any day now!!

Tubal?!? wtf. There is nothing resembling Tubal anywhere near Moscow.

I have found reference of Tubal and Meshech as being Georgian.

Holly shit realy? Russia the country that covers 1/6th of the planet primarily ringing the north pole is north of Isreal. MIND BLOWN.


Seriously I think this is some of the dumbest crap I've read in a while.

I'm sorry, but I'm choosing to go with countless historians with degrees opposed to some random dude who says he studied Russia "allot" and never heard of something. It's "a lot" btw. Israel is not spelled Isreal either btw. You say MIND BLOWN about Russia being north of Israel. Moscow is exactly north of Jerusalem. I was going to ask what you think Magog is since you seem to be an expert on history (enough to challenge people with phd), but I don't want to flood this topic.

Listen buddy, I happen to have a degree in Russian History and was taught Russian history by a number of phds. Not once was this theory ever mentioned. I also have bookshelf full of Russian history and Russian politcal science books, never have I heard this nonsense. I can only conclude this guy is a crackpot.

Countless historians eh? Your webpage cites the bible and 4 other guys.

1.Tim lahaye has a doctorate in "ministry"
2. Thomas S. McCall has a "Th.M. in Old Testament studies and a Th.D. in Semitic languages and Old Testament"
3. Zola Levitt " held music degrees from Duquesne University and Indiana University (doctoral coursework completed), and an Honorary Th.D. from Faith Bible College"
4.Peter Lemessurier Qualifications unkown. I was unable to find anything about this guy other than he wrote a number of new age/religious books.

None of these people are historians, they are all theologians, actually one isn't even a theologian he was just handy with a flute, unless you don't need any formal education to be theologian. Also to be fair I have no clue who this Lemessurier guy is, I could find no info on him other than his book list.

So are the number of historians supporting this theory literally uncountable due to there being none of them?

So how are these people qualified to talk about who modern Russia is descended from? Their link seems to be Scynthians were geographically in the same area as southern Russia, and therefore the Russians are their descendants. An area not controlled by the Russians until 1500 by the way. As well as a handful of old Hebrew words they have decided are somehow linked to Russian places.

Lol what?


Moscow is "Exactly" north is it? if it is they should share the same longitude. Let's check that out shall we. Jerusalem Longitude 34,48 Moscow Longitude 37,36 hmmm.

The origin of the Russian people has been pretty heavily researched and there are two competing theories. Either they originated from Vikings who then mixed with the locals(favoured theory) or from the south slavs of Kievan Russ.

This website is the first I have heard of this "theory".

Therefore, there is no god. I have a degree in science, so I am qualified to say that science backs Baron von PWN, and my conclusion.

[PROFITS]

God is unfalsifiable.

Scientist that come up with theories to get trillions of dollars from government for further research doesn't disprove anything. Scientist that approve of these theories (if approved will result in millions and billions of $ for further research) opposed to not approving (if not approved results in cuts of millions and billions of $ and jobs) does not count as proof of anything. However, there are many benefits that come out of this research and I don't oppose it at all. I'm just saying I wouldn't be persuaded by it to put all my faith in it.

If any one of you guys would like to start a new link regarding religion, science, or history of Russia, I'd be glad to join the conversation if you pm me the link. Otherwise, lets not flood this topic with things not may get off subject. BTW, that one single source does not represent the theory of Magog and Russia. Multiple Historians from around the world have concluded this. I'm not sure anybody is claiming 100% fact of this, but it is a widely known and accepted theory from widely known and accepted sources.

[Baron Von PWN]

God is unfalsifiable.

Scientist that come up with theories to get trillions of dollars from government for further research doesn't disprove anything. Scientist that approve of these theories (if approved will result in millions and billions of $ for further research) opposed to not approving (if not approved results in cuts of millions and billions of $ and jobs) does not count as proof of anything. However, there are many benefits that come out of this research and I don't oppose it at all. I'm just saying I wouldn't be persuaded by it to put all my faith in it.

If any one of you guys would like to start a new link regarding religion, science, or history of Russia, I'd be glad to join the conversation if you pm me the link. Otherwise, lets not flood this topic with things not may get off subject. BTW, that one single source does not represent the theory of Magog and Russia. Multiple Historians from around the world have concluded this. I'm not sure anybody is claiming 100% fact of this, but it is a widely known and accepted theory from widely known and accepted sources.

