PDA

View Full Version : Is the veil of darkness slowly descending on Russia?


Pages : [1] 2

rh200
25th Apr 2014, 00:49
For years I have watched Russia, not to concerned, with all the antics, I'm the first to appreciate that things are not cut an dried. But after a while there becomes a trend, a trend that has been repeated through out history.

It reminds me of the old saying, If you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water it will jump out, if you heat it up slowly it will just sit there and die. I have no idea if its true, but the analogy is a good one.

So I came across this, and just wondered, is this another nail in the coffin of a free in Russia.

Russian President Vladimir Putin reckons the internet is a ?CIA project? | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/russian-president-vladimir-putin-reckons-the-internet-is-a-cia-project/story-fnh81p7g-1226895614751)

It appears insignificant, but chess games usually are about moving your insignificant pieces around, slowly building the trap until there is no escape?

Fox3WheresMyBanana
25th Apr 2014, 01:18
Most believe the unexperienced world beyond the pan rim to be no better. Not many understand the inevitable consequences of boiling until it's too late. Most of that small number convince themselves the heat will be turned down before it gets unpleasantly warm. Still fewer have the opportunity to attack the chef.

parabellum
25th Apr 2014, 01:23
We don't hear much about internal politics in Russia, what are the chances that Putin, seen to be dragging Russia into a war, might be turfed out by the party caucus?

probes
25th Apr 2014, 05:39
Nil. He's not doing anything, the West is attacking them and leaving them no choice, one has to defend oneself.
Watch the press conferences on the Ukraine.

evansb
25th Apr 2014, 06:10
Has the veil of darkness ever been lifted from Mother Russia? Putin and his cadre are all ex KGB thugs. Same old same oldov. Chechnyans castrated most of their Russian prisoners. Worse treatment followed. Unfortunately, I predict Putins successor will be even worse. To sum up, Nobody likes Russia.

chuks
25th Apr 2014, 07:20
I think some of us are confusing V. Putin and his clique with Russia itself. One is rather small, and the other is rather large, so that my money is on the large one, Russia, over the small one, Putin and his clique.

For now, it looks a bit grim, yes indeed, but it's still early days. Let's see what happens if Putin's crowd find that there's more to life than just sitting on a big pile of looted cash, although that might take a while.

Putin's a throw-back to the time of Stalin, just another "man on horseback," trying to revive this Russian Empire that Stalin was able to paste together. Putin seems to be looking at the map for all the previous bits that once belonged to the Soviet Union, to grab them back. An obvious problem with this is that his Russia is in the position of a colony, exporting raw materials and importing finished goods, which is a position of weakness if your customer-vendors can find other suppliers of raw materials, say.

The sad thing is, we, the USA, saw this one coming back when western Europe was all excited about buying gas from Russia. (No less a personage than Gerhard Schröder, the former German chancellor, is working for Gazprom. He had to tell a recent interviewer that his relationship was with Russia, not with Putin, when those who read or heard that must have nodded and said something like, "Yes, of course ....") What did we pushy Yanks know about doing business with Russia, and what could possibly go wrong with doing business with the "new" Russia, so democratic and all?

Russia must be more dependable than North Korea, say, and we know that North Korea is a dependable trade partner, so ... ?

Anyway, the gas deal was done, and now Putin has a powerful tool to use to gain influence over Europe. Let's see how we can sort this mess out without having a shooting war.

evansb
25th Apr 2014, 07:25
There is zero evidence of Russia becoming a more humane, thoughtful, democratic nation state. Show me otherwise.

chuks
25th Apr 2014, 07:38
Have you in "Feedlot country" not noticed the demise of the Soviet Union? That stands out here in Germany! Then there's the way that the Gulag Archipelago has been done away with.

There are two big things, just for starters. Get reading about modern Russia before you jump to such conclusions.

probes
25th Apr 2014, 08:00
those who advocate conflict
would you be more specific, maybe?

Andy_S
25th Apr 2014, 08:21
.....the West is attacking them and leaving them no choice, one has to defend oneself.

Really? I must have slept through the bit where "the West" put troops on Russian sovereign territory?

chuks
25th Apr 2014, 08:26
Ah, it's that Masked Man again!

I think you may find that we graciously consented to stop our overflights of the Soviet Union once the USSR developed the capability of shooting down our aircraft. You might want to read up on that first, before making with the bombast.

Were you, perhaps, trying to write something in the conditional, such as, " ... all hell would have broken loose and then Americans would have gone ape-shit and probably started pushing buttons ... "? You are exhibiting a fixed opinion about something that is purely in the realm of speculation, since it never happened, so that you might want to take your own advice, to calm down and get over yourself. Just because you choose to believe something or other about "Americans," that does not necessarily make it so, even when proved to your complete satisfaction by imaginary example.

Part of the problem might be that you have chosen to live under our "nuclear umbrella." Perhaps a change of venue is in order.

Cacophonix
25th Apr 2014, 09:02
I can't help that thinking for all his political cunning and doublethink, Putin may have boxed himself into a corner in his continued provocation in Eastern Ukraine. The outcome of this may prove to be sub-optimal for all concerned and potentially tragic in the longer term both in Russia and here in the West.

He has not left himself with a way out in the Ukraine without losing face given the expectations of the resurrection of Russian grandeur that underpins his popularity in a much reduced and still impoverished Russia that harkens to the cult of the strong man.

Putin appeals to the old nationalistic fervour and plays to a Russian psyche that historically seems to have been beset by a huge chip on the Slavic shoulder...

I suspect that Putin is now obliged to intervene in Eastern Ukraine and, for all our bellicosity, we in the West will do nothing initially, not least because we can't. Nonetheless Putin will now be riding the tiger of Russian expectation and no more so than in the Baltic states and so will begin the first gambit in a zero-sum game that could lead to another major war and Putin can only go along with the momentum of the avalanche that is primarily of his own making for fear of losing everything.

We live in dangerous times...

Caco

Tankertrashnav
25th Apr 2014, 09:15
Meanwhile China, which aims to be the next world superpower, watches from the sideines and smiles inscrutably. It is in China's interest to watch both US and Soviet (oops, Russian) influence decline, and that will surely happen in many of our lifetimes.

PTT
25th Apr 2014, 09:17
I find Russia's actions very concerning. There are some obvious historic parallels here.

acbus1
25th Apr 2014, 09:23
There are some obvious historic parallels here.
Nuclear aresenals aside. :uhoh:

probes
25th Apr 2014, 09:38
Originally Posted by probes http://www.pprune.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/538551-veil-darkness-slowly-descending-russia.html#post8449483)
.....the West is attacking them and leaving them no choice, one has to defend oneself.


Really? I must have slept through the bit where "the West" put troops on Russian sovereign territory?

sorry, Andy_S, I thought the irony is obvious.

John Hill
25th Apr 2014, 09:58
I don't recall when we asked to share any nuclear umbrella, is this some sort of mafia protection racket?

Andy_S
25th Apr 2014, 10:21
Probes,

In which case apologies.... :O

In my defence, there are a couple of people who post on JB - without irony - who genuinely seem to think that everything Putin does is reasonable, justifiable and proportionate. Sorry to have misunderstood.

Cacophonix
25th Apr 2014, 10:40
I don't recall when we asked to share any nuclear umbrella, is this some sort of mafia protection racket?

Well clearly NZ has chosen to opt out of the nuclear game and in truth it matters not one jot either way.

Here in the UK we most consciously courted the US to the extent we went and made a couple of very loud dirty bangs in the Pacific in order to prove we were equal partners in any post nuclear world and shelved our own technology buying completely into the concept of the US umbrella. Here it is a fait accompli and the rest of the European chickens (save for the French with their farce de frappe) are in the same coop...

Cluck as we will we need the US umbrella while we pray that the weather stays benign...

Caco

acbus1
25th Apr 2014, 10:46
I thought the irony is obvious
The parallels continue to emerge:

From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an irony curtain has descended across the Continent.

;)

racedo
25th Apr 2014, 11:27
I find it puzzling that a US Govt official can state they spent $5 Billion investing in democracy in Ukraine.............exactly what did they get for their money ?

Pushing the Russia is a big threat only has one predicable outcome, lots of money and new toys for Military.

tony draper
25th Apr 2014, 11:36
Agree we have a bunch of spivs and blokes who have been playing pretend Nazis for the last twenty years who have inserted themselves in Kiev who are probably hanging in there just waiting for the money to arrive from the EU and the USA and be off on their toes with it as soon as it lands, as is the tradition in those parts,they were probably spitting bullets when they found the coffers empty when they threw the last thief out
KEEP OUT OF IT!!
:=

Cacophonix
25th Apr 2014, 11:39
From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an irony curtain has descended across the Continent.

:D:D:D

Caco

OFSO
25th Apr 2014, 13:36
I still don't know how the Ukraine could have been thrilled by the chance to join a large international community with democratically-elected officials, working 12 hours a day for very little money. Still, Russia was a lot better choice than the EU.

rh200
25th Apr 2014, 13:59
Although the Ukraine is an obvious point of contention, it is not the only issue.

If we look at both China and Russia since the end of the cold war, it appears to be two vastly different stories. One advancing at a huge pace, perhaps to quickly, the other appears to be stagnating.

The Chinese appear to have embraced oppertunity and develop many industries, something the world economy finds itself dependent on. The Russians don't really appear to have achieved much, apart from selling gas.

I said a while ago that the world has had a good run with out any major wars, and its because its more benificial to trade than to fight at the moment. It would appear that Russia is not getting the advantages that some others are getting in this new world trade order.

One wonders why they havn't, is because they just can't for various reasons, or have their leaders not been inclined to, and have decided to stay on old fashion methods, of relying on "sphere's of influence".

bnt
25th Apr 2014, 14:08
Well, I doubt I'm the only one to see Putin's actions in Ukraine as in part a strategy to boost his internal popularity and Russia's morale in general. The people could use an existential boost, considering the amount of vodka some of them consume.

All the more so if he can paint his actions as justifiable due to outside provocation or "the will of the people". I think the USA govt. is playing right in to Putin's hands: I still don't see what their Ukraine interests are, beyond general Cold War geopolitics. If the Ukraine splits in two, with the Eastern provinces rejoining Russia, what's it to them?

Sallyann1234
25th Apr 2014, 14:12
The historic parallels are indeed very striking.
Send agitators into an adjacent country to foment disorder, then march in to restore order. It worked very well for Hitler and it has worked twice so far for Putin.
Unlike others I don't see Putin in any trouble over this - the west can do little in real terms to stop him.

airship
25th Apr 2014, 17:33
We're all living under various "veils of darkness" today in 2014, whether or not these are of USA or other origins.

We're certainly all "living and enduring" the propoganda "bombardment" if I may call it that, even from our own (ostensibly liberal and respecting) western governments, their security agencies, and even certain members of the "so-called" independent press who voluntarily "rally around" when called upon to do so in mainstream publications...?!

All of that shouldn't necessarily bother us too much (when we're NOT actually "at war", eg. during WWII etc.). The point that our own governments in 2014 are all more or less merrily pursuing such efforts during "peace-time" should worry most of us and especially those who actually lived during those periods when we were really "at war" and all such propaganda might have been warranted...

Otherwise, I fear that all "they're doing" is to simply further the interests of the politico-military-industrial complex.

Matari
25th Apr 2014, 17:38
If there were a drinking game where you took a shot of Mezcal every time Airship ragged on the "USA" -- regardless of thread topic -- then you'd be hammered in very short order.

Airship, not sure what planet you live on, but I would bet money that one day you will realize that living under the US's "veil of darkness" was the most pleasant time of your life.

con-pilot
25th Apr 2014, 17:57
One does wonder just how long a "veil of darkness" would have lasted, regardless of who started it, when we all know who did, had Truman said at the end of the European Theater of World War Two and said, 'Okay, we won, bring all of our forces home, let Stalin sort out the peace in Europe.'

'Bye'.

airship
25th Apr 2014, 18:09
Matari wrote: ...I would bet money that one day you will realize that living under the US's "veil of darkness" was the most pleasant time of your life.

Implied "threat" or "just information"...?! Whatever, I'm pretty sure that in the past (and well before there was a USA) many ordinary folk posed similar questions about their existences and the threats they faced, a few hundred years or even several thousands of years ago.

Do Matari (and many others here similarly) simply believe that they can really "bully" or silence everyone with their own meagre (poorly thought-out and/or conceived) contributions...?! :}

PTT
25th Apr 2014, 18:31
One does wonder just how long a "veil of darkness" would have lasted, regardless of who started it, when we all know who did, had Truman said at the end of the European Theater of World War Two and said, 'Okay, we won, bring all of our forces home, let Stalin sort out the peace in Europe.'Yep, that was a purely altruistic act... :hmm:

con-pilot
25th Apr 2014, 19:21
Yep, that was a purely altruistic act...

Yeah, the fact that there was a larger, major war ongoing in the Pacific, with the US being faced by committing to an invasion of the Japanese homeland island must have completely slipped your mind.

Truman would have been well in his rights to pull all US forces out of Europe after Germany surruended and brought them back to the US to be used in the invasion of Japan.

You need to drop on your kness and thank God he didn't, or you would have been living on you knees since the end of World War Two in Europe.













Now that should stir some stuff up. :p

Matari
25th Apr 2014, 20:03
Altruistic? It's called enlightened self-interest. Compare and contrast the US actions post-WWII to the barbaric self interest of the Japanese colonizers leading up to the war, and the Soviets post-WWII, or the actions of any number of your favorite anti-US allies.

PTT
25th Apr 2014, 20:08
It's called enlightened self-interest.Nothing enlightened about it, merely practical.

I'm not suggesting life under the Russians would have been better by any means, but it's nonsense to keep demanding gratitude when it was done with self-interest in mind. Had it not been in the US' interests to get involved then we would have been speaking Russian.

Natstrackalpha
25th Apr 2014, 20:19
2 Typhoons scambled from Scotland to intercept a Bear (they still got bears?)


We should drop cylinders of frozen ice cream on Murmansk, in the middle of winter, in aid of the Cold War.


funny how things go from how they were before the war to a situation as it is now
>
>Baldrick
"The thing is: The way I see it, these days there's a war on, right? and, ages ago, there wasn't a war on, right? So, there must have been a moment when there not being a war on went away, right? and there being a war on came along. So, what I want to know is: How did we get from the one case of affairs to the other case of affairs?"


Edmund: Do you mean "Why did the war start?"

Baldrick: Yeah.

George: The war started because of the vile Hun and his villainous empire-building.

Edmund: George, the British Empire at present covers a quarter of the globe, while the German Empire consists of a small sausage factory in Tanganyika. I hardly think that we can be entirely absolved of blame on the imperialistic front.

Baldrick: I heard that it started when a bloke called Archie Duke shot an ostrich 'cause he was hungry.

Edmund: I think you mean it started when the Archduke of Austro-Hungary got shot.

Baldrick: Nah, there was definitely an ostrich involved, sir.

Edmund: Well, possibly. But the real reason for the whole thing was that it was too much effort not to have a war.

George: By Golly, this is interesting; I always loved history...

Edmund: You see, Baldrick, in order to prevent war in Europe, two superblocs developed: us, the French and the Russians on one side, and the Germans and Austro-Hungary on the other. The idea was to have two vast opposing armies, each acting as the other's deterrent. That way there could never be a war.

Baldrick: But this is a sort of a war, isn't it, sir?

Edmund: Yes, that's right. You see, there was a tiny flaw in the plan.

George: What was that, sir?

Edmund: It was bollocks.


Blackadder courtesy of and written by Rowan Atkinson, Ben Elton and Richard Curtis.

con-pilot
25th Apr 2014, 20:19
Had it not been in the US' interests to get involved then we would have been speaking Russian.

