Radio Liberty Fires Reporter for Video of Civilians Killed by Kiev Forces.
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150315/1019526898.html
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150315/1019526898.html
Russia Discussion
- Thread starter iSparky
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/214857-who-rules-america
tl;dr - the average american has barely any impact on decisionmaking.
So what's the solution ? Socialism ? The abolition of money and financial system ?
I prefer tyranny.
So I start making a joke by saying that politics in America and Russia are - despite a difference in system on the official side - painfully similar and you jump into a complete different direction.
How?
Also Socialism sounds great in theory, but is a practically dysfunctional system which is incapable of working.
How?
Also Socialism sounds great in theory, but is a practically dysfunctional system which is incapable of working.
The article should be clearer. The title says he was fired but the article says he was dismissed for a month (suspended). Which is it?
A wild HIPSTER appeared!
I am glad you managed to refuse my point so greatly. I will go back to Starbucks now and take out my iPhone 5 while tumblring and twittering about the epic smackdown you did as I sip on my Caramel Macchiato and touch my ironic fullbeard.
See he even supports one of the big evil corporations that secretly rule the United States.
Sorry. I couldn't resist.
Come on now. In all seriousness, with a straight face. America and Russia have the exact same political system. There's no substantive difference between the two. If we changed your citizenship tomorrow, you'd have a 50-50 between the two. Seriously.
You seriously believe that?
No, I dont. I am not talking about the "written" politics, but about the acting. Here is my quote:
You see that little word there?
Politics is, was and will always be some soap opera with a lot of actors, some played drama and more often than not the screenwriters are behind the scenes. Including some plottwists out of nowhere. The only issue here is that the Background actors are actual human lifes which are played with. Power corrupts and corrupt people are drawn to power. (Unfortunately I don't find the research anymore about the higher percentage of sociopaths among politicians)
Let's face it: If they would really care about the people, they would have offered Crimea to have another voting which gets supervised by both sides so no questionable videos come up like in the Scotland voting and we would know for sure what Crimeas decision is. But they actually don't care. Same principle in the middle east. How exactly can Israel develop such strong military, including several nuclear weapons, in such a short time? Why not proclaim Jerusalem as international territory since all Judaism, Christianity and Islam all have spiritual relations to it? And everyone who offends against it has to go to Den Haag infront of court. Those two would solve a lot of problems.
Why don't we do that? Because they don't care. Its always about power, influence, economical and geopolitical reasons. History repeats and we are certainly not morally superior than we were 100 or 500 or 2000 years ago. If it weren't for Russia and the USA, it would be Europe and China. If it weren't for them, it would be someone else. The system doesn't matter as every system is fraudable. Actually the most transparent system would be a monarchy, but then we would go back to sudden early deaths of monarchs.
The only difference I can see between the USA and Russia is that most people in Russia now the limits of their voice while a lot of Americans still think they are free, independent and that their voice counts. I will quote my grandfather here: "In the DDR we at least knew the media lied to us and could therefor make up our own mind."
You see that little word there?
Politics is, was and will always be some soap opera with a lot of actors, some played drama and more often than not the screenwriters are behind the scenes. Including some plottwists out of nowhere. The only issue here is that the Background actors are actual human lifes which are played with. Power corrupts and corrupt people are drawn to power. (Unfortunately I don't find the research anymore about the higher percentage of sociopaths among politicians)
Let's face it: If they would really care about the people, they would have offered Crimea to have another voting which gets supervised by both sides so no questionable videos come up like in the Scotland voting and we would know for sure what Crimeas decision is. But they actually don't care. Same principle in the middle east. How exactly can Israel develop such strong military, including several nuclear weapons, in such a short time? Why not proclaim Jerusalem as international territory since all Judaism, Christianity and Islam all have spiritual relations to it? And everyone who offends against it has to go to Den Haag infront of court. Those two would solve a lot of problems.
Why don't we do that? Because they don't care. Its always about power, influence, economical and geopolitical reasons. History repeats and we are certainly not morally superior than we were 100 or 500 or 2000 years ago. If it weren't for Russia and the USA, it would be Europe and China. If it weren't for them, it would be someone else. The system doesn't matter as every system is fraudable. Actually the most transparent system would be a monarchy, but then we would go back to sudden early deaths of monarchs.
The only difference I can see between the USA and Russia is that most people in Russia now the limits of their voice while a lot of Americans still think they are free, independent and that their voice counts. I will quote my grandfather here: "In the DDR we at least knew the media lied to us and could therefor make up our own mind."
