Russia

[Njugle]

And do you mean all this anti-Russian propaganda in the West is a sign of a proper democracy and freedom of speech??

 

A good point. There is a culture of 40years of suspicion and paranoia toward Russia. Regardless of what the situation actually was at any given time, it served the US and UK governments well to uphold the idea of the great aggressive bear. With greater communictaion in the world, it now serves them better to demonise(possibly correctly) the so-called terrorists queuing up to allegedly kill us all.

 

An interesting perspective is to view recent Russian activities as is we were allies with them and view the US's as if they were a Cold War foe. In this aspect the Russians probably come out best.

 

The National Geographic ran a story about Russia recently. It was interesting to read of the vast quantities of money now circulating in Moscow, where millionaires are commonplace and it is the multi-million or billionaires that stand out. Ranked by a consultancy firm as now the most expensive city in the world for ex-patriots.

 

I suppose what i am saying in this ramble is that the main cause of our negative opinions of Russia is ignorance, as with so many nations. We have heard for months now about the utterly banal story of the American leadership race. In the same period what have we heard of routine politics in other countries. Makes you wonder about the BBC right enough.

[ArabiaTerra]

I didn't get this biased impression from the Beeb. They reported that the Georgians had attacked South Ossetia and that the Russians had moved in in response and then reported the reaction from western politicians. It was the politicians who were biased, portraying Russia's response to Georgian aggression as a pre-meditated invasion of another sovereign country. I found myself shouting at the politicians on the tv: "But the Georgians started it!".

 

The bias was in the West's political response, not the BBC's reporting of that response.

[paulb]

2006

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2887/

aug 2008

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4621592.ece

 

concerning the ukraine

Vladimir Putin’s recent remarks while still president of Russia clarified Russia’s position on that account. During the recent NATO summit and in the follow-up meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush in Sochi, Putin commented that much of Ukraine’s territory had been “given away†by Russia and that Ukraine would “cease to exist as a state†if it joined NATO. In that case, Putin hinted, Russia would encourage secession of the Crimea and eastern regions of Ukraine. While Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov refused to deny Putin’s comments, Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov confirmed them almost explicitly, though more diplomatically, for the media. Duma politicians and Kremlin consultants, such as Gleb Pavlovsky, have suggested that Russia withdraw from the 1997 treaty or, technically speaking, not renew its validity upon its expiry in 2009 (see EDM, March 24, April 10, 14).

 

now if you were a former state of the ussr would you feel safe with them as your neighbour.

 

have a read if intrested

http://www.kyivpost.com/nation/29583

 

they are not a nice warm cuddly teddy bear. they have craws and they will use them.

[deardron]

concerning the ukraine

Vladimir Putin’s recent remarks while still president of Russia clarified Russia’s position on that account. During the recent NATO summit and in the follow-up meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush in Sochi, Putin commented that much of Ukraine’s territory had been “given away†by Russia and that Ukraine would “cease to exist as a state†if it joined NATO. In that case, Putin hinted, Russia would encourage secession of the Crimea and eastern regions of Ukraine.

It's not a direct threat with war, but just a statement of the fact that today's Ukraine is not a monolythe formation and while 60-70% of its population are against going into NATO, a decision towards that can split up the country (it's already split up if we compare the political attitudes of West and East/South Ukraine, but at the moment everything is polite). Putin just explained this fact to his colleagues from abroad, and he knew what he was talking about. But Russia does recognize the Ukraine as a sovereign state within existing borders, here's a direct quote from Putin:

 

Crimea is not disputable territory, the chairman of the government of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin in interview of German broadcasting company ARD has declared. "Crimea is not any disputable territory. There there was no ethnic conflict, unlike the conflict between South Ossetia and Georgia", - the Russian prime minister has told.

 

"Russia recognised for a long time borders of today’s Ukraine. We, as a matter of fact, have finished first and last our negotiations on border. It is a question of demarcation, but theseare already technical affairs", - Putin has added.

http://fin-forex.com/putin-crimea-is-not-disputable-territory/

 

Pro-Russian organizations in Crimea criticized the statement of RF Prime Minister Vladimir Putin who claimed in an interview with Germany’s television that Russia has “long recognized†Ukraine`s borders, and the Crimea in southern Ukraine “is not a disputed territoryâ€.