Oh yeah, the Marshall Plan was the epitome of self-interest. :rolleyes:

Matari
25th Apr 2014, 20:22
We've been through this before. Just because you don't understand a concept, doesn't mean it is incorrect.

Scenario 1:

Caveman 1 sees Caveman 2 cooking a bronto-burger. Caveman 1 clonks Caveman 2 with a club and takes the bronto-burger. This is pure self interest, and represents the Belgians in the Congo, the Soviets, and pre-war Japanese.

Scenario 2:

Caveman 1 sees Caveman 2 cooking a bronto-burger. Caveman 1 trades a gallon of yak beer for Caveman 2's bronto-burger. This is enlightened self-interest, and represents the post-WWII world order created and sustained by the dominant power, the US.

The blockade of West Berlin was the Soviets acting in pure self-interest. The US cargo fliers (and their allies) were acting with enlightened self interest. Capiche?

John Hill
25th Apr 2014, 21:49
Oh yeah, the Marshall Plan was the epitome of self-interest.
Exactly.

One has to remember that the US was apparently happy enough at the prospect of a Nazi invasion of Britain and the following all Nazi Europe and it was only when Hitler attacked Russia leading to the prospect of a communist Europe that America got involved in the war in Europe.

The Marshall Plan was intended to strengthen Europe against any future threat from the Soviet Union.

So yes, self-interest.

pigboat
25th Apr 2014, 21:59
Oh yeah, the Marshall Plan was the epitome of self-interest.
Mais oui! Using JH's logic any help the Marshall Plan afforded post war Europe may be likened to collateral damage. ;)

con-pilot
25th Apr 2014, 22:05
One has to remember that the US was apparently happy enough at the prospect of a Nazi invasion of Britain and the following all Nazi Europe and it was only when Hitler attacked Russia leading to the prospect of a communist Europe that America got involved in the war in Europe.


Jesus H Christ! Where on Earth do you learn history?

Guess you'd been happy if the US had never gotten "involved" with the war in Europe?

Yes, that was a question, which you will not answer, as you never do answer questions, only ask them.

And no, the US was never happy a the prospect of a Nazi invasion of any country, let alone Britian. It was just not our affair, it was just one more war, of an endless series of wars in Europe.

Limeygal
25th Apr 2014, 22:11
The answer is obvious-introduce potato blight to Russia, no spuds=niet wodka for Nikita. That will put the cat among the Cossacks. Easy peasy. Why does everything have to be so difficult? :ok:

PTT
25th Apr 2014, 22:51
con-pilotOh yeah, the Marshall Plan was the epitome of self-interest.Seems you're getting it. Rebuild other countries in order to prevent your own economy from collapsing. Here's an extract from Marshall's 1947 speech:
Aside from the demoralizing effect on the world at large and the possibilities of disturbances arising as a result of the desperation of the people concerned, the consequences to the economy of the United States should be apparent to all.
So yes, self-interest.

Matari - Oh I get the concept, but scenario 1 is short-sighted self-interest while scenario 2 is long-sighted self-interest: the caveman in scenario 2 can get more than 1 burger from his plan. Calling it enlightened is painting it up nice and shiny, and nothing more: it is still self-interest, just practical.

con-pilot
25th Apr 2014, 23:04
So yes, self-interest.



No, he said that to get the bloody bill passed through Congress.

Yes, the US did in fact benefit from the recovery of Europe due to the Marshall Plan.

But, it help Europe a hell of a lot more than it did the US.


Yes, yes, I know, the US is evil, it has caused all the wrongs in the world going back to include the Fall of Rome, which was George W. Bush's fault. :p

Rule3
25th Apr 2014, 23:55
I do... Been several times. Nice country.

My 2 cents worth. Putin can and WILL do what he wants to in Ukraine, Belarus etc. for the same reason as dogs lick their dicks.

Because he can, and Team America World Police and NATO can do SFA about it.

Such is life.

airship
26th Apr 2014, 00:10
It never ceases to amaze me how single-minded some Americans like Matari can be sometimes, often or even consistently. Everything is either black or white, there are never ever any grey areas. It reminds me of the even more astute gentleman infamous for his utterances of phrases such as "if you're not with us, you're against us" and "mission accomplished", the latter being made from the relative safety of the deck of a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier off the Californian coast during GWII (and not in the Persian Gulf as most people assumed at the time).

And quite unlike myself. I see "connections" almost everywhere. For example yesterday, when I read that Israel's PM had cancelled scheduled peace talks with the Palestinians because he'd heard that the 2 major Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah were reconciling, I understood that the strategy of "divide and rule" there was in danger of collapsing. And then I thought of all those Israeli settlers of Russian-speaking origins. What do they think of Putin? And would Putin ever intervene in Israel should that country's leadership put them in grave danger (as in Ukraine)? Perhaps that might represent a quite extraordinary and unexpected resolution for "peace in the middle-east"?!

When con-pilot writes: Yes, yes, I know, the US is evil, it has caused all the wrongs in the world going back to include the Fall of Rome, which was George W. Bush's fault. :p
he can do so with impunity. As opposed to someone with a name like Abdallah posting from somewhere in northern Pakistan posting something similar elsewhere on the net. Abdallah (or whatever his name is) should watch out for those hellfires... :uhoh:

We may not be discussing Crimea or the Ukraine in 80 years time, but I think the chances are that we will still be talking about Palestine and Israel in 2094...
(well, not me because that would mean I'd be 134 years old and probably senile - I'm already half-demented).

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 00:19
If we have to kill them we will...

My grandfather was a Russian Jew and as much as I love Russia, I know it will and has to be destroyed...

**** you Putin...

Caco

airship
26th Apr 2014, 00:27
Whoa Caco! Don't let all those personal feelings and emotions get in the way of calm and reasoned discussions here...?! :ok:

chuks
26th Apr 2014, 00:36
Some of you guys ... what were you doing during World History in Year 7? Puzzling over The Beano, I guess .... The USA did not declare war on Nazi Germany; Nazi Germany declared war on the USA! So much for us deciding what to do in that instance; it was decided for us.

You cannot "remember" something that did not, as a matter of strict historical fact, occur; here, though, you are perfectly free to imagine it, as some of you obviously do. The Marshall Plan as pure self-interest: I love it!

Anyway, it wasn't George W. Bush who caused the fall of Rome. That was his great-uncle, Prescott Bush, who did that. I know that for a fact because I read all about it on the internet.

airship
26th Apr 2014, 00:57
The Marshall Plan also quite neatly coincided with the ratification of the Bretton Woods Agreements, leading to the continued economic hegemony of the USA to this day. I always wondered how and why GM built cars in Germany (Opel) and the UK (Vauxhall) for the European market, but never made any money out of it (at least, they never paid any corporation taxes on any profits in EU apparently).

Going back to chuk's post. I'll never forget the young blonde American TV quiz contestant who exclaimed "Hung(a)ry's a country?!" I'm confident that somewhere else in USA, there's another blonde admirer of the Bush lineage who might say somethink like "I'd like to visit Italy, take a look at Prescott Bush's leaning tower of pizzas. I'm famished!"

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 01:01
**** Putin. The Russian homosexual that he is. A Slavic girly boy...

Tell us Vlad...!

Lynyrd Skynyrd - Sweet Home Alabama - YouTube

Caco

parabellum
26th Apr 2014, 01:01
Russia getting involved in any kind of spat with the West, ranging from land grabbing to all out war is going to seriously affect Russia's economy. There are some very very rich people in Russia who rely on the Russian economy not being brought to a halt by sanctions and/or war. As Putin's cabinet are, according to PPRuNe, all his old NKVD/KGB pals is it not reasonable to assume they are corrupt?


Would large amounts of money changing hands be sufficient to persuade these cabinet stalwarts to go against Putin before it is too late and if necessary kick him out?


Caco - Time to put the cork back in and head for bed! ;-)

con-pilot
26th Apr 2014, 01:02
Anyway, it wasn't George W. Bush who caused the fall of Rome. That was his great-uncle, Prescott Bush, who did that. I know that for a fact because I read all about it on the internet.

Oh shoot, you're right, plum done forgetted about him. :{


Airship

Take your meds my friend.

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 01:09
Take your meds my friend.

Con, we all might have to...

But before we do let's kill a Russian...

(those useless mother ****ers)

Caco

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 01:15
We should curse the bastards just like this...

Kalinka - Ivan Rebroff - YouTube


Caco

airship
26th Apr 2014, 01:24
Why do some people, when running out of arguments, always resort to suggesting that others should take their pills, or often even explicitly accusing their opponents of consuming (illegal) substances...?!

PS. Caco, you're a little OTT at the moment. parabellum (and others - you know them...) have noticed too. Here's a nice sweet little lullaby just for you:

LOBO- "DON'T TELL ME GOODNIGHT" - YouTube

Sleep well, see you tomorrow...?! :)

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 01:25
Caco - Time to put the cork back in and head for bed! ;-)

Don't be ridiculous man! If we can't hate them then how are we going to defeat them...?

:-)

Caco

airship
26th Apr 2014, 01:33
Militarily-speaking, it might be better for you to at least immediately, if just temporarily, cease all hostilities, abandoning your position and even running away. So at to live to fight again another day. Like tomorrow...?! :ok:

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 01:39
Militarily-speaking, it might be better for you to at least immediately, if just temporarily, cease all hostilities, abandoning your position and even running away. So at to live to fight again another day. Like tomorrow...?! :ok:

Airship, you are clearly a charming, nay intelligent man. A lover of pigeons and cats. But why should we take you seriously when you can't hate Putin and his cadres? ;)

Caco

airship
26th Apr 2014, 02:02
"Hate" is a word I rarely choose to use, I hate having to use it, even infrequently. In my mind, those who use the word frequently, do so perhaps because they feel "hated" themselves, and are probably very insecure and unconfident about how they consider themselves and believe that they're considered by others.

Neither Putin (or the Americans) have ever harmed me or one of my pudicats (but may God have mercy on them if they ever did). And there are better ways to spend one's limited time here on the planet than to go around hating...

You like music so perhaps you will appreciate this better as explanation:

Lobo- A Big Red Kite (1972) - YouTube

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 02:07
Damn it my helium inebriated buddy. The last time I heard that song was when I was but a pup living in Parkhurst JHB.

You are right of course, we shouldn't hate anybody. The fact that I do makes me a bigger nincompoop that I should be...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu_rItLPTXc

Caco

Matari
26th Apr 2014, 02:28
My dear Airship, not only do I see in shades of grey, I see in bright Technicolor (American patent). You seem a decent chap, a bit of a loner but individualistic, sensitive, wanting to live and let live, as long as others leave you alone. Funny enough, these are very American qualities.

In your chosen country of domicile, if not for the influence of American culture, you would have been locked into suffocating village life; shunned even, for not having married, for not producing many children, for not attending mass every Sunday, and for not conforming as a good village paysan.

Instead you seem to have carved out a particular lifestyle, very much the individual -- and society's norms be damned. Good for you, and welcome to the club!

So instead of moaning about the American way, embrace it! For we are comrades, you with your pudditats, me with my Milton Friedman books.

This amitié is brought to you by 70 years of American power, American culture and American influence. You are welcome; we helped you because of who we are.

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 02:36
Ah Matari, mon ami, you think you know **** all but you know you know **** nothing...!

Edith Piaf - Non, Je ne regrette rien - YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6A9dXJbY0M

Caco

parabellum
26th Apr 2014, 02:42
Caco - for the last time, GO TO BED! :=

Matari
26th Apr 2014, 02:43
Don't know ****? Easy Caco....

pA1oFSMwRDU

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 02:48
Caco - for the last time, GO TO BED! :=

Don't be so bloody sensible Para... :ok:

Caco

airship
26th Apr 2014, 02:55
You reminded me of when I was about 12 or 13 years old, going to a UK comprehensive school. After school, I encountered one of my class-mates unexpectedly. I'm not sure if he was one of those who incorrectly addressed me as a Paki or Sambo (which might have been more accurate). Whatever, he decided we'd have a wrestling match. He was quite a lot bigger than me, but I apparently put up a good fight. The result of which was when it was over and we got up, he announced "You're alright!". Which was a small victory, even if all the others continued to use abusive language (surely "educated" by their parents and what they heard at home?). But it didn't matter much. Within a few weeks I'd be playing truant, spending my school-days at Beachy head, watching Chinese folks picking shellfish until it was time to cycle home.

They say power corrupts. Hate does much the same. And I don't even consider my ex. class-mates as being responsible anymore. Whatever hatred they had was "instilled by others" and was not "natural". And I'm sure most have outgrown that ignorant and wasteful episode of their lives just as I have. Of course, had I been "born in the USA", I'd have probably gone back to that school with an AK47 and 6 magazines... ;) :uhoh:

PS. Matari, but you confuse generally accepted and widely-held human values with these being wholly American ones...?! A few million years have passed since us monkeys started walking upright. Just a few hundred years ago, there was no America (until some backward European "discovered" it). But you already knew all that. So what gives with this American supremacy shite you're going on about...?!

Cacophonix
26th Apr 2014, 03:01
C'est ne pas une question de l'homme Matari... ;)

Georges Bizet - "Les Toreadors" from Carmen Suite No. 1 - YouTube

Caco

airship
26th Apr 2014, 03:10
Doesn't anybody go to bed here? It's just past 4am here on a (thankfully) Saturday morning. Certainly, all those north Americans harking-on about their superior culture etc. should (if they respect their official religion) be safely tucked in bed by this late hour (at least if on the east coast). The USA is a big country innit? But does it have more time zones than Russia?!

Matari
26th Apr 2014, 03:17
Airship,

I will recall a short vignette of my time long ago in France. I was there for a summer semester of French, and we Americans were treated to a display of traditional French folk music. You know the kind, costumes, accordian, fiddle, etc.

Well after the show a couple of the dastardly Yanks (aren't we all) asked if they could borrow a couple guitars and instruments from the players. Sure enough, a minor jam session started, with the French kids looking on in amazement at the combination of rock-n-roll riffs and general good fun coming out of the unruly American bunch.

Soon the young French folk players were joining in, and having a grand time to boot. But along came the headmistress of their school, jerked them away, gave them a stern talking to, and off they went, heads bowed.

Well I took that as a clash of cultures....staid, traditional, conforming on the one hand, brash and individualistic on the other.

You see Airship, the advances we've made in the West in the last 70 years didn't happen "just because." The medicines, long life expectancies, modern and liberating conveniences, cheap travel to any corner of the globe, instant communications -- these were all created by the chaos of a thriving, free-market, capitalist political system. This amazing and creative global economic system, much to your apparent dismay, has been nurtured and protected by the US for the last several decades.

Without such global forces replacing the old traditions (for better and often times for worse), I fear you would have been constrained to a conforming and miserable village life. So enjoy your individual freedoms, and stop looking for a US bogeyman under every rock.

airship
26th Apr 2014, 03:27
...and stop looking for a US bogeyman under every rock.

You're right, just looking under every other rock will save 50% of the effort! Thanks...

Dueling Banjos (HD) - YouTube

PS. R U sure it was in France, and not somewhere in the Appalachian mountains. Apparently even Burt Reynolds had some diffhiculties making himself understood when conversing with the natives. But they were probably also of French origin, waaaaaaay back when.

pigboat
26th Apr 2014, 03:55
Don't Bait The Bears by Taki Theodoracopulos. (http://takimag.com/article/dont_bait_the_bears_taki#axzz2zxIou300)

airship
26th Apr 2014, 05:44
There's one nice thing about staying up so late here: it means that I was able to put out my rubbish (garbage) for the 1st time in almost 6 months. They come by every day here, but only about 5.30am. I'm rarely awake this early on any day. As I live directly opposite several restaurants with outside terraces which often remain open until 1am, I've no other reasonable option. At the rate of 1 approx. 100L (20kg weight) per late night PPRuNe / JB session, I only need another 20 or so say, to be rid of all of it.

