Russia Discussion

Tyrion said:
Now, if I lived in any of those countries, I might consider that pretty worrying especially given Russia's track record. If they're so paranoid about NATO expansion, why not stop pushing it's neighbours away.
Click to expand...

They are really paranoid. Even many years after the Cold War, they keep sending those bombers flying either in foreign airspace or close to those.

Can you imagine how public opinion would have reacted if Western countries kept sending strategic bombers close to Russian airspace after the Cold War?
 
Tyrion said:
Now, if I lived in any of those countries, I might consider that pretty worrying especially given Russia's track record. If they're so paranoid about NATO expansion, why not stop pushing it's neighbours away.
Click to expand...

What's Russia's track record exactly, and how does that compare to the US's, the UK's, or more generally NATO's?
Given NATO's track record and the fact that it began increasing it's presence on Russia's border (in the guise of a missile defense shield against the likely threat of nuclear attack from Iran and North Korea), and going against post cold war agreements, long before the conflict in Ukraine, I would say the paranoia is justified.
Every army in the world creates scenarios for war-games based on various actual locations around the world. I think it would be safe to say that NATO's exercises follow the same principal, unless you know otherwise.

Association with one side or the other can seriusly affect the way we perceive things. Russia as well as the western nations are acting in their self-interest. Putin will continue to look out for his nations geopolitical interests as those opposing him will look out for theirs. When these interests are no longer aligned you get a conflict where the strongest side usually wins. Simply painting one side as evil is quite frankly juvenile and naive. Can people please stop perceiving their side as the "good guys" acting in the best interest of human kind; it's getting quite annoying!!???
 
Fergie's gum said:
What's Russia's track record exactly, and how does that compare to the US's, the UK's, or more generally NATO's?
Given NATO's track record and the fact that it began increasing it's presence on Russia's border (in the guise of a missile defense shield against the likely threat of nuclear attack from Iran and North Korea), and going against post cold war agreements, long before the conflict in Ukraine, I would say the paranoia is justified.
Every army in the world creates scenarios for war-games based on various actual locations around the world. I think it would be safe to say that NATO's exercises follow the same principal, unless you know otherwise.

Association with one side or the other can seriusly affect the way we perceive things. Russia as well as the western nations are acting in their self-interest. Putin will continue to look out for his nations geopolitical interests as those opposing him will look out for theirs. When these interests are no longer aligned you get a conflict where the strongest side usually wins. Simply painting one side as evil is quite frankly juvenile and naive. Can people please stop perceiving their side as the "good guys" acting in the best interest of human kind; it's getting quite annoying!!???
Click to expand...

This is a bit more nuanced than just a geopolitical handbags with two sides acting on self-interest, and the relativists who like to couch it as such often completely overlook the idea that Putin's behavior is driven by a desire to remain in power after a decade and a half of nurturing a system of intense corruption and Kleptocratic patronage within the Russian system. He has turned Russia into an authoritarian state and is relying on concepts like nationalism, propaganda, neo-imperialism, and the theft of foreign land to keep himself relevant to his patronage network of Oligarchs and the Russian public. Therefore, this entire issue is innately being driven by domestic Russian politics, whereby Putin views the existence of a democratic state on Russia's front door (Ukraine) as an existential threat to his dictatorship. Had he been a true statesman from the start and implemented the necessary reforms that Russia needed following the Yeltsin years, then relinquished power as all true Democratic leaders do after a term or two, then none of this would be taking place. Unfortunately, he hasn't and so it needs to be said in no uncertain terms that this entire debacle is the result of a corrupt little dictator who is slowly destroying a great country because he doesn't want to relinquish power.
 