Feel free to PM me these multiple "historians".

[BigBallinStalin]

The origin of the Russian people has been pretty heavily researched and there are two competing theories. Either they originated from Vikings who then mixed with the locals(favoured theory) or from the south slavs of Kievan Russ.

WAT

Why is the the viking theory favored over the Kievan Russ theory??

Because the Russian state grew around the principality of Moscow, which was taken over by these viking dudes the Varangians way back. They followed the River systems of Russia to the Moscow region and established themselves there. Kievan Russ was further to the south around Kiev and supporters of the theory have always been vague as to how they moved north. One of the big reasons the Kievan Russ theory is still around is because it was favoured by the Soviet elites who didin't like the idea of Viking "aristocratic" types being the founders of the Russian state, and prefered the idea of Slavic peasant culture that Kievan russ supported.

Either way it is clear Kievan Russ had heavy influences on Muscovy but they were not the source of Moscocy. That was the Varangian line.

Yeah, I've played Medieval 2: Total War (Stainless Steel mod) too!

Who exactly were the locals, who later mixed with the Varangians?

What were the locals relation to the Kievan Russ? Couldn't there have been an earlier connection which is obscure from the historical accounts?

[BigBallinStalin]

NEOTENY< WHY YOU DIRTY BUGGER


Gentlemen, the "God exists, NO HE DOESN'T, YES HE DOES AND STOP BELITTING MY BELIEFS" thread is not here.

[Neoteny]

God is unfalsifiable.

Scientist that come up with theories to get trillions of dollars from government for further research doesn't disprove anything. Scientist that approve of these theories (if approved will result in millions and billions of $ for further research) opposed to not approving (if not approved results in cuts of millions and billions of $ and jobs) does not count as proof of anything. However, there are many benefits that come out of this research and I don't oppose it at all. I'm just saying I wouldn't be persuaded by it to put all my faith in it.

If any one of you guys would like to start a new link regarding religion, science, or history of Russia, I'd be glad to join the conversation if you pm me the link. Otherwise, lets not flood this topic with things not may get off subject. BTW, that one single source does not represent the theory of Magog and Russia. Multiple Historians from around the world have concluded this. I'm not sure anybody is claiming 100% fact of this, but it is a widely known and accepted theory from widely known and accepted sources.

Feel free to PM me these multiple "historians".

Also, who's paying their salary and research costs.

NEOTENY< WHY YOU DIRTY BUGGER


Gentlemen, the "God exists, NO HE DOESN'T, YES HE DOES AND STOP BELITTING MY BELIEFS" thread is not here.

:runs away cackling:

Cackle cackle.

[Baron Von PWN]

The origin of the Russian people has been pretty heavily researched and there are two competing theories. Either they originated from Vikings who then mixed with the locals(favoured theory) or from the south slavs of Kievan Russ.

WAT

Why is the the viking theory favored over the Kievan Russ theory??

Because the Russian state grew around the principality of Moscow, which was taken over by these viking dudes the Varangians way back. They followed the River systems of Russia to the Moscow region and established themselves there. Kievan Russ was further to the south around Kiev and supporters of the theory have always been vague as to how they moved north. One of the big reasons the Kievan Russ theory is still around is because it was favoured by the Soviet elites who didin't like the idea of Viking "aristocratic" types being the founders of the Russian state, and prefered the idea of Slavic peasant culture that Kievan russ supported.

Either way it is clear Kievan Russ had heavy influences on Muscovy but they were not the source of Moscocy. That was the Varangian line.

Yeah, I've played Medieval 2: Total War (Stainless Steel mod) too!

Who exactly were the locals, who later mixed with the Varangians?

What were the locals relation to the Kievan Russ? Couldn't there have been an earlier connection which is obscure from the historical accounts?

They were Slavs, who later mixed with the varangians, to make the "Great Russians". Historians are devided on wether the Varangians were invited by the slavs in order to establish order or were simply conquered.

Kievan Russ were slavs and went on to become Ukrainians and Belorussians.

The three together are considered the "eastern" slavs .

Then there are your western slavs Poles,Czeks, Slovaks and Morovians and then there are the Southern slavs of the Balkans.

There are earlier connections in that they are all slavs who at some point moved west., displacing whoever was there before.