PS. It's not smelly, just full of empty cans, bottles and packaging. The food waste gets flushed down the toilet except for any "bony waste". That attracts some flies for a few days admittedly until it loses appeal (or more accurately decomposes to the extent that the flies are no longer attracted). But they're very small tiny flies and I've grown to appreciate their company. I certainly couldn't use chemicals to get rid of them, nor "throw them out" during the cold winter months. And they represent a small microcosm of a much wider world, one in which I'm some sort of God perhaps. But the sheer volume of remaining rubbish to be disposed of does sometimes impede the easy passage along the narrow corridors of my small 45m² apartment. I know I have a "problem with rubbish", I admit that. But compared to other difficulties I've experienced over the past several years, I'll eventually cope with and overcome this one too. I hope. All things considered, I don't believe that even Putin would "put up" with such behaviour. The CIA might be interested, if only to the extent that if I were one day ever to become famous, they'd be able to blackmail me or at least have a handle on things. :zzz:

Matari
26th Apr 2014, 05:53
A traditional French wife would never have allowed that. La poubelle, ça pue...

probes
26th Apr 2014, 05:53
I just love the specification: 'not smelly' :cool:

Boudreaux Bob
26th Apr 2014, 05:54
Darkness is surely having its effect on the USA!:mad:

airship
26th Apr 2014, 06:19
The USA is always at her greatest when it's say, their marines who intervene with all guns blazing, saving lives, sacrificing their own and safe-guarding values held commonly by many folks, irrespective of their nationality, race, or religious beliefs.

The same cannot be said of those individual Americans who so easily use the sacrifices of their fellows when trying to make their own points in these forums. But you get used to it. I was not looking for sympathy. Neither was I looking for a fight. You know what though? I'm going to take a leaf out of John Lennon's book. And just imagine...

parabellum
26th Apr 2014, 06:53
Look in the Yellow Pages Airship, for some $$$ you can hire a mini-skip for the day and be shot of all your rubbish in about an hour, then all you have to do is clean the floor and walls!


Think you will find that most, if not all, the USA people on this BB that you come across have done their time for Uncle Sam and offered themselves up for sacrifice Airship, fortunately their offer hasn't, so far, been accepted.

chuks
26th Apr 2014, 07:04
A group of European observers from the OSCE (Organization for Security and Coöperation in Europe) are being held by pro-Russian forces in the eastern Ukraine, with the situation having been described as unclear by the German Defense Minister, Dr. Ursula von der Leyen.

They were sent there to try and figure out what was going on, particularly, I would guess, to verify that there are no pogroms being carried out against the Russian-speaking or else just plain Russian people in that region, since that is the main justification that Vladimir Putin is using to threaten invasion. The group includes four people from the German army, the Bundeswehr.

Previously, a right-wing (Christian Democratic Union) German politician, Wolfgang Schaüble, the Minister for Finance, had compared, in very direct terms, what Putin is doing now to what Hitler had done previously in similar circumstances: using the pretext of protecting one's own countrymen. Schaüble, near the end of his political career, is notorious for telling it just the way he sees it, so that his comments did not attract wide support among German politicians.

A noted Australasian internet political commentator, on the other hand, recently has weighed in with his own comments, "Me no like America! America bad!" before wandering off to try and barter his pig for another bride, but one who knows how to make fire. CIA analysts are now trying to make sense of this outburst.

John Hill
26th Apr 2014, 07:06
The USA is always at her greatest when it's say, their marines who intervene with all guns blazing, saving lives, sacrificing their own and safe-guarding values held commonly by many folks, irrespective of their nationality, race, or religious beliefs.

Such a heritage to be proud of but all too often nowadays it is overwhelming firepower launched against towns and mud brick villages from safety a few miles away or, as is becoming more common, from the safety of a drone driver's suite on another continent.

acbus1
26th Apr 2014, 07:32
Grief, chuks, steady on there; your post is actually on-topic. :ooh:

Of course, had I been "born in the USA", I'd have probably gone back to that school with an AK47 and 6 magazines...
Most likely Playboy, Penthouse, Pick Up Truck, Harvard Business Review, Harper's Magazine, National Geographic.


Good job Putin doesn't visit PPRuNe. :rolleyes:

chuks
26th Apr 2014, 09:27
Two things that ensure our continued World Domination: overwhelming firepower, a fanatical devotion to the Pope, and proper punctuation! No, wait ....

On-topic? What's that about? A whole, albeit rather small, country is being picked apart, but all that some here can be bothered about is the flaws seen in their somewhat imaginary vision of "America," meaning the United States of America. Gotta drag that anti-American, illogical bias into everything. It's either that we are deeply, very deeply, already involved in this mess to the tune of $5 billion in funding for raving, fascist fanatics, or else it's that we are slacking off once again, ignoring the carrying out of our presumed (by who, exactly?) global responsibilities to the complete satisfaction of those who just sit on their butts and carp.

It's kind of refreshing to sit here in Germany and watch the German government get involved in finding a solution to this problem by taking a leading role. My goodness, but it's almost as if they aren't depending on the USA to sort out everything for them! Some of you guys might want to take a break from the usual Yank-bashing to think that one over. It's almost as if we really do understand that there are limits to the usefulness of military power, so that we are willing to work towards a diplomatic solution, even assuming that is possible.

It must be hard, coming from a region where it's all tribal warfare with sharpened sticks, no air force to speak of to hand, to look at a global super-power and not feel that manly ornament loosen its fit, but that's life.

That's just dull reality, though, nothing that should interfere with this vision of an "America" that is armed to the teeth and mindlessly aggressive, but oddly unwilling to take useful actions. Even our poor old Marshall Plan comes in for a good shoeing, when that must be some kind of a first .... No, there's just no pleasing some people.

pigboat
26th Apr 2014, 14:37
...ignoring the carrying out of our presumed (by who, exactly?) global responsibilities to the complete dissatisfaction of those who just sit on their butts and carp.

Fixed it for you.

chuks
26th Apr 2014, 17:53
I stand corrected.

PTT
26th Apr 2014, 18:02
all that some here can be bothered about is the flaws seen in their somewhat imaginary vision of "America," meaning the United States of America.Wouldn't have been brought up had certain posters not tried to claim (http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/538551-veil-darkness-slowly-descending-russia-2.html#post8450416) that the good ole US of A rushed to Europe's aid in her hour of need, when actually they wouldn't have done so at all had it not been beneficial for them to do so - at the very least, more beneficial than to not do so.
Even our poor old Marshall Plan comes in for a good shoeingNope, just put into context as being an act of self-interest rather than of altruism.

It's almost as if some here want the rest of us to sit in awe at America's beneficence and back everything she does rather than opening our eyes to the fact that her acts, while beneficial to us in cases such as the Marshall Plan, are also at least as beneficial to her. Call it "enlightened" self interest if you will, but if there is no self interest there would be no action taken.

Lonewolf_50
26th Apr 2014, 18:27
Militarily-speaking, it might be better for you to at least immediately, if just temporarily, cease all hostilities, abandoning your position and even running away. So at to live to fight again another day. Another reason the Italians are not a power.
I find it puzzling that a US Govt official can state they spent $5 Billion investing in democracy in Ukraine.............exactly what did they get for their money ?
That's a well asked question. The answer is the usual, what we always get from foreign aid: some vague notion of "doing something" regardless of its effectiveness.

chuks
26th Apr 2014, 20:14
You can have an act of both self-interest and altruism; the two are not exclusionary. We are still competing with Russia, to see whether capitalism or whatever it is they use is a better way to run things, so that not allowing some rival to Russia to fail, to help them, is both in our interest and possibly altruistic in that we often do attempt sincerely to help.

It's not all drone strikes, you know! There are also such things as libraries supported by USAID, an extension of "soft power." There's not much point to trying to get a John Hill, for example, to see both sides of this, but there really are two sides to it.

Matari
26th Apr 2014, 20:42
It is a reflection of our enlightened values that we believe it's in our own best interests, when others prosper. That's a fairly unique concept in superpower geopolitics.

Such altruism certainly wasn't practiced by the Soviets then, or by the Russians now. Or by the masters of the 1000-year Reich, the ultimate "long-term interest" program ever devised.

John Hill
26th Apr 2014, 21:07
It is a reflection of our enlightened values that we believe it's in our own best interests, when others prosper.

So why do you resort so often to embargoes and blockades that are intended to keep other countries poor?

con-pilot
26th Apr 2014, 21:13
So why do you resort so often to embargoes and blockades that are intended to keep other countries poor?

You mean countries like New Zealand? :p


Sorry, you're just too easy. :E

John Hill
26th Apr 2014, 21:18
You mean countries like New Zealand? Must be another of America's non-successes on the international scene as NZ's economy is quite comfortable right now.

Not so good though for countries such as Cuba.

Matari
26th Apr 2014, 21:40
The words "blockade" and "embargo" are not synonymous.

You understand, don't you, that trade with Cuba and North Korea only serves to profit brutal military cliques, and not the people?

con-pilot
26th Apr 2014, 21:41
Okay, I'll switch tack. Tack is the alignment of a sailing vessel with respect to the wind when moving upwind, just so you know John.

Not so good though for countries such as Cuba.

Serves 'em right.

So why doesn't New Zealand support Cuba? New Zealand being a, no the, most perfect country in the world, acording to you.

rh200
26th Apr 2014, 23:44
Must be another of America's non-successes on the international scene as NZ's economy is quite comfortable right now.

A lot of third world countrys populations are ignorant of their conditions, and think they have it good.:E.

A lot of excuses from anti American crowds about about "Empires" etc. on our side and doing it for our own benifit. The fact is the open trade and freedom system seems to be helping all the other countries far more than the American economy. You could say the Australian one as well.

Even though we have a bit more diversity than Russia, a huge amount of our economy is dependent on raw commodity exports. As for America, yes its economy has its ups and downs, I don't see any magical solution that means they will soar ahead and prosper, yet they still persist with the whole freedom, trade stuff.

Another words, there could be better ways, but they are prepared to do the hard yards on the system as it is.

It will be interesting to see how China goes over the next decade if it starts to stagnate. Russia just seems to be reverting back to the old model (if it ever left it). If anything the actions of Russia might be a wake up call for the west. If anything, too many airy fairy pollies have gotten on board the whole "we'll all sing together in a perfect place" mode.

PTT
26th Apr 2014, 23:54
chuksYou can have an act of both self-interest and altruism; the two are not exclusionary.From Mirriam-Webster:
feelings and behavior that show a desire to help other people and a lack of selfishness. Altruism precludes selfishness. While the Marshall Plan was of benefit to both the US and Europe it was not carried out purely, or even primarily, in order to benefit Europe. In fact, had it only benefited Europe and been detrimental to the US it would not have been put into effect. The same is true of the decision to get involved in Europe in WW2. As such they were not altruistic acts either in intent or in execution.
Just so we're clear this is not me merely USA-bashing, the same is true of the UK's decision to get involved. It wasn't done to save the poor Poles or the poor Czechs, it was done because a regional German power the size of Europe would have been bad for the UK, just as it (or a pan-Eurasian Soviet Union) would have been for the US. Had the potential results of not getting involved not been bad for either country neither would have got involved.

I'm not doubting the individuals at ground level are doing it to help: having served with many US servicemen and women I have very little bad to say about them as individuals or a group. Governments, though, are a different matter. That bit goes for all nations, not just the US.

matariIt is a reflection of our enlightened values that we believe it's in our own best interests, when others prosper. That's a fairly unique concept in superpower geopolitics.It's rational selfishness rather than enlightened self-interest. The difference is that the deciding factor as to whether an action is carried out is whether it is in the interests of the self rather than the interests of others: the benefit to others is a by-product rather than the aim. The Netherlands, through mercantilism in the 16th-18th centuries, did the same.

Matari
27th Apr 2014, 01:40
Earlier you said our self-interest was "not enlightened," it was "merely long-term self interest." When I pointed out that the Nazis and Soviets had pretty detailed long-term plans (as do the Islamists today), you now say it was "rational self interest."

But the Nazis and Soviets were completely "rational" in that they believed scientific reason led them to their superior forms of government. In fact, totalitarians love to cloak their heinous crimes in "scientific" jargon...appearing to be rational when they are just thugs with a gun.

The Dutch and Ottoman were "rational" to the extent that colonizing and ruling a people for monetary gain was beneficial to them. It was a good long-term plan, too, until the locals got uppity.

The post WWII era was remarkably enlightened, in that we spent blood and treasure to rebuild and protect people to whom we had absolutely no obligation. Instead, we were driven by a -- yes, unique -- desire to create a better world for all, which would of course benefit ourselves.

But don't worry, we long ago got used to the moaning and protests from our European betters, those content to complain from the comfort of their rebuilt cities.

John Hill
27th Apr 2014, 01:58
The post WWII era was remarkably enlightened, in that we spent blood and treasure to rebuild and protect people to whom we had absolutely no obligation.

I would like to read of some examples of this, just one would be better than nothing.

rh200
27th Apr 2014, 02:04
I would like to read of some examples of this, just one would be better than nothing.

Try most of the western world John, we would all be speaking Russian (Soviets), mandarin or exterminated otherwise. Both those particular movements had no issue with genocide to kill off ressistance.

West Coast
27th Apr 2014, 02:17
John

A holocaust denier as well?

Matari
27th Apr 2014, 02:21
John Hill, is your understanding of history really that limited?

You asked for one example. More than 2 million tons of food aid and supplies were delivered to the besieged Berliners from June '48 to Sept. '49. More than 100 fliers lost their lives during the airlift, among them Americans and British.

The Soviets were using a favored tactic -- starvation -- as a form of warfare. We stopped them at the cost of blood and treasure.

The Berliners are grateful and know who their friends are, even if certain Kiwis pretend ignorance.

John Hill
27th Apr 2014, 05:25
Matari, this is what you wrote ... to rebuild and protect people to whom we had absolutely no obligation....

But you did have an obligation to the people you had defeated and occupied their country.

The Berlin Airlift was certainly not because you felt bad about the tens of thousands of other Berliners your bombing had killed in the years before.
The real reason for the Berlin Airlift was to oppose the USSR who were blockading the city.

West Coast
27th Apr 2014, 05:26
And you can prove this how?

John Hill
27th Apr 2014, 05:26
A holocaust denier as well?

Soon you will be telling me how Paton's tanks smashed down the gates of Auschwitz.

John Hill
27th Apr 2014, 05:28
And you can prove this how?

I dont have to, it was Matari who claimed they had no obligation to the citizens of Berlin.

chuks
27th Apr 2014, 07:23
Read up on the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, PTT. We learned from that, I think, to take a very different tack with the Marshall Plan. The first one was pure, self-defeating selfishness, the second one, while of benefit to the USA, was of perhaps greater benefit to the people of Europe.

Another thing is that nations very often do things that are detrimental to their welfare, while probably not meaning to do that. "Stupidity," I think that's called, and the bigger the country, the more stupids. For example:

We, the USA, wipe out the occasional Third World wedding party with a mis-aimed drone strike, when we have to say, "Oops!" I mean, doing that kind of thing is embarrassing!

New Zealand has put free Wi-Fi into their asylums, so that all sorts of weird opinions about just about everything have come to be associated with this one particular, minor part of "Australasia." Used to be, it was cannibalism we thought of first when anyone said "Australasia," but now it's ungrammatical bloviation, when one has to ask, "Which is worse?"

