Your views on Russia?

[paxamericana]

I think Russia's future is tied up with the rest of Europe why they seek to isolate themselves by attacking Ukraine seems counter productive. 

Edited July 15, 2018 by paxrom

[paxamericana]

16 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Russia does not have the projection via multiple military bases on the USA's border.  The opposite is true.

Someone has been drinking that Russian coolaid...

Russia subjugate neighboring countries and if you want evidence look at Georgia, Ukraine, and ESPECIALLY Chechnya. Plenty of human rights violation all around including their own people. Last I checked most America's enemies human rights aren't violated as much as Russia's own citizen.

Russia lacks the economic and geopolitical power the US has when the soviet union collapsed.Obviously they don't carry the same capability as a true super power.

You'd rather have China and/or Russia be the new world's police? Human rights are non existence on their agenda. So as much criticism you give to America think of the alternative. America never claimed to be perfect, we do the best we can. America stands for a rule based order where the strong doesn't take advantage of the weak. We follow the rule of law, the Russian and Chinese much prefer the strong taking advantage of the weak. Look at their foreign policy for their neighbors. Their foreign policy is imperialism.

 

16 hours ago, GostHacked said:

The USA has done enough there as well. Because the reaction to an alleged (and not even vetted) gas attack on civilians is to send cruise missiles into the nation. Destruction and death is a response to destruction and death.

Naww I'll believe the CIA intelligence and Secretary of Defense James N Mattis over Russian news media any day of the week. 

How many advance NATO cruise missiles did they shoot down exactly with their old soviet S300? All of them or does that sound too much to be believable, nah lets say 70 odd something out of 100. Yup lets just make up figure out of no where and claim it news. 

Animal Assad track record on using chemical weapons ain't that great fyi. 

 

 

 

Edited July 15, 2018 by paxrom

[Argus]

On 7/14/2018 at 9:30 AM, OftenWrong said:

If the people there are tremendously unhappy with the way things are, they can change it. 

How? There is no free press and no rule of law. The media is under Putin's control, and anyone who tries to organize protests of any kind winds up getting arrested. 

[Argus]

On 7/14/2018 at 11:34 AM, GostHacked said:

Russia does not have the projection via multiple military bases on the USA's border.  The opposite is true.

But the Russians have fomented revolution and civil disruption around the world for decades. It is doing it now in western countries which everyone knows about, and in many third world countries, which is being overlooked.

Edited July 15, 2018 by Argus

[taxme]

On 7/4/2018 at 7:25 PM, Machjo said:

Though I don't agree with the annexation of Crimea, I can still understand the complexities of the situation. Prior to the annexation, protests in Kiev had gotten so far out of control that protesters were starting to occupy ministry headquarters while western politicians condemned the government for its use of force.

Now let's put this in perspective for a moment. Imagine downtown Washington DC in flames and protesters burning police cars and the Department of the Interior. Any objective viewer would conclude that the protesters, having taken control of a federal building of that importance, had reached the point of posing a genuine revolutionary threat to the survival of the state. Now imagine based on this reasonable assessment that congress declares a state of emergency and martial law and gives the military the authority to use lethal force to regain control of central government administrative offices.

Now imagine that the EU condemns this and that some members of the the European Parliament (think John Baird in Kiev's streets) come to visit Washington DC to show their support for these revolutionaries posing a genuine threat to the stability of the state and condemn the state's use of force against them as if they were just peaceful protesters. Add to that that Russia, the most powerful country in the world, has military bases stationed in Mexico and Cuba and has long expressed a certain aggressiveness towards Canada, and the revolutionaries want to join the EU which is essentially Russian-led for all intents and purposes.

Now imagine that Canada is militarily far more powerful than the US but not Russia and the EU, that New York State had long been a part of Canada before it later became a part of the United States, and most New Yorkers have long identified themselves as culturally Canadian. Now imagine that there are a few other pockets of ethnic Canadians living across parts of the northern US, that ethnic Americans have long treated ethnic Canadians in the US as second-class citizens, and as the political situation worsens, these ethnic Canadians start to worry for their safety and so start to organize to separate from the US to join Canada.