[BigBallinStalin]

Okay! Thanks, BVP.

In US-Iran news, the bargaining game continues.

[PROFITS]

The origin of the Russian people has been pretty heavily researched and there are two competing theories. Either they originated from Vikings who then mixed with the locals(favoured theory) or from the south slavs of Kievan Russ.

WAT

Why is the the viking theory favored over the Kievan Russ theory??

Because the Russian state grew around the principality of Moscow, which was taken over by these viking dudes the Varangians way back. They followed the River systems of Russia to the Moscow region and established themselves there. Kievan Russ was further to the south around Kiev and supporters of the theory have always been vague as to how they moved north. One of the big reasons the Kievan Russ theory is still around is because it was favoured by the Soviet elites who didin't like the idea of Viking "aristocratic" types being the founders of the Russian state, and prefered the idea of Slavic peasant culture that Kievan russ supported.

Either way it is clear Kievan Russ had heavy influences on Muscovy but they were not the source of Moscocy. That was the Varangian line.

Yeah, I've played Medieval 2: Total War (Stainless Steel mod) too!

Who exactly were the locals, who later mixed with the Varangians?

What were the locals relation to the Kievan Russ? Couldn't there have been an earlier connection which is obscure from the historical accounts?

They were Slavs, who later mixed with the varangians, to make the "Great Russians". Historians are devided on wether the Varangians were invited by the slavs in order to establish order or were simply conquered.

Kievan Russ were slavs and went on to become Ukrainians and Belorussians.

The three together are considered the "eastern" slavs .

Then there are your western slavs Poles,Czeks, Slovaks and Morovians and then there are the Southern slavs of the Balkans.

There are earlier connections in that they are all slavs who at some point moved west., displacing whoever was there before.

I'd be happy to join this conversation if you feel it's worth starting a new topic on.

[PROFITS]

I feel less confident about diplomacy with Iran on this matter as most felt about North Korea. We all know how that turned out.

[Baron Von PWN]

I'd be happy to join this conversation if you feel it's worth starting a new topic on.

If you want to talk about your crazy prophecies and how they relate to Russia go ahead start a thread. I will be in attendance and raging mightily at the nonsense that will no doubt be posted. Or you could even post in this thread viewtopic.php?f=8&t=123379&hilit=ask+me+anything+about+Russia#p2710675. Which is about anything to do with Russia or the Soviet Union.

I don't feel the need to start a thread about it.

[Juan_Bottom]

As OP, I declare ye can flood away this topic--until something very interesting happens with Iran.

It wont be an American invasion of Iran, I can tell you that much.

If Israel were to invade, would you be shocked that US mercenaries were operating in Iran? How about US Special Forces in Iran?

Israel can't invade Iran, but they can attack it. I said that the US may provide some niche support, even an airstrike or two. But the US isn't there to attack Iran. It's extra large carrier force is there to intimidate Iran into complying or to not counter-attack Israel. Obama can't not support Israel, but he can't attack Iran either.

[BigBallinStalin]

I feel less confident about diplomacy with Iran on this matter as most felt about North Korea. We all know how that turned out.

Right now, it's about posturing and bargaining.

I was talking to a foreign policy analyst about this Iran situation. He described it as good cop, bad cop at first. France is the nice guy, coaxing Iran to work out a deal, while the US is the bad cop with the sanctions.

Now, it's good cop-bad cop-crazy cop, where Israel is the officer in the car ripping apart his shirt, while the US (after pulling over Iran) says, "Look, Iran. We can either work out a deal together, or I'll have to let my friend in the car sort this out. What's it gonna be?"

[Juan_Bottom]

Exactly. That's how I see it.

[BigBallinStalin]

Exactly. That's how I see it.

How else do you see it?

[Juan_Bottom]

A lot more clearly than you I suppose. Mr "America is gonna invade Iran for Israel."

Also, I do wonder how Israel is going to use this for the Republican advantage. Obviously a Republican administration is always better for Israel-America relations. So how, I wonder, are they using this situation against Obama?

[Woodruff]

I feel less confident about diplomacy with Iran on this matter as most felt about North Korea. We all know how that turned out.

I trust Iran SLIGHTLY more than I trusted North Korea. I don't think that Iran is being run by raving lunatics. I'm quite certain that North Korea was.