Last edited:
Probably true in most places though. All the average person will have is the right to vote and one single vote very rarely has much of an impact on the results of any elections. That is not to say that others through money can have too much influence, but we are talking the AVERAGE person.
but back on subject, Putin wanted to roll out the nukes to ensure he got the Crimea. Scary stuff.
You probably should have read the article
. I will quote the important part:"The analysts found that when controlling for the power of economic elites and organized interest groups, the influence of ordinary Americans registers at a "non-significant, near-zero level." The analysts further discovered that rich individuals and business-dominated interest groups dominate the policymaking process. The mass-based interest groups had minimal influence compared to the business-based interest groups.
The study also debunks the notion that the policy preferences of business and the rich reflect the views of common citizens. They found to the contrary that such preferences often sharply diverge and when they do, the economic elites and business interests almost always win and the ordinary Americans lose.
The authors also say that given limitations to tapping into the full power elite in America and their policy preferences, "the real world impact of elites upon public policy may be still greater" than their findings indicate.
Ultimately, Gilens and Page conclude from their work, "economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.""
You probably should have read the article
here is your summary of the article
The you probably should not have mentioned the AVERAGE person then either. But anyways you are off topic of this thread, enough.
Is this thread still about Ukraine ?
As per usual mention anything about any other country and someone derails the thread into a discussion about the US, been pretty standard for those who just do not want to have to admit Putin is wrong.
Fair point. I could have been more clear.
What kind of argumentation is that? "You are off-topic if you don't admit my view is right" ?
How about Putin isn't the only one involved in the conflict, but there are several key-players - which includes the USA as well as the EU. Things aren't black and white.
Good thing I did not say that then. Nice try though. Here's a lollipop for you
We could rename it "Ukraine truce something something but wait til you hear about Iraq!"
Just an idea.
You pretty much displayed your opinion as the only valid one and implied that anyone who brings up different points just derails the thread. So yes, you pretty much stated it.
Seriously though no matter who "wins" in the Ukraine they are going to be left with a ravaged messed to clean up and rebuild afterwards. Crimea will still be in good shape but large swatches will be absolute ruins. Whoever "wins" is going to spending billions rebuilding.
True but that doesn't mean that they aren't a really, REALLY dark shade of grey. I'm sure the US and EU have an influence on events in Ukraine. In fact, I'd hope they do. What I don't believe is that they can be blamed for the current situation half as much as Russia can or that every slight failing on the west's part means that Russia's actions in Ukraine are any less dangerous or deplorable.
Seriously though no matter who "wins" in the Ukraine they are going to be left with a ravaged messed to clean up and rebuild afterwards. Crimea will still be in good shape but large swatches will be absolute ruins. Whoever "wins" is going to spending billions rebuilding.
On that note, I saw this today and quite enjoyed it. You have to skip to 3:20 for the part just about Russia and Crimea:
Well, Russia clearly played their part to the issue, but in war there is never anyone right. All parties act out of self-interest and there are many questions to be asked. Saying that Russia has 75%+ of the blame is just way too easy and we don't know what happens behind the scenes. Let's face it, there are way too many questionable things where we still haven't gotten answers about. Alone the Ukraine Government did some pretty shady stuff and there is no public discourse about these.
That naturally doesn't release Russia from any blame, but it is way too simplified to say "Russia is the main person to blame" in a complex issue.
Of course total obliterating the land you are fighting over is nothing new in human history is it been going on since before many of today's nations even existed.
First time I glanced at this, I read it without the first "y" in tyranny. Sorry about that.It is not a simplification to say that Russia is the main aggressor here. They forcibly annexed Crimea for starters.
Which happened after the crisis in the Ukraine started already. Additionally you assume that the voting they did was not legit when the chance is there that it actually was the peoples decision. I stated a possible solution earlier already. Re-Do the voting with both sides supervising the voting. Before that it is only speculation of one side saying the voting was correct and the other side saying it was frauded.
So we are going to pretend that the Euro-Maiden/Anti-Maidan issue didn't happen and that it wasn't boiling already way before the February 2014 in the Ukraine and everyone with a proper working Intelligence Gathering Agency knew that and were trying to prepare for possible "ifs" and "whens" ?
You know, those things just don't happen out of nowhere on a whim.
You know, those things just don't happen out of nowhere on a whim.
Who says history began last year? Putin's Russia has been interfering in Ukrainian affairs since day one, attempting to control Ukrainian politics by infusing corrupt Russian standards into its system as a means to destabilize its internal affairs and control it's gas and Russian naval basing in Crimea. Western involvement is merely a counter argument to Putin's Russia behaving like it owns Ukraine as if the Soviet Union were still alive today.