PTT
27th Apr 2014, 08:24
Matari - I used the term rational to distinguish it from short term selfishness (which is what the Nazi and Soviet plans likely would have been). "Rational self interest" is a specific term (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_egoism) coined by Ayn Rand.
The post WWII era was remarkably enlightened, in that we spent blood and treasure to rebuild and protect people to whom we had absolutely no obligation. Instead, we were driven by a -- yes, unique -- desire to create a better world for all, which would of course benefit ourselves. Had there been no benefit to yourselves it would not have been the course of action taken. This is the distinction. You mark it up as some sort of morally superior crusade to make the world a better place, when actually it was the motive of self-interest which made this the selected course of action. Self interest is the mark of all government foreign policy, including that of the US.

chuks - indeed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff act was detrimental to the US, and therefore, as you suggest, stupid. The distinction is that the S-H Tariff act was ended, while the Marshall Plan was not.
As for relative benefit of the Marshall Plan, I suspect that the main benefit was to the US. Again, I'm not saying it was not beneficial to Europe, but I very much doubt anyone would give themselves a relative disadvantage with such a package. That the initial aid went to countries most at risk from "creeping communism", and that the majority of the money was spent on purchasing goods from the US, shows how this was achieved.
Furthermore, the funds were used for leverage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_National_Revolution#Operation_Crow_and_Serangan_O emoem_.28General_Offensive.29) against recipients, such as against the Netherlands in 1949 when they tried to restore colonial rule to Indonesia.

John Hill
27th Apr 2014, 08:48
...and that the majority of the money was spent on purchasing goods from the US, shows how this was achieved.

This demonstrates an all too common characteristic of foreign aid from many 'First World' countries. Aid is announced as so many million dollars and orders are placed with the suppliers who are generally from the donor country.

The goods and services are produced and maybe delivered. They might even be installed and commissioned into service but often this is not the case but not to worry as the money still flows from the tax payers' pockets to those of the industrial, agricultural and technology corporations that support the government in power.

Two countries are really good a this sort of thing and one of them is France.

How many airports have you flown too where mouldering crates can be opened to reveal un-installed radio, communications and navigational aid equipment?

chuks
27th Apr 2014, 08:49
PTT, I have no argument with your basic facts. It's just how one chooses to interpret them that can be difficult. There's some old alkie in a Santa suit handing out candy to children, for example, but is he giving superficial happiness to children, or is he just doing free advertising for a candy manufacturer, or is he doing, perhaps, both things? It's all in how one chooses to look at it, no?

You can stretch this sort of thing too far in either direction, so that either we Americans are going about sprinkling fairy dust, spreading happiness wherever we go, or else it's someone dragging some gratuitous mention of an aspect of the Holocaust into "things I don't like about America," just because ....

You can be a Pollyanna, or you can be a jerk, in other words. It might be best to avoid the edges, to try to stay somewhat in the middle, except that this is the internet.

Meanwhile, the OSCE group is still being held by pro-Russian activists. The Germans include a colonel from the German army, two other officers, and an interpreter, while others in the group include military observers from the Czech Republic, Sweden, Denmark, and Poland. The colonel declined to say, in a telephone interview, what he was doing in the Ukraine.

Russia has promised to help free the detainees.

The USA is alleging airspace violations by Russian aircraft on the border with the Ukraine, something denied by Russia, while Putin has said that there are only differences with the USA, not a total freeze in relations between the two.

These are two somewhat contradictory things I just read in one article in my German paper, along with a flanking report about how a neo-Nazi march in Kreuzberg, Berlin was derailed by a mass counter-demo.

PTT
27th Apr 2014, 08:54
PTT, I have no argument with your basic facts. It's just how one chooses to interpret them that can be difficult. There's some old alkie in a Santa suit handing out candy to children, for example, but is he giving superficial happiness to children, or is he just doing free advertising for a candy manufacturer, or is he doing, perhaps, both things? It's all in how one chooses to look at it, no? I think intent is the important thing. Would your alkie be doing it if he were getting nothing (not enough info in your example to say, but you get the point)? Would the US have implemented the Marshall Plan if they were to get nothing from it?
I do agree with you on going too far in either direction. That's pretty much my beef with the statements made by Matari and con-pilot - that we should all be thankful for intervention and recovery. Neither would have happened if it wasn't in the interests of the US, so we said thanks a while back and it's done now: you've reaped the rewards.

John Hill
27th Apr 2014, 10:58
, or else it's someone dragging some gratuitous mention of an aspect of the Holocaust into "things I don't like about America," just because ..

West Coast doesn't like America?

chuks
27th Apr 2014, 12:20
No more free grammar lessons today ....

You cannot really assign "intent" to actions taken by sovereign states, not with a very high degree of certainty, PTT. To this day, there are Germans who assign good intent to Hitler's Germany, while grudgingly admitting that, "Yes, perhaps the poor man went a bit too far," before adding, "But he was provoked!"

In this latest kerfuffle, is V. Putin's Russia making a grab for some territory, or is it protecting Russian-speaking, essentially "Russian," citizens of the Ukraine from fascist persecution? We see it one way, Putin and his admirers see it in quite another way.

There's a lot more to the making of modern Europe than just the Marshall Plan, when some Americans might want to overlook that fact. Here it might be overstated, simply as a response to some fellow persistently smearing the USA in any way he can think of, even dragging some tank owner named Paton into this to leave us, frankly, baffled. (We must have done something wrong there, or not done something right there, but only God and John Hill know what that is!)

chuks
27th Apr 2014, 14:45
What have you forgotten about airspace violations, that you need to be reminded about? They are done by one particular country against another particular country, but with something like 180 countries in the world, which two are you referring to? Who have we been molesting now, if it's the USA as the party doing the violation you are referring to?

The two under discussion here are Russia (violator), and the Ukraine (victim), with the USA having complained about that on behalf of the Ukraine, I guess. Where's the problem with that?

Also, is it you who is "calling us out?" Have you not read about our trigger-happy President Obama? Go now, to look at some of those image-captures from drone strikes, to see what a mess a Hellfire can make of your hairdo, and then ask yourself, "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do you?

PTT
27th Apr 2014, 15:28
You cannot really assign "intent" to actions taken by sovereign states, not with a very high degree of certainty, PTT.You can look at the sum of the actions to ascertain the intent. The Marshall Plan was one of those actions taken with good results for all; there are plenty of others which were beneficial only for the US; there are none I'm aware of which worked which had good results for others but were to the detriment of the US.

arcniz
27th Apr 2014, 15:29
As much as it goes against the grain, I will attempt to say something positive on this topic... if only in contrast to a more negative history not so long behind us.

Europe and Asia have been more or less continually embroiled in wars small and large since before the first histories were written on cave walls, and likely long before that.

What we moderns have to show for that is a world that has become increasingly less belligerent, in practice, but more violent when the process arises. The next few global-scale versions of that very likely will put humanity back into pre-history again, so we are in a window with unique perspectives available about past and future.

The trend of history in recent centuries has been toward highly aggregated central governments controlling ever more vast populations and geography. Mr. Putin and Mr. Obama happen to be at the helm of two biggies with immense power for constructive and destructive initiatives.

A much different situation existed forty years ago, when all the computers and space and communications aspects that govern modern life were setting deep roots. About then US President Nixon traveled to China & opened a dialogue that has allowed wary and then increasingly enthusiastic collaboration between the USA and PRC for economic, trade, business, development and social interchanges that have alleviated many tensions from decades prior, and have contributed to stability and growth for each. Mr. Nixon was kicked out of his job for his efforts, but the results have been profound for increasing global wealth and decreasing tensions.

At the end of the 60's US and USSR space programs were accelerated because they served the strategic purpose of perfecting better delivery vehicles for nuclear weapons, which had come to be stockpiled in such quantities by the two nations that using the nukes on hand seemed likely to
extinct life on earth, and the means to start that process were in the pockets and on the keychains of an uncomfortably long list of persons empowered as actors. Communications between US and the Soviets were not very reliable nor very well established. To many thoughtful persons with some inside knowledge, it seemed clear the whole works could collapse into nuclear fury by accident or mistake, with no way to head off the global train-wreck once automation and command-chain sequences reached a certain threshold of progression toward the ultimate Event.

I think various graying ones here can confirm that international political things now, even at their silliest, are vastly better and more rational than at the peak of nuclear risk some 40 years back, when the total breakdown of civilization was palpably near and no mechanisms existed to limit or damp oscillations that would set it to irreversibly proceeding from some minor accident or misunderstanding.

From the perspective of how thoroughly fouled-up things recently were, we can maybe appreciate the novelty of the Russian and American Heads of State now being able to actually call each other for a chat about ways to put a damper on the spread of conflict and scale coming from Russia's problems on its south borders. Both leaders have ranks of argumentative politicians in background, seeking to maneuver the policy directions taken as borders change and political independence movements spring up. The Brits had that problem at various times, as did the French and various other imperial powers - and they mostly made a mess of it. So far, Mr. P and Mr. O have been resourceful and constructive, IMHO, given the cadres of political idiots standing and posturing in the shadows behind them regarding the current situation, and pressing for all sorts of crazy agendas and postures.

I would say the whole deal is evidence the world ain't half so crazy as it was two generations back, and that's a good thing.

chuks
27th Apr 2014, 15:31
PTT, you can look and make, perhaps, a highly-informed guess, but that is about all.

barry lloyd
27th Apr 2014, 15:57
You lot are so busy arguing amongst yourselves about stuff that happened 70 years ago that you've lost the plot. We are well off the OP's original question and need to be back there.

The OP is talking about a 21st century Russia which is now asserting itself on the world stage. There will be games played in the coming months the like of which we have not previously seen, and I very much doubt whether any of the current western leaders have the brains or desire to deal with it. Germany will do nothing because they don't want to fall out with Russia. Obama hasn't got a chess-players brain as Putin has, and the rest of the EU leaders are disinterested.
If Russia annexes eastern Ukraine, the world will do nothing. Sanctions? Don't make me laugh! There are 350,000 Russians living in London alone. (You could ask yourself why, but I think we all know the answer to that one). What do we do, cancel their visas and send them home? Make the oligarchs in Chelsea and Kensington sell up their mansions? Of course we won't, and Putin knows it, just as he knows that the rest of the world will do nothing if he takes eastern Ukraine. He will do it by stealth rather than outright action, hence the chess-playing analogy.

Having won half of Ukraine, I wonder where he will go next...?

Tankertrashnav
27th Apr 2014, 16:26
Continuing the trend back to the OP's original question, I see that Standard & Poor have just downgraded Russia's foreign currency rating from BBBB to BBBB-, which is one step above junk status. Capital continues to haemorrage out of the country, the Russian Central Bank has increased its interest rates to 7.5% in an apparently vain attempt to attract investment.

I heard one commentator the other day stating that the size of the Russian economy was roughly equivalent to Italy's. Only Russia's vast oil & gas reserves are keeping it afloat, and income from these are at the mercy of sanctions, if the UN has the balls to apply them.

con-pilot
27th Apr 2014, 16:36
Having won half of Ukraine, I wonder where he will go next...?

Using his queen for a direct assault then a knight and a bishop in a flanking move, take the rest of the Ukriane, then declare Checkmate and win this game.

Next question is, how many Russian speakng people are in Poland? :suspect:

chuks
27th Apr 2014, 17:47
No, no, Masked Man, that is you calling us out! For hypocrisy or whatever, but still .... I tell you, we have terminated people, terminated them with extreme prejudice, for far less than that, but if you really are feeling lucky, well, you just go right ahead with that "calling out" thing you feel compelled to do to the USA. (I hope we survive this, being called out by the Lone Ranger. Cue: the William Tell Overture.)

I'm not quite that "dumb," not to know how to spell "aren't," no, but I still really would like to know which two countries the Lone Ranger refers to when it comes to violations of airspace. I honestly cannot recall that we've outraged anyone this week, but I might have missed something he could tell us about. Right now, I think it's been Russia violating Ukrainian airspace and a whole lot more besides, but what do I know? Oh, and doing that in a thoroughly hypocritical way, if that even matters!

To have a German state minister tut-tutting and comparing your actions to those of the late German Führer, Adolf the Well-Intentioned ... that takes some doing, but then V. Putin really is a man of action.

Con, I am sure you know that Poland was once a part of Imperial Russia (as was Finland). Well, half of what had been Poland until 1939 is now part of Russia, come to that, so perhaps Putin simply wants the rest of it, the other half of what had been Poland until it became the Incorporated Eastern Territories of Nazi Germany, plus a lot of what had been Germany until 1945. Why not?

When we were in Istanbul recently I chatted with some other tourists, from southern Finland. Of course I asked them what they thought about what Vladimir is up to, when one of them said, "Oh, we do not worry about Russia!" I just laughed and told them to brush up on their Russian.

Maybe Finland suddenly decides to join NATO? Of course they do get 100% of their gas from Russia, there is that .... Modern life is just so darn complicated!

con-pilot
27th Apr 2014, 19:40
Con, I am sure you know that Poland was once a part of Imperial Russia (as was Finland).

Yes, quite right, I do know that, hence my post. I just hope Putin doesn't. :\

Oh, by the way, I overflew Cuba, quite a few times actually, but don't tell Lone_Ranger.

Hmm, come to think about it, I have overflown Viet Nam and China as well. But mum's the word as far as Lone_Range is concerned.

We won't mention all the other countries I have overflown, that would give Lone_Ranger way too much to be paranoid over.

Even had the American flag painted on the tail on most of the aircraft I overflew countries in.

Lonewolf_50
27th Apr 2014, 20:18
Only Russia's vast oil & gas reserves are keeping it afloat, and income from these are at the mercy of sanctions, if the UN has the balls to apply them. Russia is a sitting member of UNSC. There will be no UN sanctions.

John Hill
27th Apr 2014, 20:27
Permanent members of the UN Security Council are immune from sanctions and so are their best mates.

chuks
27th Apr 2014, 20:35
I had a rather interesting trip once, from Libreville, Gabon to Nairobi, Kenya, that saw me overflying Lake Victoria without clearance from two countries of the three that lay claim to it. (Clarence forgot the clearances for Tanzania and Uganda.) So I went down the middle at low altitude, staying quiet as a mouse until I got into Kenyan airspace.

Back then, though, Vladimir Putin was just an unknown, minor KGB agent in Dresden, East Germany, somebody rather like me, somebody nobody had ever heard of, while the recent events in Eastern Europe had not even been dreamed of yet; the Soviet Union was held by almost everybody to be something that should last a very long time, another sort of thousand-year empire. The idea of an independent Ukraine back then, something that Russia should have to scrabble to get hold of ... im-possible!

After all, Nikita Krushchev had given away the Crimea to the Ukraine in 1954, obviously never dreaming of an independent Ukraine.

How I wish that Elena Dontesk Donttell Donteventhinkaboutit on her RED tractor still were here to grace this discussion with her pure, Russian logic. "Ukraine, what Ukraine?" was her basic position towards a national entity that predates Russia itself, and that was her in a good mood. When she was riled up, ah, what a little Cossack she could be!

I think she's there now, riding down demonstrators on the streets of Odessa, flailing wildly with her knout, left, right and center, screaming, "All bow before Comrade Vladimir Vladimirovich! On your knees now, worms!" Ah yes, happy days ....

There are sanctions and then there are sanctions. Upset Uncle Sam and you may find yourself facing rather effective sanctions that have SFA to do with the UN Security Council. Perhaps you wish to visit your money, held in some US bank or in the form of US paper ... good luck with that if things go very much further!

Spare parts for your airplanes? That's another one. Just ask Iran how that works. Access to certain financial markets ... we have ways to make you behave, perhaps.

New Zealand sanctions, that's another matter. What, no lamb chops?

fitliker
27th Apr 2014, 21:11
BBC News - US allows Boeing plane component sales to Iran (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-26896983)




Boeing is selling parts to Iran.The Airbus sales team will follow shortly, if they are not there already selling their wares.