Canada, expressing concern for the rapidly deteriorating situation along its border and Russian and other European leaders cheering it on, decides to annex New York State after the state calls a quick referendum.

Now it may be that Canada would have long dreamed of retaking  New York State and just saw this as their pretext to do so. Canada would most certainly be wrong to do this. But at the same,  we'd need to understand the Canadian situation. Firstly, the US would essentially have been facing a rising revolution (and no, not just a minor protest but a violent revolution) in the streets of Washington DC that would have been falling out of control and that would already have spread like wildfire across the entire northern US along the US-Canada border with ethnic Canadians already organizing themselves militarily. European leaders would have come to Washington DC's streets to cheer the revolutionaries (and I'm sorry, but once they start burning police cars and federal  buildings, they're not just protesters anymore), and the US president would already have sought refuge in Canada. In that context, while we could disagree with Canada's actions, we could also understand them. Canada would be wrong and would deserve universal condemnation. But at the same time, how could we ignore the will of New Yorkers? It still wouldn't be an excuse to illegally annex New York of course. And if the referendum was rushed, it could warrant at least another internationally-monitored referendum, and even then Canada would still have been wrong in annexing New York State even with the will of the New Yorkers themselves without the consent of the government in Washington DC.

 

So I'm not saying that it would have been right to annex New York State or that Canada would not have deserved universal condemnation in such a scenario. What I am saying though is that Russian and other European politicians and anti-Canadian revolutionaries in the streets of Washington DC  would have provoked Canada into doing this. If I punch you just as you are about to punch me, that might constitute legitimate self defense. If I punch you after you've already punched me and started to walk away, that's assault since you no longer posed a threat to me at the time that I punched you, but you still would have to accept responsibility for having provoked me. In the same way, while we can certainly condemn Russia's actions, we cannot deny that we provoked Russia into that action, and so we too need to accept equal responsibility for the Russian annexation of Crimea.

So while we accept Russia's culpability, we need to acknowledge ours too. With that, let's not cast the first stone, accept that we messed up by provoking Russia into this action, and re-establish friendly relations with Russia.

 

1. First of all, the people in Crimea voted to join Russia. Russia did not go into Crimea and take it over. They were invited in. All left wing liberal media lies as usual. 

2. How many countries are American troops stationed in? 

3. Everybody wants to make Russia out to be the big bad bogeyman but appear to want to ignore, maybe on purpose, China and all that it has done as far as spying goes on in other countries like Canada. I have no fear of Russia or Putin. The Russian people are doing quite well and are quite satisfied with Putin as their leader. I have more fear for what China and North Korea might try and do. It looks like North Korea is backing out of the deals it made with Trump to get rid of nuclear weapons. One can never trust a commie. The communists are the liars and cheats and thieves.

Putin is not a communist. It was the communists that tried to destroy all religions in Russia in the past when they ran and ruled and destroyed that once great Christian nation. Now religion is making a come back thanks to Putin. The Russian people are free to do as they wish. All this bull shit about Russia is just that. All globalist corporate elite bull shit. I will even admit that FOX news is against Russia and Putin for some unknown reason which I find rather confusing. 

But with Trump in power in America and with Putin in power in Russia the world is safe from any world war and both are an enemy to the communist globalist elite. At least that is the way I am reading things these days. But hey. 

[OftenWrong]

10 hours ago, Argus said:

How? There is no free press and no rule of law. The media is under Putin's control, and anyone who tries to organize protests of any kind winds up getting arrested. 

I suggest that Russian citizens are ok with what their government is doing, generally. They see no need to change it. Exceptionalism.

On 7/7/2018 at 9:09 PM, Argus said:

Its people are, more often than not, ignorant drunken peasants who admire people like Putin because "He's a real man!", and are incredibly chauvinistic towards anyone not Russian. They seem to be perfectly content to live in a shithole as long as its a militarily powerful shithole that can bully other countries.

Yep.

[JamesHackerMP]

About Putin being a real man....can someone find a link to a NYT (or maybe it was WaPo) I read at the time of Putin's election, concerning his "election song". He had one and it was hilarious. The girl in the song is lamenting that her boyfriend beats her and is a deadbeat; the refrain was something like "Why can't I find a real man, a man like Putin?"