And this is the part I greatly disagree with. It is way too easy and convenient to say it is only the mean bad russians, it's black and white and naturally good and evil. If history has shown one thing, that then whenever two powerful kingdoms collided, both played their part for it to escalate.
Since Russia regaining strength we are again in a cold war, because Russia wants to establish their refound strength and the west doesn't want to give away their power-monopoly. Ukraine is merely a chess piece which is important due to geopolitical - militiary and economically wise - reasons. The west wants that advantage to keep Russia at bay and Russia wants that advantage to prevent that and have more influence towards the west. It was never about the people. The big players are sacrificing those pawns, which for morally normal people are human lifes, just like in a game of chess. We - as in the western nations around the USA and EU - didn't exactly covered ourselves in glory either within the last 15-20 years. To say then that we are morally superior and barely reacting to Russia being the sole aggressor is simply arrogant to the max.
And let's be honest here - on a rational basis Russia has recently outplayed the west twice with Crimea as well as the Syria chemical weapons conflict which caused the west to have an economic embargo towards Russia as well as the NATO having aerial manoeuvre very close to the Russian borders. A few decades ago this would have easily been considered a declaration of war when the situation demands both sides to be trying to de-escalate. Just imagine for a moment Russia would have such aerial manoeuvres over Mexico and Kuba and you know how threatening of an act this is.
As I said in my previous comments already. Neither side is right and both only care for self-interest, but not about the human lifes which are on the stake. To say Russia is the only aggressor here is twisting the complex issue and redeeming the west of any blame and therefor giving us the possibility to keep going with these actions by having no resistance amoung the people And then in 50 years our grandchildren (if they will even exist) can ask us "Why didn't you do anything to find a peaceful solution?". We have been there 70 years ago, because until the war actually started the people didn't think of any bad their side did as well.
Its not the best way of looking at it. It is about power - that's for sure, but its also equally a matter of norms and economics. For example, if Russia were a liberal democracy in line with EU norms and was focused on economic cooperation rather subversion, coercion, and Sudetenland style land grabs; there would be no sanctions and no conflict. The conflict only exists because Putin's Russia is corrupt to the core, which when combined with having the world's largest nuclear arsenal, and the invasion and land grabs of neighboring states in the 21st century, makes for a recipe of inevitable conflict. Europe and the US are quite rightly objecting to this through the expression of sanctions. If Russia had proper leadership that reformed its internal governance, expanded media freedoms, civil society, reduced corruption, and a list of other EU type norms, there would no conflict at all as all states would be operating on the same standard. Ultimately, states gravitate towards common societal norms that undergird their ability to maintain stable economic relations, which Putin's Russia has clearly deviated from.
Aye the thing that really bothers me with this is Putin and the fact he's been in power for far too long.
He's crossed the tipping point of leaving office, in that if he were to leave, any follow on Russian governments could prosecute him for a litany of crimes from corruption to murder, to drug trafficking . Therefore he's incentivized to cling to power for as long as possible, which also means he is likely to crack down on all forms of potential dissent or opposition, as their strengthening would be perceived as a potential threat to his own grip on power. I doubt he will ever leave office unless he is deposed through a coup or a popular uprising, which imo, is his worst fear and the reason he has completely securitized the Russian mindset towards foreign invaders and fascists. Its basically a way to preserve his own dictatorship.
EU norms ...
... where a prime minister gets put into position without a democractic vote (Mario Monti)
... where one country has more and more prevailing pedophile issues (Jimmy Savile case with him being good friends with Thatcher & Prince Charles, the coverups of officials in the Roterham, Sheffield, Oxford-cases as well as the documents accusing several people in the parliament of it)
... where a german politician, who had to go, gets a few months later an easy and influental position in a thinkthank of Washington as well as becoming part of the EU (Guttenberg)
... where it the Libya war was supported while not standing up to the disaster they created
... where one country sells and even gifts several nucreal capable high-tech submarines to a country which is at constant risk of war (Germany to Israel)
... where everyone loses their shit over freedom of speech towards one religion, but it being illegal - and can lead to prison time - towards another one with a star (Je suis Charlie & Judaism)
... who accepts that in several EU member states critical people get arrested (Dieudonné M’bala M’bala & Giulietto Chiesa)
... who supports the Ukraine government despite having shady people - including actual nazis - fighting for them
... who hides the fact that poverty is constantly increasing inside the EU (see Red Cross report)
... who has 8 out of the 10 most indepted countries worldwide among them
... who ignores the decision of Den Haag who decided that the sanctions against Iran are illegitimate
... whose closest ally has ongoing wars for decades - mostly organised from european ground
... whose closest ally has the most prisoners worldwide by total numbers as well as population-percentage
... whose closest ally is the only country who ever used atombombs on humans
... whose closest ally stabs them in the back for still having economic trade despite the EU-embargo and no one calls it out
Those are just a few from the top of my mind. In German we have a saying: "Who sits in a house of glass shouldn't throw with stones."