Ukraine cages its soldiers to stop them getting drunk: Alcohol problem is so bad army has to put troops in an open air drunk-tank.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...oops-locked-metal-cages-punishment-drunk.html

2A1B8AAF00000578-3144833-image-a-2_1435682406968.jpg
 
Raoul said:
This is a bit more nuanced than just a geopolitical handbags with two sides acting on self-interest, and the relativists who like to couch it as such often completely overlook the idea that Putin's behavior is driven by a desire to remain in power after a decade and a half of nurturing a system of intense corruption and Kleptocratic patronage within the Russian system. He has turned Russia into an authoritarian state and is relying on concepts like nationalism, propaganda, neo-imperialism, and the theft of foreign land to keep himself relevant to his patronage network of Oligarchs and the Russian public. Therefore, this entire issue is innately being driven by domestic Russian politics, whereby Putin views the existence of a democratic state on Russia's front door (Ukraine) as an existential threat to his dictatorship. Had he been a true statesman from the start and implemented the necessary reforms that Russia needed following the Yeltsin years, then relinquished power as all true Democratic leaders do after a term or two, then none of this would be taking place. Unfortunately, he hasn't and so it needs to be said in no uncertain terms that this entire debacle is the result of a corrupt little dictator who is slowly destroying a great country because he doesn't want to relinquish power.
Click to expand...


You keep writing the same nonsense over and over. You've been to Ukraine to five minutes some time ago and that apparently made you an expert on everything that happens in that part of the world. I lived in the US for 15 years but I would never proclaim myself a top expert on American history or politics and would never lecture those who were born and raised there on what America is all about. I may have a strong opinion about US foreign policies, but there are many things I could never understand about the country that is not my homeland, even if I know much more about it than you ever would about the subject of this thread.

Then again, when the US Ambassador to Ukraine makes a fool of himself for millions to see, I guess your own mix of arrogance and incompetence can be forgiven.

http://redpilltimes.com/ukrainian-p...ter-with-buk-pic-from-a-2013-moscow-air-show/
 
Raoul said:
This is a bit more nuanced than just a geopolitical handbags with two sides acting on self-interest, and the relativists who like to couch it as such often completely overlook the idea that Putin's behavior is driven by a desire to remain in power after a decade and a half of nurturing a system of intense corruption and Kleptocratic patronage within the Russian system. He has turned Russia into an authoritarian state and is relying on concepts like nationalism, propaganda, neo-imperialism, and the theft of foreign land to keep himself relevant to his patronage network of Oligarchs and the Russian public. Therefore, this entire issue is innately being driven by domestic Russian politics, whereby Putin views the existence of a democratic state on Russia's front door (Ukraine) as an existential threat to his dictatorship. Had he been a true statesman from the start and implemented the necessary reforms that Russia needed following the Yeltsin years, then relinquished power as all true Democratic leaders do after a term or two, then none of this would be taking place. Unfortunately, he hasn't and so it needs to be said in no uncertain terms that this entire debacle is the result of a corrupt little dictator who is slowly destroying a great country because he doesn't want to relinquish power.
Click to expand...

Firstly, can I just say that you have very good writing skills. You communicate your opinion very well.

From what I gather however, you're saying the west is in conflict with Putin for democracy's sake. I agree that this is true, but not for the democracy that you and I aspire to, but for a hacked, hypocritical, morally-void version of democracy that is designed not to serve the people (demos) but to serve the elite few (oligoi). So in short you want to replace one oligarchy with another which is more familiar to you. That there is the crux of the matter. This is why I stated that "association with one side or the other can seriously affect the way we perceive things.

Now some people may argue that it is better for humanity to live in a world with one unchallenged centre of power, while others see it as beneficial to have a powerful opposition to keep the major power in check. I think it would be an easy choice to make if the centre of power was trustworthy and had truly democratic and humanistic intentions, but sadly as has been proven time and again, it does not.
 