Was it Stalin who said that a Capitalist will sell you the rope to hang him with ?


Sanctions and embargo's just means the price goes up a little. Market forces are greater than any Politician. The invisible hand of commerce will always win.
If anyone can name ONE capital city in any country where Heroin/Opium/Opiates cannot be bought then I might believe in the power of sanctions and embargo's over the forces that can drive a market :)

barry lloyd
27th Apr 2014, 21:27
There are sanctions and then there are sanctions. Upset Uncle Sam and you may find yourself facing rather effective sanctions that have SFA to do with the UN Security Council. Perhaps you wish to visit your money, held in some US bank or in the form of US paper ... good luck with that if things go very much further!

Spare parts for your airplanes? That's another one. Just ask Iran how that works. Access to certain financial markets ... we have ways to make you behave, perhaps.

New Zealand sanctions, that's another matter. What, no lamb chops?

Fair comment, chuks, but a lot of the aircraft operating on the registrations of certain British islands are Airbuses, so no problems there. The money? Oh, that's in the same British islands, Bermuda, BVI, Cayman Islands, Channel Islands - take your pick. Some is in Liechtenstein too, just for good measure and of course Monaco so you've got the euro covered as well. I doubt if much of it is in the USA, though a fair amount may be in dollars.

Financial markets? Well they can play with our own; they've made billions from them in the past, why stop now? No one's bothered about the rouble anyway and they can still exchange them for dollars, which they did even in the days of the Soviet Union. Now stopping that would be an interesting sanction!

I have lived and worked in Russia and I never ate lamb once while I was there, (can't even recall it being on a menu), so I guess the Kiwis ain't got much to sanction.:)

West Coast
27th Apr 2014, 23:13
The Kiwi's will break Putin's bank account by not importing oil from Russia.

Cacophonix
27th Apr 2014, 23:40
The Kiwi's will break Putin's bank account by not importing oil from Russia.

As his baboon head nodded in tears I knew I wanted to kill him...:ok:

Caco

Cacophonix
28th Apr 2014, 01:37
I know I am spitting into my own samovar but...

Jethro Tull- Said She Was A Dancer - YouTube

Caco

chuks
28th Apr 2014, 07:20
I just read a think-piece about Iran, how their economy is still suffering from the sanctions. It seems that many potential investors are worried about falling foul of some US rule or other, even though sanctions have been---for now at least---lifted.

There used to be a line of confiscated aircraft at Homestead Airport, south of Miami. I went out there to have a look at a Cessna 404, since I had been told there were a few there that had been confiscated from dope-runners, or else found abandoned after a dope run. There in the middle of all those piston-bangers was a nice, shiny Lear Jet. When I asked what that was doing there, out came some tangled tale of Sandinista Nicaraguans and a Cuban secret agent and, and, and .... Anyway, the end result was this Lear Jet left parked to rot because someone had upset Uncle Sam.

Then there's the way that pretty much any US-made gizmo that gets bolted to an airframe and that is headed out of the country has to be certified to meet some rules about high-tech exports. No joke, that.

My point is that once you upset the US authorities, much awkwardness may ensue. Okay, the Russkies can turn to alternate sources for stuff they cannot make themselves, but to be impeded access to the US market ... that is going to be a royal pain.

That said, it would make a lot more sense right now to focus on helping the Ukraine rather than on sanctioning Russia. Putin and his mob are not going to be doing a lot of thinking about long-term economic impact, since they are not businessmen in the true sense of that term, but more just mafiosi, sat on big piles of looted wealth.

There's an odd little enclave that Russia grabbed at the end of the Second World War, the Kaliningrad Oblast, formerly home to Königsberg, the original Prussian capital. If you get an invitation from a relative, or perhaps just someone posing as a relative, you might be able to get a visa and visit Kaliningrad; I was thinking about trying this back door way to see this obscure little place, cut off from the rest of Russia but thoroughly Russified by now, almost all of its original population fled or expelled. It could be a look at the future of the Ukraine, in fact.

Then there was, or perhaps still is, a train that runs from Berlin to Odessa, taking 24 hours for the trip. I wanted to give that a go, but the wife seemed oddly cool to my idea, telling me that I was on my own for that. Had Dushan tipped her off to my quest for Elena?

Anyway, both of these ideas are on ice for now. If anyone else would like to try a trip to Kaliningrad or Odessa, though, I would be happy to help.

I guess I will just go to Luton again while I wait for things to settle down further east. No visa required, looks and feels sort of like Kaliningrad or Pyongyang ... why not?

rgbrock1
28th Apr 2014, 12:59
con wrote:

Next question is, how many Russian speakng people are in Poland?

Or in Moldavia? Or in Lithuania? Or in Estonia? Or in Belarus? Or in eastern Romania? Or in Latvia? :eek:

PTT
28th Apr 2014, 13:02
It's ok, we'll all be safe now...

BBC News - Four RAF Typhoon jets head for Lithuania deployment (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27183642)

Nice show of strength... :hmm:

El Grifo
28th Apr 2014, 15:10
Bit of showboating or what ??

The Aviationist » Putin?s Doomsday Plane circling near Finland for third day in a row as he visits his spiritual mentor (http://theaviationist.com/2014/04/27/tu-214-near-finland/)

El G.

Lonewolf_50
28th Apr 2014, 16:20
Bit of showboating or what ??

The Aviationist » Putin?s Doomsday Plane circling near Finland for third day in a row as he visits his spiritual mentor (http://theaviationist.com/2014/04/27/tu-214-near-finland/)

El G.
Nope. Ops normal.

@Caco: nice song choice, :ok: even though I prefer "Black Satin Dancer" as Tull's best dance themed tune.

flying lid
28th Apr 2014, 16:47
The little shithouse will be after Alaska soon - just watch !!!!!!!!

He will soon cut off Europe's gas, and UK's major coal supply (from Siberia).

Why do we (the west) never learn - you can't trust Russia.

Lid

tony draper
28th Apr 2014, 17:11
We are sitting right on top of enough coal up here to keep us going for the next 100,000 years Mr Lid.
:rolleyes:

Lonewolf_50
28th Apr 2014, 17:23
Perhaps the dark statnic mills will fire up again when the domestic coal industry revives.

Ian Anderson from Jethro Tull with Bruce Dickinson - Jerusalem - YouTube

I had no idea. Bruce Dickinson is presented to us as a Captain on 757's. Had no idea there was life after Rock 'n Roll. :ok: Good choice of second careers. :cool:

flying lid
28th Apr 2014, 17:34
Too true Mr Draper, but Maggie shut most of the mines, and only a handful are left and a couple of these are currently under threat of closure.

I'm no fan of Fracking, mainly due to the injection of various noxious chemicals deep underground and the associated risk of ground water contamination - but we do need a better energy mix, UK mined coal, nuclear, wind and wave (tidal barrages) etc.

Energy, (or lack of it at an affordable cost) that's really what causes most of the worlds modern unrest. It will get worse, much worse, even if Russia calms down.

We in the UK really do need to get our fingers out, and some politicians with engineering background in. It will be too late soon, when the lights start to go out.

Lid

tony draper
28th Apr 2014, 17:42
We used to make all the gas we needed out of that coal as well,Hitler ran a war for a few years out of petrol made from cabbage leaves and turnips,we should never ever rely on furriners for our energy.
:=

vulcanised
28th Apr 2014, 17:48
Maggie shut most of the mines


Think you'll find Labour had a bigger hand in that.

flying lid
28th Apr 2014, 21:06
we should never ever rely on furriners for our energy

How very, very true.

Re the mines, Labour or Tory - they were closed. Many were nearing life's end, but many were not. Parkside Golborne and Bickershaw in Lancashire were merged underground into one super colliery in the late 80's, £millions spent in new machinery, rail rapid load facilities etc, shut in 1993 with hundreds of millions of tons of unworked coal down there - no geological or manpower problems either - just sheer bloody minded politics.

Many similar stories in Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, North East, South Wales, etc.

What the hell, Global Warming will keep us warm next winter as the "veil of darkness" descends upon the UK !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lid

con-pilot
28th Apr 2014, 21:25
What the hell, Global Warming will keep us warm next winter !!!!!!!!!!!!!


Didn't this winter, nor the one before that, the one before that, the one before that, the one before that, the one before that, the one before that, the one before that, the one before that, etc. :p

But then again, the US is the number one producer of natrual gas in the world and Oklahoma is the third highest producer in the US.

And most of our electricty is generated from coal fueled power plants, the coal being mined in South Dakota transported by train to Oklahoma.

Go figure. :\

tony draper
28th Apr 2014, 21:49
For years all the learned tomes I read stated we were living in what would be in terms of the Geological timescale a very brief inter glacial period and the great Ice Sheet was bound to return sooner or later,I'd still put my money on the Ice Sheet.
Unless we start pumping as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as we can of course,then we might delay it a tad.
:E

John Hill
29th Apr 2014, 02:01
If I am not mistaken the Great Ice Sheet eras have occupied only a very minor part of the geological time scale, so far.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation

John Hill
29th Apr 2014, 11:00
Lone Ranger, the last Ice Age finished only 12,000 years ago or so which barely registers on a scale of 4,600,000,000 years!

PTT
29th Apr 2014, 11:10
Quaternary glaciation also known as the Pleistocene glaciation or the current ice age, refers to a series of glacial events separated by interglacial events during the Quaternary period from 2.58 Ma (million years ago) to present
In popular culture, there is often reference to "the next ice age". Technically, since the Earth is already in an ice age at present, this usually refers to the next glacial period (because the Earth is currently in an interglacial period). Quaternary glaciation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_glaciation)

Lonewolf_50
29th Apr 2014, 13:08
So long as there's enough ice for my drink ...

tony draper
29th Apr 2014, 13:21
Your ok Mr Lonewolf the ice never got as far as Texas,but when it does return I suspect Texas will be a tad crowded.:E

sitigeltfel
29th Apr 2014, 15:45
Maggie shut most of the (remaining) mines

I have corrected that for you.

The score to date is, Harold Wilson-290, Margaret Thatcher-160.

Labour, and its fellow travellers, do not appreciate being reminded of that.

Lonewolf_50
29th Apr 2014, 16:02
stig, the line to take is that that Maggie shut down the "clean" coal mines, whereas Wilson shut down the "dirty" coal mines. :} :E Greens and lefties, fellow travelers.

(On this side of the pond, there's been much noise by our coal producers about generating power with "clean coal" which will occasionally cause one's ribs pain from laughter)

con-pilot
29th Apr 2014, 17:34
Wolf

It is very easy to make power with clean coal. :rolleyes:


Ya just got to wash it first.


Bada Boom!





I'll be here all week folks. Please remember to tip your cocktail waitress handsomely.

airship
29th Apr 2014, 18:21
I'm merely looking forward to reviewing the results of even a very short (if violent) confrontation between the so-called "air-superiority" assets that NATO countries possess today in the face of their Russian (ex. USSR) enemies and/or counterparts...?!

Before the UK (or other countries) finally and irrevocably commit themselves to spending the equivalent of £150 million per airplane when buying JSF-35s for their aircraft carrier/s (as in the case of the UK)...

...when a French-made Dassault Rafale, or even a Swedish-made Gripen would have been more suitable, and much cheaper. Of course, back in WWII, the Swedes were "non-aligned" in the war against the Nazis. And the French had their asses kicked.

I may be a "dumb Brit" living in France, but I'd (have still chosen) the relatively proven French Rafale to equip a real RN aircraft carrier at least initially...?! :rolleyes:

tony draper
29th Apr 2014, 18:25
Old Uncle Hugh who incidentally was a staunch labor man and had doings with various unions said one of the ways Harrold's chums had of shutting down mines on economic grounds was to take say a mine that was making a profit albeit a small one and install millions of pounds worth of new kit in it then say look at how much winning the coal at this pit is costing then give it the bullet.
:uhoh:

airship
29th Apr 2014, 19:57
The "veil of darkness" which has already descended on most of western Europe etc. is best described as our (French) politicians being so corrupt as to always act to: 1) Preserve their own financial interests; 2) Preserve the interests of France; 3) Support other countries before "surrendering"...?! :(

chuks
30th Apr 2014, 07:02
The OSCE observers are still being held by pro-Russian forces, but meanwhile former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder (SPD, the rough German equivalent of Labour in the UK) had Vladimir Putin as guest of honor at his birthday party in Saint Petersburg, when they got into a big hug that was captured on camera. This has put the SPD to some trouble trying to explain that this was just Gerhard being Gerhard (a greedy opportunist, four-times-married, so far), that it was nothing to do with him showing any respect for his position as the former Chancellor of Germany.

I must remember to ask my neighbor across the street, a mad keen SPD man himself, what he thinks about all this.

That's right on message for Vladimir, showing that he owns Gerhard, that he's bought some powerful influence in the West, since Gerhard is head of Nord Stream, a gas pipeline operator that has the Russian firm Gazprom as its majority, 51%, partner. They are building a gas pipeline between Vyborg, Russia and Greifswald, Germany.

One SPD leader offered the feeble hope that Gerhard had surely spoken with Vladimir about those German hostages during the birthday celebrations, but I rather doubt that came to pass, because of "good manners" and all that sort of thing.

Viborg used to be known as Viipuri when it was the second-largest town in Finland, located in the Finnish Karelian heartland. I visited it once, on the way to Leningrad on the so-called Vodka train, when I found Vyborg to be a sad, dirty little place that stank of brown coal smoke. I looked around and said to myself, "If only John Hill were here! We could party down in the station bar!" Just another one of life's missed opportunities, that one ....

meadowrun
30th Apr 2014, 12:49
Since we were talking aviation above (horrors) and the F-35 in particular.... I keep reading about how it is turning into a massively expensive mistake. Some comments from Michael Byers - - - - -
"Canadians are lucky to still have fighters that can go toe-to-toe with Russian Migs and Sukhois. The fast and maneuverable CF-18s were built during the cold war specifically for aerial combat. The F-35s Canada is considering purchasing (still) however, are designed for a very different mission: evading air defences during the forst wave of "shock-and-awe" attacks on the command sites, radar bases and ant-aircraft missles of "rogue states" such as Iraq, Libya, Syria and Iran ( add NK)."


The F-35 is a compromise aircraft that stems from the Pentagon's desire to procure a single model for the Air Force, Navy and Marines: an unachievable aircraft that would land vertically, evade radar detection, conduct ground attacks and still hold it's own in aerial combat.


Instead, all three versions are over-sized, overweight, underpowered - and still under development. The aircraft has been found to have high wing loading and a poor trust loading compared to other fighters. The biting conclusion is that it can't turn, can't climb, can't run.


In 2013 the US government downgraded the specs by reducing turn performance from 5.3 to 4.6 sustained g's and extended the time for acceleration from 0.8 Mach to 1.2 Mach by eight seconds. top speed will be Mach 1.6 compared to Mach 1.8 for the three decades old F-18. In 1958 the Avro Arrow hit Mach 1.9.


Add a limited capacity for missiles and bombs. The Russians would eat it for lunch. Lockheed-Martin still struggles with the design and the 24 million lines of software code supposed to make it work. The F-22s and Super Hornets are taking up the slack but the F-22 has it's own slew of problems including a mission capability of 60%.


Canada has deployed 6 CF-18s to Poland recently. The dithering about the purchase of F-35s continues.


Far too much money for each and highly questionable effectiveness.

rh200
31st Jul 2014, 06:43
BBC News - Nato 'unprepared' for Russia threat, say MPs (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-28577904)

Oh, their just beginning to see a potential threat from Russia now:ugh:

There's a big difference to having your head in the sand and allowing a bit of largess and giving the benefit of the doubt. The fact is we have been trying to be inclusive of Russia since the fall, but we should always have kept a weary eye.