We should also look at some of Russia-Today headlines:
"Putin blasts WWII history rewriting as lies aimed at weakening Russia"
"Russian military exercises ‘logical response’ to NATO troops on its border"
"EU blaming Russia for lack of freedom of expression - the pot calling the kettle black"
"No matter what Russia does, US neo-cons will always go for Cold War"
"West’s ‘propaganda war for public opinion’"
"Kiev silencing opposition voices"
Those are just a few nitpicks. I am not saying Russia is right, nor wrong. I am saying that we aren't any better than them. These headlines could be easily the same for our media. So who says our media is exactly superior - especially when we have been involved in more wars in the last 30 years than Russia has? More often than not the truth is inbetween both sides and I stay with both sides being equally to blame in this game of chess being about to turn into disaster.
It is easy to point fingers, but it is much more difficult to accept own mistakes. We should first take responsibility for our own actions and accept that we have a blame in the current state of events in order to find a proper solution, because as long as we just point fingers it will be impossible to find such a solution to this conflict.
Do you find it equally questionable that Helmut Kohl was for 16 years the Kanzler of Germany or do you only find it questionable because he is Putin and it is Russia?
... where a prime minister gets put into position without a democractic vote (Mario Monti)
... where one country has more and more prevailing pedophile issues (Jimmy Savile case with him being good friends with Thatcher & Prince Charles, the coverups of officials in the Roterham, Sheffield, Oxford-cases as well as the documents accusing several people in the parliament of it)
... where a german politician, who had to go, gets a few months later an easy and influental position in a thinkthank of Washington as well as becoming part of the EU (Guttenberg)
... where it the Libya war was supported while not standing up to the disaster they created
... where one country sells and even gifts several nucreal capable high-tech submarines to a country which is at constant risk of war (Germany to Israel)
... where everyone loses their shit over freedom of speech towards one religion, but it being illegal - and can lead to prison time - towards another one with a star (Je suis Charlie & Judaism)
... who accepts that in several EU member states critical people get arrested (Dieudonné M’bala M’bala & Giulietto Chiesa)
... who supports the Ukraine government despite having shady people - including actual nazis - fighting for them
... who hides the fact that poverty is constantly increasing inside the EU (see Red Cross report)
... who has 8 out of the 10 most indepted countries worldwide among them
... who ignores the decision of Den Haag who decided that the sanctions against Iran are illegitimate
... whose closest ally has ongoing wars for decades - mostly organised from european ground
... whose closest ally has the most prisoners worldwide by total numbers as well as population-percentage
... whose closest ally is the only country who ever used atombombs on humans
... whose closest ally stabs them in the back for still having economic trade despite the EU-embargo and no one calls it out
Those are just a few from the top of my mind. In German we have a saying: "Who sits in a house of glass shouldn't throw with stones."
We should also look at some of Russia-Today headlines:
"Putin blasts WWII history rewriting as lies aimed at weakening Russia"
"Russian military exercises ‘logical response’ to NATO troops on its border"
"EU blaming Russia for lack of freedom of expression - the pot calling the kettle black"
"No matter what Russia does, US neo-cons will always go for Cold War"
"West’s ‘propaganda war for public opinion’"
"Kiev silencing opposition voices"
Those are just a few nitpicks. I am not saying Russia is right, nor wrong. I am saying that we aren't any better than them. These headlines could be easily the same for our media. So who says our media is exactly superior - especially when we have been involved in more wars in the last 30 years than Russia has? More often than not the truth is inbetween both sides and I stay with both sides being equally to blame in this game of chess being about to turn into disaster.
It is easy to point fingers, but it is much more difficult to accept own mistakes. We should first take responsibility for our own actions and accept that we have a blame in the current state of events in order to find a proper solution, because as long as we just point fingers it will be impossible to find such a solution to this conflict.
Do you find it equally questionable that Helmut Kohl was for 16 years the Kanzler of Germany or do you only find it questionable because he is Putin and it is Russia?
Uhm it was 8 years Western Germany and 8 years Germany, slightly different situation.