I about shat myself laughing when I read about that. But it's illustrative of his clever manipulation of the population.

[JamesHackerMP]

Oh, I think I found it. But I could have sworn it was his campaign song for his first election bid in the late 90s. Well, my memory might have failed me. Anyway here is a story about it:

http://www.pbs.org/soundtracks/stories/putin/

Actually follow this other link it's hilarious, it has subtitles in English, too. Gotta wait about 20 or so seconds in before the actual singing starts, tho.

http://russianhistoryblog.org/2011/02/youtube-of-the-week-a-man-like-putin-with-english-subtitles/

Edited July 28, 2018 by JamesHackerMP

[paxamericana]

On 7/14/2018 at 10:36 AM, GostHacked said:

The USA has done enough there as well. Because the reaction to an alleged (and not even vetted) gas attack on civilians is to send cruise missiles into the nation. Destruction and death is a response to destruction and death.

Nah Ill take our cia and pentagon offical word over russian any day

[GostHacked]

On 7/15/2018 at 12:18 PM, Argus said:

But the Russians have fomented revolution and civil disruption around the world for decades. It is doing it now in western countries which everyone knows about, and in many third world countries, which is being overlooked.

Both Russia and the US do it. And now China is having a go at it. The USA has been doing just that in the M.E. for the last 20 years and the outcome has been terrible. We don't have to worry about the Russians, we got out own idiots to deal with and we should be dealing with those stupid leaders instead of blaming Russia for all our problems.

[GostHacked]

8 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

Nah Ill take our cia and pentagon offical word over russian any day

Yeah I figured that. Remember the shame of Colin Powell?  You'll take that word?

[paxamericana]

1 hour ago, GostHacked said:

Yeah I figured that. Remember the shame of Colin Powell?  You'll take that word?

We aren't perfect. Some of my buddies who work in the intelligence community face the same issue when bad intelligence put our operator's lives at risk. We lost people because it. That is part of the gig. Now if someone in the administration purposefully and knowingly use bad intelligence to justify something for personal gain then that is a violation of our ethics law and should be prosecuted.

Edited July 28, 2018 by paxamericana

[ReeferMadness]

Modern Russia is mess and that is largely the fault of the USA.  In the 90s, Americans (other westerners too but mainly Americans) were so determined to kill socialism of any stripe, they used the IMF to push through brutal "reforms" that destroyed any economic stability that ordinary Russians had under communism.  Things deteriorated so rapidly that Russians were set to re-elect communists in 1996.  Under Clinton, the USA brazenly interfered in the Russian election and of course "the right candidate" won; amid widespread allegations of rampant electoral fraud.  Then, Yeltsin turned around and handed the reins to Putin, who, by most accounts, has since run the country much the same way as a mafia boss runs a territory.

So was Russia's interference in the 2016 American election blowback or simply payback?  Trump was buddies with Bill Clinton in that era so it's far from inconceivable that Trump had some influence in the goings on in Russia.

Politics is a dirty, incestuous affair, particularly when you throw crony capitalism into the mix.  But hey.  USA is chock full of morons who still believe that Trump is "draining the swamp".

 

 

 

 

[paxamericana]

7 hours ago, ReeferMadness said:

Politics is a dirty, incestuous affair, particularly when you throw crony capitalism into the mix.  But hey.  USA is chock full of morons who still believe that Trump is "draining the swamp".

Oh the drainage is great now, its only a shame that liberal crooked Hillary supporter are trying to clog it again. 

Edited July 29, 2018 by paxamericana

[Michael Hardner]

12 hours ago, ReeferMadness said:

1. Modern Russia is mess and that is largely the fault of the USA.  In the 90s, Americans (other westerners too but mainly Americans) were so determined to kill socialism of any stripe, they used the IMF to push through brutal "reforms" that destroyed any economic stability that ordinary Russians had under communism.  Things deteriorated so rapidly that Russians were set to re-elect communists in 1996.  Under Clinton, the USA brazenly interfered in the Russian election and of course "the right candidate" won; amid widespread allegations of rampant electoral fraud.   

2. So was Russia's interference in the 2016 American election blowback or simply payback? 

3. Trump was buddies with Bill Clinton in that era so it's far from inconceivable that Trump had some influence in the goings on in Russia.