Raoul said:
This is a bit more nuanced than just a geopolitical handbags with two sides acting on self-interest, and the relativists who like to couch it as such often completely overlook the idea that Putin's behavior is driven by a desire to remain in power after a decade and a half of nurturing a system of intense corruption and Kleptocratic patronage within the Russian system. He has turned Russia into an authoritarian state and is relying on concepts like nationalism, propaganda, neo-imperialism, and the theft of foreign land to keep himself relevant to his patronage network of Oligarchs and the Russian public. Therefore, this entire issue is innately being driven by domestic Russian politics, whereby Putin views the existence of a democratic state on Russia's front door (Ukraine) as an existential threat to his dictatorship. Had he been a true statesman from the start and implemented the necessary reforms that Russia needed following the Yeltsin years, then relinquished power as all true Democratic leaders do after a term or two, then none of this would be taking place. Unfortunately, he hasn't and so it needs to be said in no uncertain terms that this entire debacle is the result of a corrupt little dictator who is slowly destroying a great country because he doesn't want to relinquish power.
Click to expand...

It's a pity Putin hasn't encouraged his wife or brother to stand for election and keep things in the family. In a democratic way of course.
 
antihenry said:
Kiev forced to fight its own fascist militias | The Times.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4495642.ece
Click to expand...
This is all so depressing.
The cold war beginning to get colder again, Isis & the whole middle east mess, africa looking like it could be caught up in civil wars / muslim extremism for years. The USA acting like a Hegemon and China looking like they might well stand up to them.
Is it just me or is the world more messed up than usual at the moment?
 
Raoul said:
Very good interview with Garry Kasparov - who hits the nail on the head regarding Putin.

http://imrussia.org/en/opinions/232...itarian-one-is-the-absence-of-mass-repression
Click to expand...
some rather strange bits in there imo

G.K.: That brings to mind the old Montenegrin joke: “We aren’t afraid of German planes, because together with the Russians, we are 200 million” [Ed.—the original joke rhymes]. Together with the Chinese, we are 1.5 billion, but there are nine times more Chinese than Russians. But that’s not the most important thing. Nuclear weapons aside, the powers of the two countries are not at all comparable. China is a country that has a plan looking ahead many decades, if not centuries. And China looks at Russia as a territory to be swallowed up in the future. You don’t have to be a great geopolitical strategist to understand that China considers significant parts of Russia to be under temporary occupation: the Far East and Eastern Siberia.

Approximately half of Russia should become part of Greater China in the opinion of Chinese geopolitical strategists. And this process is very successfully under way—Chinese are settling on Russian lands. We don’t yet know the exact numbers, although even official statistics, which minimize by multiples the real number of Chinese, are alarming. It is clear that the current conflict between Russia and the West is beneficial for China. Russia signs lopsided agreements that are purely for the purpose of making China smile encouragingly. Strategically, [these agreements] ensure the Sinification of half of Russia’s territory.
Click to expand...

I think that's stretching things a bit far for example...

map-articleLarge.png
]

that's more like a conspiracy theory than a reality and should be given about as much credence as mr icke and his reptilian royal family
 
sun_tzu said:
some rather strange bits in there imo



I think that's stretching things a bit far for example...

map-articleLarge.png
]

that's more like a conspiracy theory than a reality and should be given about as much credence as mr icke and his reptilian royal family
Click to expand...

A bit off topic really. I was referring to his critique of Putin, which is quite accurate and something no one inside Russia would be prepared to offer for fear of death or imprisonment.
 
Kasparov is a nobody. A brilliant chess player, no doubt, but he is clueless when it comes to politics. He is a bit of a joke, really. No one takes him seriously and he's been living in NYC for some time now.
 
antihenry said:
Kasparov is a nobody. A brilliant chess player, no doubt, but he is clueless when it comes to politics. He is a bit of a joke, really. No one takes him seriously and he's been living in NYC for some time now.
Click to expand...

No shit, he's been living abroad because he was arrested as an opposition figure inside Putin's police state. The fact that he's outside Russia where he isn't subjected to arrest and intimidation is what allows him to speak the truth.