One wonders where all those tacticians and strategists that the Pentagon usually have developing various scenarios where.

tony draper
31st Jul 2014, 09:49
And if Ivan turns off the gas to Europe?:rolleyes:

Andy_S
31st Jul 2014, 10:10
And if Ivan turns off the gas to Europe?

Then they don't get the revenue from gas sales.

One big difference between the Soviet era and today is that Russia is tied into the global economy. They need the hard currency that gas sales provide. In all the scenarios I've read about sanctions against Russia, there seems to be a consensus that they won't turn the taps off because it would be extraordinarily counter-productive to do so.

There’s no doubt that sanctions will hurt the Russians much more than the EU / USA. Whether that will be enough to force them to disengage from Ukraine is another matter. The Russian establishment have invested a lot of political capital in re-establishing a ‘sphere of influence’ based on the former USSR, and will not want to lose face by backing down. Putin may be caught between a rock and a hard place on this one.

tony draper
31st Jul 2014, 10:21
Ivan's people are a lot more accustomed to going without than the folks in Germany,he will of course wait until winter,leastwise that's what I would do.
:)

rh200
31st Jul 2014, 12:24
Ivan's people are a lot more accustomed to going without than the folks in Germany,he will of course wait until winter,leastwise that's what I would do.

Yep, the Russians could hold out longer. If Merkel wasn't Putins on the side squeeze she would have had all those reactors fired back up again. Then still be buying gas while she can and stockpiling. Whilst searching for alternate supplies from us.

If there was a concerted effort by the west we could tie things over, but hay the frogs still want to deliver new boats.

airship
15th Aug 2014, 23:56
According to many TV reports here in France, the Ukraine has attacked the Russian "aid" convoy, resulting in many of these vehicles being destroyed.

I can understand Ukraine's worries and even their wish not to have to accept Russian aid for the "rebels" or more accurately, the civilian populations in "rebel-held" areas. But destroying parts of the aid convoy appear quite a drastic reponse.

Let me get this straight: A few months ago, Ukraine was basicallly bankrupt. "We" in the form of the EU, the UN, and to a much lesser extent the USA, contributed US$ billions into the coffers of the Ukrainian government. Which they've used to pay their soldiers, buy arms or whatever since, in addition to doing their best to hold "the West" basically hostage in their fraternal war against their own citizens (whilst always being allowed to call them "Russian-backed" terrorists). When "we" back the Ukrainians, that's all OK. When the Russians back the Ukrainian separatists, that's pure evil, illegal and worthy of sanctions...?! :confused:

Rob Courtney
16th Aug 2014, 00:00
It wasn't the aid convoy airship. They are talking about an armoured convoy made up of APCs that crossed the border last night but was spotted by the media and the govt

airship
16th Aug 2014, 00:34
Russian APCs crossing the border?! :confused: Wouldn't that be a Russian invasion? If so, why are the Russians not following though directly with the rest of their invasion forces, massed just across the border?

Or is this yet another attempt of propaganda instituted by an Ukranian government (of questionable legitimacy) hoping to persuade their supporters (ie. us) that they're behaving correctly whilst trying to elimainate their opposition (ie. other Ukranians) in what is a civil war, "without restrictions" so far as the official Ukrainian forces are concerned for an approved but limited time...?!

Of course, once the Ukrainians have eliminated all opposition in the east, they will be free and able to march towards the south-east into Crimea. Who will simply fall over themselves to come back into the Ukrainian hemisphere...?! :ok:

Uncle Fred
16th Aug 2014, 00:56
Good summation of the F-35 Meadowrun.

Reminds me why there is more than one type of tool in a toolbox. Try as we might, we just have not developed a single tool that will do it all.

Sadly, the pork on the project is spread to nearly every single Congressional district of importance thus ensuring survival even if we could no longer hold back the Red Horde as it streams over the wire...

fleigle
16th Aug 2014, 03:05
What are you smoking Airship?, it has been reported, by BBC correspondants and others, that army forces from Russia crossed into Ukraine as night fell.
Seriously, :(:(:(
f

vulcanised
16th Aug 2014, 13:01
I used to be something of an admirer of Putin, but not any more.

I think he missed a golden opportunity over the downing of MH17. It would have cost him nothing to condemn the act (he hasn't and almost condoned it), even better, he could have sent in nearby troops to detain the perps which would have given him huge credit with other nations.

flash8
16th Aug 2014, 16:38
he could have sent in nearby troops to detain the perps

Assuming it wasn't the unelected president Willy Wonka who ordered the downing with plausible deniability?

tony draper
16th Aug 2014, 18:06
I suspect if Putin so desired he could walk into the Ukraine stick Kiev betwixt the cheeks of his arse and squeeze it flat in a day and be buggah all our halfwits could do about it.
:uhoh:
That's spooky, just as I finished typing that and had hit send,some talking head came on the on Telly said more or less the same thing.:uhoh:

con-pilot
16th Aug 2014, 19:08
Assuming it wasn't the unelected president Willy Wonka who ordered the downing with plausible deniability?

Got any proof of that? :rolleyes:

Andy_S
16th Aug 2014, 20:42
Assuming it wasn't the unelected president Willy Wonka who ordered the downing with plausible deniability?

You appear to have a bit of an agenda, as demonstrated by a recent post on the MH17 thread:

Their is no evidence that either the separatists nor their alleged Russian sponsors are responsible for this......

No evidence? The separatists boasted about it on Twitter for heavens sake. At least they did until it became clear that they'd shot down a civil airliner, at which point the message was hastily deleted. How much of a smoking gun do you need??

BTW, on the subject of, as you put it, "alleged" Russian sponsorship, the new separatist leader in the Donetsk region has today confirmed that large numbers of the forces under his control received military training in Russia.

flash8
17th Aug 2014, 18:31
You appear to have a bit of an agenda

My only agenda is the truth, for the families and victims especially.

I sincerely doubt the Russians are behind this. I dealt with Russian government officials on a daily basis for many years until recently and they are in the end no different from our (UK) officials, they would be horrified if this was the case and the truth would out.

The Russians are a very moral people (with exceptions like anywhere else), and having lived in Moscow fifteen years I reckon I have some experience.

The Ukrainian government led by Willy Wonka however is an entirely different matter. Incidentally I lived in Odessa (well just outside in a place called Nikolaev) for six months and like every other city in Ukraine is entirely mafia controlled beneath the surface, like Russia was perhaps twenty years ago during the dark days.

Why people see the bogeyman in Russia is beyond me... I always like to say that Moscow is far safer than London.. and I was born and raised in London.

con-pilot
17th Aug 2014, 19:57
I always like to say that Moscow is far safer than London.. and I was born and raised in London.

You may like to say that, but you are wrong.

Moscow, Russia, 53.55, ... London, United Kingdom, 46.24. *


* Crime Index by City 2014 Mid Year.

flash8
17th Aug 2014, 21:54
I said "safer" con... not absolute crime levels :=

Let's not get into US city statistics here ;)

con-pilot
17th Aug 2014, 21:58
I said "safer" con... not absolute crime levels

Then I guess we need your definition of "safer".

Not defending London, I really would like to know why you think Moscow is safer than London.

flash8
17th Aug 2014, 22:07
Personal safety.

I feel far less intimidated wandering the streets of Moscow at night inebriated (of which I have significant experience :}) and indeed moving about during the day without feeling I am going to be mugged/stabbed/assaulted/approached even.

I did work in London for two years back in the mid to late 90's and never felt safe after dark.

So personally, yes I feel safer in Moscow. Heck even the Militsia have improved vastly in the last decade and are now even (gasp) approachable.

Also given that London is now lost to the dogs immigration wise, it's one place I'd rather avoid.

tony draper
17th Aug 2014, 22:08
London's full of furriners and we all know they are dangerous bastards.:rolleyes:

flash8
17th Aug 2014, 22:13
bloody hell tony 80 posts in 13 years.... you are one prolific poster ;)

I didn't mean to say that all foreigners are dodgy.... but I would vote UKIP if I were allowed :)

tony draper
17th Aug 2014, 22:15
No it is just the really really furrin foreigners you dont let get behind you.:uhoh:

barry lloyd
17th Aug 2014, 22:41
I feel far less intimidated wandering the streets of Moscow at night inebriated (of which I have significant experience ) and indeed moving about during the day without feeling I am going to be mugged/stabbed/assaulted/approached even.

I did work in London for two years back in the mid to late 90's and never felt safe after dark.

So personally, yes I feel safer in Moscow. Heck even the Militsia have improved vastly in the last decade and are now even (gasp) approachable.

Also given that London is now lost to the dogs immigration wise, it's one place I'd rather avoid.

As one who has spent more time than I would have liked in both cities, I completely concur with those remarks. Ask a London cabbie (black cab) driver to go south of the river after about 8pm and await the reply "Sorry gov, don't go sarf of the river at night". Equally, In Moscow I was warned never to get into a 'taxi' which clearly had a Chechen driver. I have always felt safer walking the streets of Moscow after dark than I have in London.

con-pilot
17th Aug 2014, 22:54
Fair enough Flash.


Thank you. :ok:

flash8
18th Aug 2014, 01:58
Anytime con ;) Always enjoy reading your posts...

barry... exactly!

Solid Rust Twotter
18th Aug 2014, 07:06
...I really would like to know why you think Moscow is safer than London.


Fewer Russian gangsters in Moscow.

con-pilot
18th Aug 2014, 18:46
Fewer Russian gangsters in Moscow.

I think they must have moved to London. :p

Solid Rust Twotter
18th Aug 2014, 19:21
*Taps nose knowingly...*:ok::E

Andy_S
20th Aug 2014, 10:12
Interesting report from Reuters.
Insight - Ukraine rebel movement faces uncertain future | Reuters (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/08/20/uk-ukraine-crisis-rebelranks-insight-idUKKBN0GK0NO20140820?feedType=nl&feedName=worldNews)

I think that when the 'rebels' start to brutalise the very people whose interests they allegedly represent, then they're in trouble.

airship
27th Aug 2014, 01:58
Russia invades the Ukraine (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28940095): Earlier, Ukraine said its military had captured 10 Russian paratroopers near the village of Dzerkalne, near the Russian border...
...A Russian defence ministry source told the Russian news agency RIA Novosti the soldiers crossed the border "by accident"....
...The source also said some 500 Ukrainian servicemen had crossed the border at various times, adding: "We did not give much publicity to that. We just returned all those willing to return to Ukrainian territory at safe places."...
...But Ukrainian military spokesman Andriy Lysenko said: "This wasn't a mistake, but a special mission they were carrying out."

I've watched some of the televised reports of the Ukrainian "interrogations" of some of these 10 Russian paratroopers on Skynews, BBC etc. What bothers me is whatever happened to "name, rank and serial number" as being all that "prisoners of war" need to answer, and why are these elite Russian conscripts, pre-cursor of the hordes to follow, blathering so...?! :confused:

Also, it appears that Ukraine will be spending an additional US$3 billions over 2 years 2015-17 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28916768) on: ...re-equipping the army after an "exhausting" campaign against pro-Russian rebels.

I thought that Ukraine was literally broke?! Where does all this money come from? Is it partly EU / USA / IMF economic aid in some diverted form? If that is the case, shouldn't "the impartial media" more correctly report the "pro-Western and supported Ukrainian government..." whenever it also reports "pro-Russian rebels / terrorists..."?! That might be fair... :ok: :p :uhoh:

rh200
27th Aug 2014, 05:14
I've watched some of the televised reports of the Ukrainian "interrogations" of some of these 10 Russian paratroopers on Skynews, BBC etc. What bothers me is whatever happened to "name, rank and serial number" as being all that "prisoners of war" need to answer, and why are these elite Russian conscripts, pre-cursor of the hordes to follow, blathering so...?!

There is no war officially. Its in internal conflict, hence their criminals, terrorists etc. The Russian soldiers are there by accident or illegally carrying out combat operations. Not sure on the illegality of apply the rules of war to those.

sitigeltfel
27th Aug 2014, 06:32
The Russian soldiers are there by accident or illegally carrying out combat operations.

A error of few hundred metres might be an accident..........but 20km?

rh200
27th Aug 2014, 12:26
A error of few hundred metres might be an accident..........but 20km?
AHH but it will all be the fault of the evil west and offsetting their GPS.:E

W.R.A.I.T.H
27th Aug 2014, 12:34
offsetting their GPS.

Russkies have their own toys for navigation.

rh200
27th Aug 2014, 13:59
Russkies have their own toys for navigation.

But us evil westerners, most likely in the evil empire NATO :p have obviously hacked it to make them look bad.

On another note, got this off the bbc

BBC News - Ukraine crisis: Novoazovsk targeted by rebels (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28951319)

Seems the rebels are getting even better equipped and further down it appears that some media in Russia are starting to question.

In an editorial (http://www.vedomosti.ru/opinion/news/32616101/voyuem-li-my) (in Russian) headlined, "Are we fighting?", it pointed to the case of the captured paratroopers as well as mysterious funerals for Russian soldiers, some of whom were said officially to have died on training exercises.

Seems they have been having a lot of "Training accidents lately".

Andy_S
27th Aug 2014, 14:42
Seems the rebels are getting even better equipped.......

Interesting column in the Daily Telegraph today; speculates that Mad Vlad has invested so much political capital in bending Ukraine to his will that he can no longer back down, regardless of sanctions. With the recent territorial gains of the regular Ukrainian forces, he has been forced to escalate what had been a covert proxy war into a far more overt military operation to prop up the pro-Russian rebels. I don’t think any objective person really believes for one moment that Russian military simply ‘got lost’, and the DT reported that soldiers with Russian uniforms and military vehicles (with insignia removed, similar to the BBC story) had been seen setting up checkpoints in Eastern Ukraine.

Taking on a bunch of weekend warriors is one thing, but I fear the Ukrainian army won’t stand a chance against the mainstream Russian Military.

rh200
27th Aug 2014, 22:01
Taking on a bunch of weekend warriors is one thing, but I fear the Ukrainian army won’t stand a chance against the mainstream Russian Military.

Its well known the Ukrainian military was run down before this conflict. Sadely I think this was a long term plan.. Even with out direct intervention, they are in an unsustainable situation.

Effectively the Ukrainians have fixed resources due to us not supplying hardware, whilst the rebels have a continuouse supply of hardware and manpower.

To get around that the Ukrainians needed to end it quickly.

This extra from the bbc.

BBC News - Ukraine crisis: Luhansk firm moves factory to Russia (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28951437)

The aid convoy that ORAC mentioned the facotry.

A Ukrainian firm has moved the contents of its engineering factory from the war-hit city of Luhansk in eastern Ukraine to central Russia.
An official told Russian TV they left because of the violence, and because their customers were mostly in Russia.
Rebel-held Luhansk has been under siege for 25 days and is struggling with power and water supplies.
There was no indication of how the contents of the Luhansk machine-building plant had been moved.


The revelations emerged after Ukraine claimed a Russian aid convoy had been used to move equipment from a factory that made parts for helicopter engines.
Officials said factory thefts were being carried across rebel-held areas.


The Russians have a long history of atrocities such as massacres, rape etc, looks like looting is another. One wonders if they actually have any professional miltary, if you where one you would have to be ashamed.

BBC News - Ukraine crisis: Rebels push into port of Novoazovsk (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28951319)

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said he had received Polish intelligence reports that regular units of the Russian army were operating inside Ukraine

The Committee of Soldiers' Mothers in Russia's northern Caucasus said it had a list of 400 soldiers who had been killed or wounded - but it did not know where the injuries and deaths had happened

Ukrainian helicopter pilot Nadiya Savchenko appeared in court in the Russian city of Voronezh for a hearing on her continued detention in custody on charges of complicity in the killing of two Russian TV journalists

And abducting Ukrainian service people taking them into Russia and putting them on trial. Surely the could be International law against that.