4. USA is chock full of morons who still believe that Trump is "draining the swamp".

 

 

 

 

1. That all sounds feasible but I for one would like a cite of some kind.

2. Blowback and Payback are both one-time events, so the 2016 campaign was neither.  It is an ongoing threat and Putin's organization understands the weaknesses of democracy in a detailed enough way to provide strategies to undermine it.

3. Maybe not inconceivable but unlikely.  Even then he was a PT Barnum type showman, and would only have been interested in the areas of business he was involved in, in Russia.  Hotels were not likely a big point of interest for the US president at that time.

4. Every information system has subjectivity built into it.  The objective part is the 'commons' between the parties that are collectively engaging the debate.  I'm sure you have heard of the tragedy of the commons.

[OftenWrong]

On 7/28/2018 at 8:43 PM, ReeferMadness said:

Modern Russia is mess and that is largely the fault of the USA.  In the 90s, Americans (other westerners too but mainly Americans) were so determined to kill socialism of any stripe, they used the IMF to push through brutal "reforms" that destroyed any economic stability that ordinary Russians had under communism.  Things deteriorated so rapidly that Russians were set to re-elect communists in 1996.  Under Clinton, the USA brazenly interfered in the Russian election and of course "the right candidate" won; amid widespread allegations of rampant electoral fraud.  Then, Yeltsin turned around and handed the reins to Putin, who, by most accounts, has since run the country much the same way as a mafia boss runs a territory.

Yes, I believe you are right. I remember hearing of it at the time.

Quote

Politics is a dirty, incestuous affair, particularly when you throw crony capitalism into the mix.  But hey.  USA is chock full of morons who still believe that Trump is "draining the swamp".

Whatever draining the swamp actually means. But I am not too concerned about Donald Trump. He likes to use bluster and threats to open up a negotiation, and I don't doubt that if necessary he would back that up, but that doesn't appear to be what he wants in the end. Trump seems to be a "stick and carrot" kind of guy. I feel that most ordinary people are put off by his unusual approach to politics, but that is because they have certain expectations of conduct from a politician. Finally in the end it seems like Trump is just another US president, continuing the overall direction of US economic, military ambitions throughout the world, very much in line with the direction of presidents before him.

[JamesHackerMP]

This is a great thread so far, but I hope we can keep it from degenerating into a Trump v. Hillary or "f*** the USA" kind of thread.

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Whatever draining the swamp actually means.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drain_the_swamp

It means nothing. The only people who don't know it support him.

Quote

But I am not too concerned about Donald Trump. He likes to use bluster and threats to open up a negotiation, and I don't doubt that if necessary he would back that up, but that doesn't appear to be what he wants in the end. Trump seems to be a "stick and carrot" kind of guy. I feel that most ordinary people are put off by his unusual approach to politics, but that is because they have certain expectations of conduct from a politician.

I suspect his base would have cheered if Trump had grabbed Queen Elizabeth by the pussy. 

Quote

Finally in the end it seems like Trump is just another US president, continuing the overall direction of US economic, military ambitions throughout the world, very much in line with the direction of presidents before him.

Normal to the point of banal you think?

[GostHacked]

On 7/28/2018 at 2:13 PM, paxamericana said:

We aren't perfect. Some of my buddies who work in the intelligence community face the same issue when bad intelligence put our operator's lives at risk. We lost people because it. That is part of the gig. Now if someone in the administration purposefully and knowingly use bad intelligence to justify something for personal gain then that is a violation of our ethics law and should be prosecuted.

Problem, is nothing that was put forth regarding Iraq was correct. And because of that spectacular fuck up, I am reluctant to believe anything the US intelligence agencies put forth.

[cannuck]

On 7/28/2018 at 6:43 PM, ReeferMadness said:

Modern Russia is mess and that is largely the fault of the USA.  In the 90s, Americans (other westerners too but mainly Americans) were so determined to kill socialism of any stripe, they used the IMF to push through brutal "reforms" that destroyed any economic stability that ordinary Russians had under communism.  Things deteriorated so rapidly that Russians were set to re-elect communists in 1996.  Under Clinton, the USA brazenly interfered in the Russian election and of course "the right candidate" won; amid widespread allegations of rampant electoral fraud.  Then, Yeltsin turned around and handed the reins to Putin, who, by most accounts, has since run the country much the same way as a mafia boss runs a territory.