 
Raoul said:
No shit, he's been living abroad because he was arrested as an opposition figure inside Putin's police state. The fact that he's outside Russia where he isn't subjected to arrest and intimidation is what allows him to speak the truth.

Click to expand...


He's a self-important dickhead with delusions of grandeur. On top of it, he's a coward. While the likes of Navalny, Sobchak, Udaltsov etc at least try and voice their anti-Putin views in Russia, Kasparov fled the country at the first opportunity and all he does is playing the part of the Russian freedom fighter for gullible Westerners, whose knowledge of the modern Russia's realities at the very best matches yours or Sir Matt's for example, which is next to nothing.

Kasparov is a classic example of the poster boy for the CPSU, who turned on his former masters when it suited him. The Soviet elite nurtured him and put him on a pedestal, they bent the rules to make him a Party member at a very young age and he was more than happy to enjoy his special status because it afforded him the kind of a lifestyle most Soviet citizens could only dream of. The moment he realized Commies were rapidly losing influence and the system was falling apart, he 'suddenly' changed his views.
 
antihenry said:
He's a self-important dickhead with delusions of grandeur. On top of it, he's a coward. While the likes of Navalny, Sobchak, Udaltsov etc at least try and voice their anti-Putin views in Russia, Kasparov fled the country at the first opportunity and all he does is playing the part of the Russian freedom fighter for gullible Westerners, whose knowledge of the modern Russia's realities at the very best matches yours or Sir Matt's for example, which is next to nothing.

Kasparov is a classic example of the poster boy for the CPSU, who turned on his former masters when it suited him. The Soviet elite nurtured him and put him on a pedestal, they bent the rules to make him a Party member at a very young age and he was more than happy to enjoy his special status because it afforded him the kind of a lifestyle most Soviet citizens could only dream of. The moment he realized Commies were rapidly losing influence and the system was falling apart, he 'suddenly' changed his views.
Click to expand...

Why on earth would Kasparov stay inside a police state that seeks to persecute and imprison any form if dissent when he could be far more effective in galvanizing support against Putin and his criminal gang from the outside. What he's doing is the right thing and once Putin is gone, its the actions of people like Kasparov that will be viewed by history as the most courageous.
 
Raoul said:
Why on earth would Kasparov stay inside a police state that seeks to persecute and imprison any form if dissent when he could be far more effective in galvanizing support against Putin and his criminal gang from the outside. What he's doing is the right thing and once Putin is gone, its the actions of people like Kasparov that will be viewed by history as the most courageous.
Click to expand...

If he had any courage, he'd have stayed and fought that regime like all the other protest leaders, the ones I'd mentioned earlier and many more. Some of them suffered professionally because of their views, others were subjected to a barrage of hatred from the state owned media, etc. Kasparov ran at the first sign of trouble. Now he's showing what a heroic critic of Putin's regime he truly is all the way from his Upper West Side condo. Courageous, very courageous.

Politically he has no support within the country whatsoever and even within the protest movement, as small and insignificant as that group is, he's the least respected for the reasons I'd already mentioned. Unlike Putin, by the way, no one besides chess enthusiasts would care once he's gone.
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
Pathetic isn't it. The dirty little liar doesn't want his lies revealed to the world.
Click to expand...

Once the report comes out in October confirming that the Russian-backed/Russian rebels shot it down, they will no doubt reject the report as biased and worthless. The leaks have consistently pointed the finger at them, but he can't have his soldiers being tried in a court he doesn't control.
 
Sir Matt said:
Once the report comes out in October confirming that the Russian-backed/Russian rebels shot it down, they will no doubt reject the report as biased and worthless. The leaks have consistently pointed the finger at them, but he can't have his soldiers being tried in a court he doesn't control.
Click to expand...

He will eventually be humiliated by the report and the fact that he's been lying to his citizens and the mothers of Russian troops killed in Ukraine. As much as he tries to control the media, this will eventually come out and lead squarely back to him.
 