 

A leader of “Vera†pro-Russian law-enforcement organization told UNIAN that indignant Crimean residents have been calling him all the time. “How can he decide for us, Russians, our future, at the Russian land of Crimea?â€, the politician claims adding he will keep on fighting for the unification with Russia.

<...>

As UNIAN reported earlier, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin rejected suggestions that Russia may target pro-Western Ukraine after recognizing Georgia`s breakaway regions. Russia has ``long recognized`` Ukraine`s borders, Putin said yesterday in an interview with Germany`s ARD television. Problems among Tatar, Ukrainian and Russian populations in the Crimea are an internal issue for the Ukraine, Putin said.

http://www.unian.net/eng/news/news-270471.html

[crofter]

The video KOYAANISQATSI has posted is one of the very few examples of this censorship that has surfaced. So it seems there's a big iceberg under the water..

 

"We're sorry this video is no longer available"!

[deardron]

The video KOYAANISQATSI has posted is one of the very few examples of this censorship that has surfaced. So it seems there's a big iceberg under the water..

 

"We're sorry this video is no longer available"!

It's just a bug at YouTube, try again in a minute and it will appear again.

[Njugle]

Ye gads! That's fuel for conspiracy related debate.

 

This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.

[paulb]

to promote tension in your neighbours is not the act of a mature state. when did we try to split france up. after all most of north an eastern france was historically english. when was the last time we murdered our dissidents, can you imagine how long Alex Salmon would last.

http:// http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/death-of-a-dissident-moscows-murky-assassins-450530.html

http://www.demdigest.net/blog/?p=442

http://www.blogigo.co.uk/bulgaria/British-counterintelligence-services-stopped-attempt/3/

[deardron]

Try one of these:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5idQm8YyJs4

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJyAMes6QkQ

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41Nq6XEyKhE

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u94qW6Fn_0

 

Or search for "ossetian girl" at YouTube.

[crofter]

Try one of these:

 

 

Thanks for that.

[EM]

... the russian empire has aways felt under attack from the rest of the world. ... now they do have some justification for feeling like this...

 

An understatement if ever I heard one. I wonder if you have ever pondered the comparative casualty levels between the various combatants in WWII? Inevitably there are many unknowns and some disagreement between the historians, but the general picture is painfully clear. It is also quite different to what your typical western citizen believes. Have a look at what Wikipedia says:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wwii_casualties

 

A few numbers to consider from that page:

 

Military casualties

Soviet Union 10,700,000

United Kingdom 382,600

United States 416,800

 

Civilian

Soviet Union 11,400,000

United Kingdom 67,800

United States 1,700

 

Total

Soviet Union 23,100,000

United Kingdom 450,400

United States 418,500

 

Total as % of population

Soviet Union 13.71%

United Kingdom 0.94%

United States 0.32%

 

I would presume that you probably also believe that it was the US who came to Britain's aid and won WWII. This view is pervasive in Britain and the US, even though the historical facts do not support it. Ask any German who was responsible for the defeat of the Third Reich and most will explain that "it was the Red Army of course." Normandy was helpful and sped up the collapse but the US motivation was to halt the Red Army. 80% of German losses were on the Eastern front.

 

 

... lets just hope we dont have to go through what our parents, grandparents had to.

 

... which, though tough, was a picnic compared to the genocide in the East.

[paulb]

indeed they were butchered but that does not justify there actions now.

[paulb]

looks like another careless anti russian

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7670518.stm

[ArabiaTerra]

Trouble at t' mill

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/dissent-beginning-to-spread-across-russia-as-crisis-bites-1522983.html

 

I love this bit:

In Moscow, a motley band of communists, anarchists and liberals gathered at several points across the city to protest against Kremlin rule. At one spot, a dozen protesters taped over their mouths with white tape, held up white placards with no slogans, and handed blank white flyers to passers-by. Bemused by such a conceptual approach to protest, the police rounded them up and arrested them anyway, and the organiser got five days in prison.

[Para Handy]

Why would an Ex KGB man want to buy a news paper in the UK