That I believe is a great oversimplification.

You are right, the World Bank was there on day one (I happen to have known the "first man in" - now deceased - quite well and visited him in Moscow during the '90s).  While it is true the USSR was stable under communism, those days were already gone as it was essentially bankrupt.  THAT was partly due to the US - simply the Star Wars bluff - but there were a lot of other problems that contributed.  Those "brutal IMF reforms" were needed because in the words of my WB friend whose job was to "supervise World Bank loans" but really to advise the Gorbachev administration how to set up a market economy: we have about $4Bn a month of FDI and WB loans coming into Moscow, but they are taking out about $5Bn into their offshore accounts".  There was a complete vacuum when communism collapsed, and there was absolutely NO culture of business (outside of the black market) and no law and no systems of regulation for banking to conduct commercial business.  The only people with any command structure, communication or any idea at all how the world outside of USSR worked was the military and the KGB.  With no system of registration for personal or public property, these elements (loosely known as the "Russian Mafia" but not in any way connected to the Mafia) simply did what anyone raised in a communist state would do and grabbed for themselves everything and anything they could lay their hands on - and that included the resources and productive capacity of the entire country.  Unlike China that had Deng and "Four Pillars of Modern Reform" for a template and millions of offshore families with a century of international business experience and literally hundreds of billions of liquid capital to rush in and set up a functional market economy, Russia had no such seeds to be planted.   Only the "criminals" who rose rapidly in the situation of total anarchy.

Whether the IMF, World Bank, UN, etc. did the right thing or not is hard to say.  There was simply no precedent as to how to walk into a disfunctional and bankrupt Super Power and put it on its feet.

Edited August 12, 2018 by cannuck

[OftenWrong]

Russia is certainly not very happy with the US administration these days.

New U.S. sanctions could pitch Russia relations to new low

 

[GostHacked]

On 7/15/2018 at 3:45 AM, paxamericana said:

Someone has been drinking that Russian coolaid...

Care to prove me wrong on the amount of military force the USA can project compared to Russia ?  I'll wait.  Russia does not have missile batteries on our borders.

On 7/15/2018 at 3:45 AM, paxamericana said:

Russia subjugate neighboring countries and if you want evidence look at Georgia, Ukraine, and ESPECIALLY Chechnya. Plenty of human rights violation all around including their own people. Last I checked most America's enemies human rights aren't violated as much as Russia's own citizen.

Yeah subjugation is a long time problem for us humans. However  Crimea compared to .. Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria   ect.....

On 7/15/2018 at 3:45 AM, paxamericana said:

Russia lacks the economic and geopolitical power the US has when the soviet union collapsed.Obviously they don't carry the same capability as a true super power.

Actually under Putin, Russia has become more prominent on the world stage.

On 7/15/2018 at 3:45 AM, paxamericana said:

You'd rather have China and/or Russia be the new world's police? Human rights are non existence on their agenda. So as much criticism you give to America think of the alternative. America never claimed to be perfect, we do the best we can. America stands for a rule based order where the strong doesn't take advantage of the weak. We follow the rule of law, the Russian and Chinese much prefer the strong taking advantage of the weak. Look at their foreign policy for their neighbors. Their foreign policy is imperialism.

No where did I say I wanted Russia or China to be the new world's police.  But the USA has not been doing a very good job of it. Everything the US declares war on, there just ends up to be more of that thing.  War on terror brought, more terror. War on homeless, more homeless, same with poverty.. oh and the war on drugs, that's a failure too.

On 7/15/2018 at 3:45 AM, paxamericana said:

Naww I'll believe the CIA intelligence and Secretary of Defense James N Mattis over Russian news media any day of the week. 

Most sources I use are MSM sources that people like to prop up, right up to the moment an article proves them wrong.  All the 'intelligence' to combat war on terror, has only brought more war, more refugees and is creating a global crisis with mass emigration out of the M.E.

You tell me how successful the war on terror has been and how these nations are much worse of than 20 years ago.