Vice reporter follows the social media trail to track down a Russian soldier who fought in Ukraine:



Quite surprised how Vice were able to film so openly in some of these areas.
 
There was a story by Alexander Golts this week saying that the Russian army leadership are getting fairly desperate in terms of persuading soldiers to go to Ukraine (not surprising given they deny all knowledge if you are killed). Given the incredible amounts of corruption in Russia (including of course the army budget), it makes you wonder about the military capacity of the Russian army against serious opposition. I suspect it is very limited indeed in terms of an offensive.
 
Raoul said:
:lol: Shocking indeed.
Click to expand...

Obviously it's easier to tell your people that the final report was an American imperialist propaganda piece if it's not UN authorized. Either way, they would believe pretty much whatever Putin told them.
 
Uzz said:
Russian newspaper Izvestia reports that government officials have doubled the average price demanded for a bribe this year, because falling oil prices and Western sanctions have halved the value of the rouble against the dollar
Click to expand...

All that shows is that the international price of bribes is in $... Just ask fifa
 
Raoul said:
This is a bit more nuanced than just a geopolitical handbags with two sides acting on self-interest, and the relativists who like to couch it as such often completely overlook the idea that Putin's behavior is driven by a desire to remain in power after a decade and a half of nurturing a system of intense corruption and Kleptocratic patronage within the Russian system. He has turned Russia into an authoritarian state and is relying on concepts like nationalism, propaganda, neo-imperialism, and the theft of foreign land to keep himself relevant to his patronage network of Oligarchs and the Russian public. Therefore, this entire issue is innately being driven by domestic Russian politics, whereby Putin views the existence of a democratic state on Russia's front door (Ukraine) as an existential threat to his dictatorship. Had he been a true statesman from the start and implemented the necessary reforms that Russia needed following the Yeltsin years, then relinquished power as all true Democratic leaders do after a term or two, then none of this would be taking place. Unfortunately, he hasn't and so it needs to be said in no uncertain terms that this entire debacle is the result of a corrupt little dictator who is slowly destroying a great country because he doesn't want to relinquish power.
Click to expand...

Just a nitpick.

When hasn't Russia been an authoritarian state? What Russia had in the 90's can't really be called a democracy. It was a transitional phase and the country in many ways went to hell during it.
 
Nucks said:
Just a nitpick.

When hasn't Russia been an authoritarian state? What Russia had in the 90's can't really be called a democracy. It was a transitional phase and the country in many ways went to hell during it.
Click to expand...

It seems the Russian people tend towards authoritarianism. Maybe they like it.
 
Nucks said:
Just a nitpick.

When hasn't Russia been an authoritarian state? What Russia had in the 90's can't really be called a democracy. It was a transitional phase and the country in many ways went to hell during it.
Click to expand...

Can't disagree, although recently the west have been operating under the delusion of Russia being amenable to democratic governance when in reality its is basically being run by mostly former Communist/KGB apparatchiks, and has been run more as an organized crime patronage network than a nation state.
 
Silva said:
British people tend towards the monarchy. Doesn't mean we'd wholeheartedly reject the alternative if it happened.
Click to expand...

The British haven't had an absolute monarchy in four centuries and the last time one tried it his head was chopped off in Whitehall. Britain was one of the centers of the Enlightenment and has had some form of legislature (albeit closed and restricted for much of the time) since the Magna Carta was signed 800 years ago. Now, the monarchy is entirely symbolic.
 
Sir Matt said:
It seems the Russian people tend towards authoritarianism. Maybe they like it.
Click to expand...

When i was in Saint Petersburg last month, i thought it noteworthy how wistful our guide became when referring to the Soviet era. She would speak about the inadequacy of the pension system, and the bribery required to attain quality healthcare.

That being said, the Estonians and Germans (we visited Lubeck) were very happy with things in 2015.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.