And we sit around doing nothing, when are we pulling off the gloves?

probes
29th Aug 2014, 19:59
http://cdnph.upi.com/sv/em/i/UPI-5841409161647/2014/1/14091625218755/Canada-offers-Russia-and-Not-Russia-a-geography-lesson.jpg

The helpful map from Canada's NATO delegation (CC/ Twitter).

Read more: Canada offers map with 'Russia,' 'Not Russia' - UPI.com (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2014/08/27/Canada-offers-Russia-and-Not-Russia-a-geography-lesson/5841409161647/#ixzz3BoDx5wsh)

flash8
29th Aug 2014, 20:53
wtf do the Canadians know about Ukrainian/Russian history?

I'm sick of those Governments who have no experience of either country giving their uninformed armchair analysis.

And I'm Canadian/British lived and worked out of Moscow almost fifteen years and six months in Ukraine just outside of Odessa.

The Russians are the only rational actors in this game, and as for the Ukrainians they lost it as soon as Willy Wonka took 'charge', lets hope our Yank friends can rein in his worst excesses.

probes
29th Aug 2014, 21:18
The Russians are the only rational actors in this game
it would be interesting to read how you define 'rational' in this case.

To focus on one aspect and not the 'actors' or 'game' choice of words.

con-pilot
29th Aug 2014, 21:26
Are you American by any chance?

My guess would be no.

flash8
29th Aug 2014, 21:53
Are you American by any chance?

British/Canadian.

I have a lot of respect for the US btw and some of my best pals are American but not Obama... but that's best left for another thread.

lomapaseo
29th Aug 2014, 22:04
flash8

I have a lot of respect for the US btw and some of my best pals are American but not Obama....

but have you ever stayed in a Holiday Inn ?

if not you opinion doesn't count in the value field

pineridge
29th Aug 2014, 22:46
Flash 8 asked...........


"wtf do the Canadians know about Ukrainian/Russian history?"


Perhaps the fact that about 200,000 Ukrainians emigrated to Canada about 100 years ago has resulted in a large number of Canadians who know quite a lot about Ukrainian/Russian history.

Andy_S
29th Aug 2014, 23:28
The Russians are the only rational actors in this game.......

So you don't believe it's rational for Ukraine to want to defend it's territorial integrity?

flash8
30th Aug 2014, 00:04
So you don't believe it's rational for Ukraine to want to defend it's territorial integrity?

There are a number of issues here. Off the top of my head some thoughts.

1. The Government is lead by an unelected leader (Willy Wonka the Mafia Chocolate King) installed very likely by the CIA whose primary goal is to remove Ukraine out of the Russian orbit. The overthrow itself is indeed hugely murky. The latter 'visit' by Brennan really confirmed this. F*k even Saakashvili was there stirring the pot gleefully within days (if not hours!) (and I have met a few of his 'ministers' whilst in Tbilisi back in '05, dodgy isn't the word).

2. It is obvious even to an imbecile that Sevastopol is of vital Russian strategic interest and that any renege on the lease by a pro EU Ukraine would have never been acceptable to Russia and likely would result in a forcible takeover to preserve national interests. However it never came to that and Russia pulled off quite a coup. Note neither the US nor Willy Wonka ever mention Sevastopol.. why? They aren't fools. (For a humorous but dark undercurrent of these feelings I'd recommend you watch the Russian 1990's classic Brat and you might understand).

3. The East is almost Russia in all but name. Having spent some time there I communicated in Russian almost entirely and even felt I were in Russia. Most of the citizens identify themselves with Russia however one of Willy Wonka's first edicts was a poor bodged attempt to ban the Russian language! wtf. How to piss people off perfectly.

4. I spent six months in Nikolaev just outside of Odessa and know the city fairly well. What happened there almost certainly was instigated by the new 'Government' to stir up ethnic tensions. Heck I spoke Russian comfortably in Odessa with nobody batting an eyelid. There was peaceful co-existence. To be truthful this event REALLY shocked me. Never in a million years could I imagine this could happen, 'assistance' MUST have been there.

5. Putin has played this one well, mostly hands off. He has the vast support of Russians that I know (and I live in Moscow) of whose patriotism can never be questioned. He's in a sticky situation. Sevastopol was a must and protecting ethnic Russians is his duty.

6. One suspects the US (Government) would not mind a new cold war. After all the Military-industrial complex constantly seeks 'new' markets. This one can't be beaten. That might sound a rash statement but I believe it has some truth.

7. Russians on the whole are no different from the rest of us. Having a Russian girlfriend of many years, Russian friends of whom I would entrust my life and meeting many many (100's) of ethnic Russians all over the CIS on business they are wonderful people. Rotten Apples? Some... but same anywhere. Ukrainians? the same really which leads me to a story.

I once met a US Nuclear Sub Commander in a bar in Azerbaijan who was then a US diplomat (at least officially) - he said.. Flash, you know 95% of people anywhere in the world are decent.. any country. It's the 5% however you gotta watch out for. Wise words indeed.

con-pilot
30th Aug 2014, 00:22
6. One suspects the US would not mind a new cold war. After all the Military-industrial complex constantly seeks 'new' markets. This one can't be beaten. That might sound a rash statement but I believe it has some truth.



Sorry, but I must take exception to this statement. It is Russia, namely Putin yesterday, that stated that they are a "nuclear power not to be messed with". That was at least the second time that a senior Russian official has threatened use of nuclear weapons.

No US President since the fall of the Soviet Union has ever threaten Russia with such words. It is Putin that wants another cold war.

Not us.

flash8
30th Aug 2014, 00:34
Sorry, but I must take exception to this statement. It is Russia, namely Putin yesterday, that stated that they are a "nuclear power not to be messed with". That was at least the second time that a senior Russian official has threatened use of nuclear weapons.

Con, if this was indeed the case I expect it was in retaliation to the increasingly shrill US rhetoric on Russia. No, it has not come close yet to Ronnie's* famous statement, but one can see it leading in that direction.

*Actually the leader of your great Nation I admire the most by far, although I can't overlook his statement.

con-pilot
30th Aug 2014, 00:48
it has not come close yet to Ronnie's* famous statement

Yes, I'd like to know the statement you are referring to as well. However, when Reagan was President, the Soviet Union was still in power and Communist Party was running Russia. The Cold War was still going on and US/Soviet tension was high.

That is why I included this disclaimer in my post;

No US President since the fall of the Soviet Union has ever threaten Russia with such words.


Just covering my arse there you know. ;)

flash8
30th Aug 2014, 00:54
Yes, I'd like to know the statement you are referring to as well.

Evil empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_empire)

con-pilot
30th Aug 2014, 01:00
Uh, like I just posted, that was when the Cold War was going on.


Sorry, I'd like to stay and keep this going, but it is Friday night here and the wife is about ready for us to leave and go to dinner.

So I have to sign off.

Later my friend. :ok:

rh200
30th Aug 2014, 01:25
Regardless of the technicalities of various ethnic make ups there are some basic facts.

It is Ukraine not Russia and its borders have been accepted by both sides and internationally for a while now. Yes every one is aware of strategic scenario of various ports.

But frankly the majority of them are only that important depending on your view of the world and where you want to push it. The west has reached out to Russia time and time again, but no it wants to be a top dog.

As I have said before, this whole "our sphere of influence thing" and that country belongs to us thing are [email protected] It is thinking of a bygone time, that sadly some people are more comfortable with.

Personally I would like a few of the small countries to band together and go in on the side of the Ukrainians and tell Russia and the US to get stuffed if its not going to act.

As for Russia the only rational one, hardly, yes they are, they have astrategic outcome and are working to that end. The Ukrainians, yes they are, they are trying to defend their homeland from a Russian takeover. The rest of Europe doesn't know what to do. Obama is just glad he has the ISIS problem to take the heat off him in needing to act.

The doctrine for the last few decades has been that they could handle a couple of regional conflicts at the same time, maybe they should put their money where their mouth is.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
30th Aug 2014, 04:22
Canada has, by most estimates, the second largest Ukrainian community outside Russia (equal with the USA). My cousin is married to one. Do at least ask Google your question first Flash8.

Krystal n chips
30th Aug 2014, 06:06
" error of few hundred metres might be an accident..........but 20km?


The Russians also have officers......and maps.

probes
30th Aug 2014, 06:08
one of Willy Wonka's first edicts was a poor bodged attempt to ban the Russian language!
Ban? When was that?

rh200
30th Aug 2014, 09:09
one of Willy Wonka's first edicts was a poor bodged attempt to ban the Russian language!

I think thats a bit of misinformation as I understand it. From my understanding it was to get rid of its "official status" and hence make Ukrainian the only "official" language. From my understanding there where going to be no penalties for speaking Russian, as there are none here.

A perfectly reasonable thing to do to promote long term nationalism, if not at the right time. In view of various statements from the Russians on their so called right to protect Russian speakers anywhere, you would have to think about a long term strategy to "deal" with them.

probes
30th Aug 2014, 10:24
various statements from the Russians on their so called right to protect Russian speakers anywhere
so, the next countries would be?
And, btw, do they even need protection? - as (most of) the ones in the turbulent part of Ukraine have been protected out of their homes - or just killed? Casualties and lateral damage, you know...

ORAC
30th Aug 2014, 10:41
so, the next countries would be? The current aim would seem to be a southern land corridor to the Crimea. But I doubt if they'd stop there. Moldova will be next - unfortunately cutting Ukraine off from the Black Sea and acquiring all the commercial sea ports at the same time....

TransNistria to become part of Russia like Crimea: Russian official (http://zik.ua/en/news/2014/08/20/transnistria_to_become_part_of_russia_like_crimea_russian_of ficial_516134)

Russia Vows to Preserve Peace in Breakaway Transnistria – Russian Official (http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140822/192253008/Russia-Vows-to-Preserve-Peace-in-Breakaway-Transnistria--Russian.html)

Washington Post: War in Europe is not a hysterical idea (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/anne-applebaum-war-in-europe-is-not-a-hysterical-idea/2014/08/29/815f29d4-2f93-11e4-bb9b-997ae96fad33_story.html)

Novorossiya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya)

http://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/cYCwYmxYkmQ1dAmmiqn4XtZQBHc=/1525x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/675508/New_Russia_on_territory_of_Ukraine.0.png

Andy_S
30th Aug 2014, 11:42
There are a number of issues here. Off the top of my head some thoughts.

I'll avoid quoting all your "thoughts" and simply observe that in your long response you actually failed to answer my question - isn't it rational that the Ukrainian government want to maintain the territorial integrity of their country?

Ukraine is a sovereign state with recognised borders. Russia has unilaterally violated those borders and annexed Ukrainian territory without any kind of UN authority or consultation with other countries, despite the fact that it is signatory to a treaty recognising Ukraine's independence.

You suggest that the CIA instigated a coup, yet overlook Russia's continual meddling in the internal affairs of Ukraine.

You claim that Putin has a "duty" to protect ethnic Russians. That comes perilously close to endorsing his right to intervene, militarily, absolutely anywhere he chooses.

Matari
30th Aug 2014, 13:29
Poor, misunderstood communists. Sixty, eighty million killed and people had the nerve to call them "evil."

Putin will make amends though, winning the hearts and minds of the Poles, Hungarians, Czechs, Georgians and Baltic states like a good KGB man.

rh200
30th Aug 2014, 14:49
The current aim would seem to be a southern land corridor to the Crimea

Thats what I was thinking for a while, its logical. But there was word they will end up building other access but that will take a while. If that was so so waiting would be better than to go to all this trouble.

As such this would imply a larger strategic aim.

Does anyone know the legalities of blockading a port or area in a countries territory at their invitation?

flash8
30th Aug 2014, 18:10
isn't it rational that the Ukrainian government want to maintain the territorial integrity of their country?

A democratically elected government reflecting the will of the people yes. Willy Wonka and Mr Brennan controlling the show (with the IMF vultures in the background). I think not.

Even your average ethnic Ukrainian is disgusted at how they have deployed troops against their own people, slaughtering innocent victims willy nilly. Very few people in Ukraine believe it or not, East or West, North or South support Willy Wonka and his fascist ensemble.

As for the Malaysian 777, let's hope Brennan can contain the reality of the situation that Willy Wonka is no doubt implicated not the eastern Ukrainian Defenders nor Russia.

I'm fed up of the b*llsh*t the Western press churns out. I'd be more happy if it were even remotely balanced, even the BBC slants it's coverage with more than a tad of bias.

airship
30th Aug 2014, 18:19
F.A.O. probes and rh200 in particular. From this Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_language_in_Ukraine) about the status of the Russian language in Ukraine: In August 2012, a law on regional languages entitled any local language spoken by at least a 10% minority be declared official within that area. Russian was within weeks declared as a regional language in several southern and eastern oblasts and cities. On 23 February 2014, a bill repealing the law was approved by 232 deputies out of 450 but not signed into law by acting-president Aleksandr Turchinov.

Leaving aside for a moment all the "long-term and strategic" motivations of NATO, the EU and the West in general; Russia; "Ukrainian-speaking" Ukrainians (the majority in central and western Ukraine) and "Russian-speaking" Ukrainians (the majority in eastern and southern-eastern Ukraine including Crimea): I wonder if it was not indeed just (regardless of whether there was any ambiguity, confusion or mis-understanding involved) "the (future) status of the Russian language in Ukraine" which was the true spark which ignited the already explosive atmosphere, leading to the current conflict...?! :ok:

It's worthwhile reading the Wikipedia article quoted above. The current areas of major conflict match-up pretty much 100% with the parts of Ukraine in which "Russian-speaking" Ukrainians are the overwhelming majority (or at least Ukrainians also in favour of making Russian an official 2nd Ukrainian state language):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/UkraineNativeLanguagesCensus2001detailed-en.png/800px-UkraineNativeLanguagesCensus2001detailed-en.png

Ukraine seeks NATO membership (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28978699)?! WHOA THERE Mr. Arseny Yatsenyuk (I'm not sure just what your own "democratic" credentials for the post of PM are, or even if you are officially still PM)...?!

So Ukraine wants to join NATO. Ukraine wants to join the EU. Ukraine also wants a heck of a lot of money from the EU, USA and IMF. To "prop-up" what is basically a failed-state and continues to be governed by folks like yourself, whose motivations are highly questionable and with "the old gang of thugs" still operating from just behind the scenes. What exactly can "we" expect to get back in exchange? For battling Russia on the "economic fronts", hurting our own economies, measured already in the US$ billions. Or do you truly and seriously believe that we will "come to your aid" directly and risk a real military confrontation with Russia?! :ugh:

I suggest that President Putin, in spite of all the loud noises emanating from (Europe) especially, can assume a relatively "free-hand" whilst the sanctions and counter-sanctions don't bite any sides too hard. At the right-time in a few weeks or months, "occupy" the eastern and southern parts of Ukraine in question. And stop there! The (non-nuclear) winter will then be upon us. Europeans will start complaining about rocketing heating costs. Politicians will take note and perhaps be obliged to ease some sanctions, now that the threat of imminent Russian invasion of the rest of Europe (if there ever were any) were rapidly receding...?! :D

flash8
30th Aug 2014, 18:28
Decent post Airship.

Ukraine seeks NATO membership?! WHOA THERE Mr. Arseny Yatsenyuk

Mr. Arse is jumping the gun with that old codger Rasmussen encouraging him (not that Rasmussen even seems to understand the NATO accession criteria).

Even the former British Ambassador '04-'08 to Moscow (Sir) Tony Brenton stated Rasmussen was a crazy old buffoon and NATO membership was suicidal for the West.