On 7/15/2018 at 3:45 AM, paxamericana said:

How many advance NATO cruise missiles did they shoot down exactly with their old soviet S300? All of them or does that sound too much to be believable, nah lets say 70 odd something out of 100. Yup lets just make up figure out of no where and claim it news. 

I'll defer this to you, I don't know. But that seems to prove my notion that Russia cannot project their military as much as the USA can.  Thanks for that.

On 7/15/2018 at 3:45 AM, paxamericana said:

Animal Assad track record on using chemical weapons ain't that great fyi.

 

The alleged use of chemical weapons by Syrian forces have not been conclusive. Pure speculation without any real evidence. That's not propaganda, that is fact.

[ReeferMadness]

On 8/12/2018 at 6:48 AM, cannuck said:

That I believe is a great oversimplification.

You are right, the World Bank was there on day one (I happen to have known the "first man in" - now deceased - quite well and visited him in Moscow during the '90s).  While it is true the USSR was stable under communism, those days were already gone as it was essentially bankrupt.  THAT was partly due to the US - simply the Star Wars bluff - but there were a lot of other problems that contributed.  Those "brutal IMF reforms" were needed because in the words of my WB friend whose job was to "supervise World Bank loans" but really to advise the Gorbachev administration how to set up a market economy: we have about $4Bn a month of FDI and WB loans coming into Moscow, but they are taking out about $5Bn into their offshore accounts".  There was a complete vacuum when communism collapsed, and there was absolutely NO culture of business (outside of the black market) and no law and no systems of regulation for banking to conduct commercial business.  The only people with any command structure, communication or any idea at all how the world outside of USSR worked was the military and the KGB.  With no system of registration for personal or public property, these elements (loosely known as the "Russian Mafia" but not in any way connected to the Mafia) simply did what anyone raised in a communist state would do and grabbed for themselves everything and anything they could lay their hands on - and that included the resources and productive capacity of the entire country.  Unlike China that had Deng and "Four Pillars of Modern Reform" for a template and millions of offshore families with a century of international business experience and literally hundreds of billions of liquid capital to rush in and set up a functional market economy, Russia had no such seeds to be planted.   Only the "criminals" who rose rapidly in the situation of total anarchy.

Whether the IMF, World Bank, UN, etc. did the right thing or not is hard to say.  There was simply no precedent as to how to walk into a disfunctional and bankrupt Super Power and put it on its feet.

What unadulterated bullshit.

Everywhere the IMF/World Bank goes, they leave a path of destruction.  Huge increases in income/wealth disparities, privatized essential services, cutbacks in government services.  But when it comes to Russia and the oligarchs robbing the country blind suddenly the IMF/World bank is a helpless kitten?  They didn't impose conditions for transparency and corruption because they didn't GAF.  It's that simple.  In the eyes of capitalist zealots, a right wing kleptocracy is preferable to any form of socialism.   The US (other countries too, but mostly the US) have a long track record of using their military to attack countries that have the temerity to elect leftist governments and replace them with repressive right wing regimes.

It's telling that China is your idea of a success story.

 

[Argus]

On ‎7‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 12:21 PM, GostHacked said:

Both Russia and the US do it. And now China is having a go at it. The USA has been doing just that in the M.E. for the last 20 years and the outcome has been terrible. 

The problems of the ME are not related to American interference but to Saudi money and Wahhabi influence.

 

[Argus]

4 hours ago, ReeferMadness said:

What unadulterated bullshit.

Everywhere the IMF/World Bank goes, they leave a path of destruction.  Huge increases in income/wealth disparities, privatized essential services, cutbacks in government services.  But when it comes to Russia and the oligarchs robbing the country blind suddenly the IMF/World bank is a helpless kitten?  They didn't impose conditions for transparency and corruption because they didn't GAF. 

The IMF and world bank can only impose conditions on those borrowing money from them. The conditions they impose are designed to get the country they're loaning money to back to a state of solvency where it can balance its books without borrowing more money. That certainly means cutbacks in government services and other painful measures. But the alternative is bankruptcy. As for the Russians,  it was a pretty bizarre situation. If you think the IMF could could take complete charge of te country and eliminate corruption you're awfully naïve.

Edited August 31, 2018 by Argus