My sincere hope is the puppet Government doesn't drag us all into a wider conflict a view also echoed by Tony Brenton.

con-pilot
30th Aug 2014, 19:35
Flash

I've always had a bit of a problem when Putin supports, nothing wrong with that you understand, say this;

I'm fed up of the b*llsh*t the Western press churns out. I'd be more happy if it were even remotely balanced, even the BBC slants it's coverage with more than a tad of bias.

Here is a short, non-inclusive list of the "Western Media":

France

FranceAgence France-Presse
Le Figaro
Le Monde
Le Nouvel Observateur

Germany

GermanyDer Spiegel
Die Welt
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung

United Kingdom

BBC
Financial Times
Reuters

United States

ABC News
CBS New
NBC News
PBS News
CNN News
Fox News
Associated Press
Bloomberg L.P.
Huffington News
The New York Times
The Washington Post
The Wall Street Journal
Time


Now, in Russia the non-Western Media sources are who and how many?

flash8
30th Aug 2014, 20:25
Con

Some are worse than others... but they all to some degree reflect purely Western interests and many have a worrying trend lately in increasing the anti Russian rhetoric even to the extent of siding with what is increasingly obvious a non-legitimate 'government' full of bandits, no matter how silky smooth some of them seem (snake would be a more 'apt' description of Arse).

Russia could be strong ally of the West especially in the fight against Islamic fundamentalists for example where we truly are aligned in interests (and share much intelligence).

I do wonder how much input the relevant (read informed) people in the State department (usually the most rational of US departments with a huge number of gifted and clever people, if they had their way we would never have gone into Iraq for example) really had in all this.

To directly answer your question (lest I am accused again of avoiding direct answer) quantity isn't a factor here but quality is. Most of the mainstream Western media parrot US Government rhetoric without any real analysis, and with no wish to dig deeper.

Am I pro Russian? It's not an easy question to answer, but likely in the end probably not as much as you likely imagine, but I am very interested in the truth - something I suspect we will never hear.

Edited to say "Fox News" is not a news channel, it is pure fiction.

galaxy flyer
30th Aug 2014, 21:30
flash8,

When influential Russian "thinkers" are advocating nuclear war in Europe to prove NATO is powerless in the face of Russian revanchism, you need to get real.

Anne Applreaum on .war in Europe (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/anne-applebaum-war-in-europe-is-not-a-hysterical-idea/2014/08/29/815f29d4-2f93-11e4-bb9b-997ae96fad33_story.html)

GF

OFSO
30th Aug 2014, 21:38
I hear from Brussels that at today's ministerial meeting, EU leaders voted to adopt the most stringent reprisals against Russia. These consist of (a) voting Russia in as a full member of the EU and (b) forcing them to renounce the rouble in favour of the euro. It is considered that this will bring the Russian economy to its knees within five years at the latest.

airship
30th Aug 2014, 21:45
You're so right OFSO?! But you forgot something. Just like Eire, Greece, Portugal and Cyprus, the EU would stand-by "their fellow Russian-member", persuading the IMF to also contribute in addition to using max. EU funds to support said member and help them back onto their feet. Now that's solidarity...?! :ok:

flash8
30th Aug 2014, 22:26
Galaxy

A far more serious person, the dissident Russian analyst Andrei Piontkovsky, has recently published an article arguing, along lines that echo Zhirinovsky’s threats, that Putin really is weighing the possibility of limited nuclear strikes — perhaps against one of the Baltic capitals, perhaps a Polish city — to prove that NATO is a hollow, meaningless entity that won’t dare strike back for fear of a greater catastrophe. Indeed, in military exercises in 2009 and 2013, the Russian army openly “practiced” a nuclear attack on Warsaw.

Is all of this nothing more than the raving of lunatics? Maybe.

Maybe? Maybe? This is such b*llsh*t as to be worrying it would even be given any space in a 'respectable' media outlet. When do we stop laughing... utter utter shite - this is the sort of 'quality' we see in the Washington Post now? Plzzzzzzzzz.

galaxy flyer
30th Aug 2014, 23:04
According to the commentator, “even the most modest practical realization of [Putin’s] idea of ‘assembling the Russian lands’ requires changes of state borders at least of two NATO member countries, Latvia and Estonia.” Because of the Western alliance’s Article 5 in which an attack on one is an attack on all, that would seem impossible given MAD.

But as many analysts have suggested before, “the MAD doctrine considered only a single most destructive scenario of a military conflict between nuclear powers, total war.” But there are other scenarios, including the limited use of nuclear weapons by one side under conditions when the other side does not respond lest that lead to “mutual suicide.”

It is “theoretically clear,” Piontkovsky argues, “that in a more volatile geopolitical situation, a nuclear power focused on changing the existing status quo, enjoying the advantage of political will and indifferent to the values of human lives (its own and others), and affected by a certain adventurism, could achieve serious foreign policy results by the threat of the application or the limited application of nuclear weapons.”

Clearly, he continues, Putin does not seek “the destruction of the hated United States,” a goal that he could achieve “only at the price of mutual suicide.” Instead, his goals are “significantly more modest: the maximum extension of the Russian World, the destruction of NATO, and the discrediting and humiliation of the US as the guarantor of the security of the West.”

To put it in simplest terms, Piontkovsky continues, Putin’s actions would be “revenge for the defeat of the USSR in the third (cold) world war just as the second world war was for Germany an attempt at revenge for defeat in the first.”

Read what "shite" the Russian Pionkovsky said, just don't dismiss it out of hand. Putin is playing for keeps in Ukraine. He wants to change the map of Europe. Russia mystery be stopped or it is 1939 again and war will be inevitable when his advances become intolerable even to Euros.

GF

airship
30th Aug 2014, 23:18
...or it is 1939 again and war will be inevitable... Yer wot, Angela Merkel is going to invade Poland?!

I know, I know. I'm either MAD, serious or have a well-tuned sense of humour! :(

West Coast
30th Aug 2014, 23:22
Edited to say "Fox News" is not a news channel, it is pure fiction.

I'll take Fox over state funded media such as the BBC and RT news any day of the week. First to say they have a bias with that said. All media does.

To say it's fiction clues me in your brainwashed by whatever bias you suffer from. I watch it from time to time. I agree with some of their analysis, disagree with it in others. Just the same with the beeb and others. If you find yourself calling all they put out to be fiction, then the problem lies with you, not Fox.

rh200
30th Aug 2014, 23:22
F.A.O. probes and rh200 in particular.

As i said, there was no banning, just about status. A perfectly logical long term goal, for a stable state. The Russians tried the same thing when they where in charge, but in their case as is usual, where a bit more brutal.

I suggest that President Putin, in spite of all the loud noises emanating from (Europe) especially, can assume a relatively "free-hand" whilst the sanctions and counter-sanctions don't bite any sides too hard.

Exactly right, the Europeans and Yanks don't have the balls. As for winter approaching that will weigh heavily on the approach. Though I would presume Europe will be looking at other sources in view of the current situation, but that takes time.

Read what "shite" the Russian Pionkovsky said, just don't dismiss it out of hand.

I'm still of the opinion that at the moment Putin doesn't want a serious escalation. As such a serious response would stop him in his tracks, but there has to be a way out for him to save face. There has been no shortages of points up till now, where that could be done.

Once there is official Russian invasion going on, then that door is closed, hence serious action would come at an even higher price.

On the point of lobbing a nuke at some eastern European capital to show our weakness, interesting theory. Whilst I think thats unlikely, the fact remains what would we do? Nothing, Obama might resign and hand over the reigns to the VP.

An interesting scenario would be if there was an open invasion of the Ukraine and how far they would go in their own protection, and hence Russia response to that. If you where going to fall completely, then there's a lot that Ukraine could do to seriously give Russia a blood nose, that could be a trigger for the scenario described.

con-pilot
31st Aug 2014, 00:12
Obama might resign and hand over the reigns to the VP.


Oh God, anything but that, Biden is the best life insurance policy President Obama has. :ooh:



By the way Flash, you didn't answerer my question. Just how many sources of Russian media do you have in Moscow and how many of those are not controlled by the government?

rh200
31st Aug 2014, 00:27
Oh God, anything but that, Biden is the best life insurance policy President Obama has. :ooh:

I didn't say it was a good thing?:E

75 years tomorrow since the kings speech, and the start of WW2. Another century and things don't change. The question is can we stop the tide?

con-pilot
31st Aug 2014, 00:47
I didn't say it was a good thing?


:D:D:D

Now that's funny. :ok:

ORAC
31st Aug 2014, 07:14
To follow up on my last post on Russian plans. If I was Moldovan I'd be very worried.....

On the borders of 'New Russia', pro-Putin forces point their tanks towards central Ukraine (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11065875/On-the-borders-of-New-Russia-pro-Putin-forces-point-their-tanks-towards-central-UkraineNovoazovsk.html)

On the entrance to Novoazovsk, a tank squats behind a freshly dug earth bank, it’s barrel pointing west, with the red and blue flag of Novorossia - the latest incarnation of the separatist fighter’s self-declared state flying on the turret.

But if the fighters here get their way, it won’t be parked there long. With the backing of Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, the men on the banks are eyeing up a band of territory stretching from the Russian border into the far west of Ukraine. First in their sights is the Black Sea city of Mariupol and then many more towns and cities in Ukraine.

“Mariupol? Yeah, we’re going to take Mariupol. And then we’re going all the way to Lviv,” said a stocky man with a beard and a camoflage-painted Kalashnikov.

“Our goal is Novorossia. All of it. Odessa, Kherson, everything.”........

ORAC
2nd Sep 2014, 07:01
I was wrong to guess the next domino would be Moldova - it's Kazakhstan....

Kazakhstan is latest Russian neighbour to feel Putin's chilly nationalist rhetoric (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/01/kazakhstan-russian-neighbour-putin-chilly-nationalist-rhetoric)

But it is in the south, not in the north-west, that the chilly blast of Putin's rhetoric is being felt, far away from Europe and from Nato. In little-noticed remarks last week, he called into question the legitimacy of the post-Soviet state of Kazakhstan while ordering the Kazakhs to be on their best behaviour when it came to serving Russian interests.

The remarks, to an audience of young people in Russia on Friday, sent shocke waves through the central Asian republic, which also hosts a large ethnic Russian minority centred in the north on the Russian border. Putin said there had never been a country called Kazakhstan, that the republic was purely the product of the current president, Nursultan Nazarbayev.

"I am confident that a majority of its population supports development of close ties with Russia," said Putin. "Nazarbayev is a prudent leader, even the most prudent in the post-Soviet space. He would never act against the will of his country's people."

Kazakhstan, he said, was "part of the large Russian world that is part of the global civilisation in terms of industry and advanced technologies. I am confident that that's the way things are going to be in the medium – and long-term." Nazarbayev had "done a unique thing. He created a state in a territory that had never had a state before. The Kazakhs had no statehood.".....

probes
2nd Sep 2014, 08:21
It surely is hard to understand how Putin hopes to frighten people into liking/cooperating with Russia.

rh200
2nd Sep 2014, 08:39
It surely is hard to understand how Putin hopes to frighten people into liking/cooperating with Russia.

Um its its easy, you don't cooperate you get smited and we get what we want anyway.

Just look at Ukraine, its been taking it up the @rse playing nice and all western like. Is there any white night from the western world coming to its aid? Nope, they will just get worn down and give in, Russia will get what it wants either way unless the wets grows a spine.

Terror, it works, look at most of the world, then look at the wests and our values and high tech solutions. This is why you start getting extremist in countrys starting to sprout off about lobbing a few nukes on nondescript countrys to prove NATO is not a threat.

rh200
12th Nov 2014, 02:16
US students held in Russia over visas (http://www.news.com.au/world/breaking-news/us-students-held-in-russia-over-visas/story-e6frfkui-1227120501212)

Can you get a Russian visa for social political activity?
F#$ me its a conference organised by their own people. Getting more socialist every day.

tony draper
12th Nov 2014, 09:41
Our news channels are such shite I've taken to watching RT and am rapidly coming round to Ivans point of view,be careful about what news channel you watch.:E

racedo
12th Nov 2014, 13:17
Can you get a Russian visa for social political activity?
F#$ me its a conference organised by their own people. Getting more socialist every day.

Lets see the Russian immigration service really harassed them, questioned them, never put them in chains or held in cells, allowed to return to their hotels and sightsee over the weekend and return on Monday.

Tis a good job they hadn't gone to the US with wrong as there would have been no sighseeing and they would have spent the weekend in lockup.

probes
12th Nov 2014, 13:48
am rapidly coming round to Ivans point of view
which would be? Or rather, your interpretation of that?

rgbrock1
12th Nov 2014, 13:50
probes:

Tony D will undoubtedly correct me if I'm wrong but what I think he meant by that statement is, if you watch RT (Russian Television) then you would come around to Putin's view quite rapidly.

tony draper
12th Nov 2014, 15:25
The Russia Today News Channel,the quality of their bullshit if far higher than the infantile poo coming out of London and def superior than that issues forth from Washington.
:E

probes
12th Nov 2014, 15:53
yep, rgb, I think I did understand that, I was just interested how Mr.D interprets that. As it has to be interpreted anyway :E.

Sallyann1234
12th Nov 2014, 19:51
RT is getting some serious attention from the UK regulator Ofcom (or the "UK Government Censor" as Russia likes to call it)

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/obb266/obb266.pdf

Lonewolf_50
12th Nov 2014, 19:59
I wonder how much cultural deja vu is going on for Mr Putin?

A hundred years ago, and a bit more, one of the global centers of petrol production was in and around Baku, Azerbaijan. Move later into history and you see Hitler aiming for the Caucasus Oil Fields as a major strategic objective of his fight with Russia.

Russia has, since the Soviet Union began to break up, been making money selling gas and oil. How different is Russia now from the Czar's Russia? Nukes is one obvious difference, but I have heard more than one analyst describe Russia as a European Third World nation supplying raw materials to the rest of the industrial world. Not sure how accurate that is as a summary of Russia's place in the world, but it's a little spooky to consider that for all of the industrial expansion Stalin et al put Russia through, Russia may be reverting to an old form.

I take no joy in arriving at that conclusion, but I have a hard time avoiding my arrival there. It makes the next ten years pretty risky from a lot of angles, unless you are Chinese.

con-pilot
12th Nov 2014, 20:18
From various news reports lately it is pretty well confirmed that China is rapidly building up its Navy and Air Force. The Chinese Army is already built up, but is undergoing modernization.

Russia is doing the same, in fact Putin is bragging about this.

Now, taking into consideration that Russia and China are old age enemies and have had many border clashes, is China's build up and modernization the result that they fear the West (US) or Russia?

Lonewolf_50
12th Nov 2014, 20:23
My guess is that China fears nobody, since they are the 800 pound gorilla in the room.

They might be concerned about the Russians and United States becoming buddy-buddy, but the current state of rhetoric between our nations argues against that coming to pass any time soon. The golden chance for that came when the wall came down over 20 years ago, and too many people from the West and East blew the chance.

rgbrock1
12th Nov 2014, 20:25
Considering Japan's recent expressed wish to revisit their Constitution and the role of their military, and especially Navy, in the Pacific basin - coupled with the not so platonic history between Japan and China - I think the Chinese have that area in mind as they build up their own naval forces.

con-pilot
12th Nov 2014, 20:30
Considering Japan's recent expressed wish to revisit their Constitution and the role of their military, and especially Navy, in the Pacific basin - coupled with the not so platonic history between Japan and China - I think the Chinese have that area in mind as they build up their own naval forces.

Yes, there is quite a bit if tension over some islands in that part of the world. Like the Satay (?) islands, which I believe that Viet Nam, Japan and China want to make claim to.

And China does not need an aircraft carrier to fight a war in far western China. :p