Dahell is happening in Kiev

    Quote from blackdog

    Frankly, i don't think that people that care found Russia's image improved by the olympics.

    I don't want to sound rude since it's your country, but it's a total joke the amount of money that was spent to build a desert's cathedral, massive cleansing of stray animals (like in China two years ago) and sorry if i stereotype, but I'm sure they didn't mind too much in building in a sustainable way.

    Then we could also talk about organizational problems -sure there always are at these events- but i have a friend who came all over and she has been at several international skating competitions in the recent years and she had a lot to complain.


    Not really going to go into the Olympics, different topic and definately not without controversy. Though consider that before the Olympics, Sochi had just hills, villages and a whole lot of nothing much else, they had to build everything from scratch:


    [Blocked Image: http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/52e660bb…lopment-gif.gif]


    Comparison photos:


    http://www.businessinsider.com/pictures-of-so…c-change-2014-1


    Anyway Russia pretty much pulled off everything that was promised with no real incidents or no terrorist attacks like those that the Chechens threatened. Thus it was successful for Russia's image.


    As for Canada, the point I was making was the French empire's control of Canada ended in the 17th century, about 400 years ago. Russia's influence over Ukraine ended 20 years ago, hence apples and oranges.


    Quote from ESToomere

    I believe Crimea was "given" to Ukraine in 1954. I think if the Ruskies would have given us parts of territory back in '91 they'd long be occupying the shit out of them. It's interesting that everybody is talking about "invasion", Russian Federation has never, per se, invaded anybody, they've just offered security. Kinda like ISAF in Afghan, hell, even US in Iraq.

    I guess the main difference here is that they're bloody efficient at what they do.

    But, it's hard for me to defend Russia. There's way, WAY more Russians in Estonia than in Crimea, at any point Putin could come a-knockin: either if EU proves too harsh or too lenient for Russian intentions.

    What I'm trying to ask is, even though I'm new to this community, anybody have a couch where I can crash?


    ISAF into Afghanistan was a response to 9/11, however skewed the reasons were (most of the bombers were Saudis), the ring leader Osama was in the country and there had to be some kind of response. Iraq was an invasion based on either faulty intel or outright lies (depending on who you believe). One thing is for sure, Mr Dick Cheney certainly benefited a lot from that little venture.


    There are more Russians in Crimea, over a million whereas there are only around 300,000 in Estonia. I wouldn't worry about Putin invading your country since it's a NATO member and Estonia was never part of Russia anyway.. those ethnic Russians left over are obviously a result of the colonisation after the mass deportation of Estonian "traitors" following Soviet annexation.


    Quote from SpronyvanJohnson

    I liked this even though the numbers are wrong but then I started thinking. Crimea - 2014, Georgia - 2008, Chechnya - 1999 against Afghanistan - 2001 and Iraq - 2003.


    That is not accurate, but even if it's 10 countries... it's still 9 countries more than Russia has invaded. Like I said when the US tries to lecture Russia on international law, it's the pot screaming the kettle's black...


    Chechnya was not invaded, you can't invade your own territory, Chechnya has been part of the North Causcaus region of Russia since 1500AD. The beginning of the Chechen conflict began when the Chechens declared their independence and began ethnically cleansing and murdering Russians from the area for four whole years before Yeltsin declared war. The first war was badly handled, with terrible leadership and poor moral, most of the regions captured were retaken by Chechen seperatists. The second war was launched after several apartment buildings in Moscow were bombed by the Chechens and the terrorists invaded neighbouring Dagestan. Each war was a response to Chechen attacks.


    Georgia was also not invaded, the situation there is somewhat complex:


    During Tsarist rule, ethnic Ossetians sided with the Russian Bolsheviks to fight the Georgians in a newly formed state south of the region of North Ossetia-Alania (a region of Russia). In 1921, the Red Army conquered Georgia and it became part of the USSR. Inside the Georgian SSR An autonomous Oblast of South Ossetia was formed for the Ossetians that lived there. During Soviet rule, the Georgians and Ossetians were mostly peaceful. Following the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1991, Georgia gained independence and the Ossetians in the autonomous region called for the creation of their own republic. The Georgians refused and eventually after several years of unrest, war broke out. After a year of conflict, an agreement was reached whereby Georgias and South Ossetians would have their own zones of control with Russian forces overseeing events.


    There were tensions between both sides and In 2006 South Ossetia declared it's independence which was not recognised by Georgia. Tensions escalated into war in 2008 after president Saakashvili ordered Georgian soldiers to fire on the city of Tskhinvali (the unrecognised capital of South Ossetia) in response to attacks by South Ossetian milita. The assault killed Ossetians and several Russian peacekeepers there. Russia responded by retaliating against the Georgian forces, pushing them back as far as Gori but pulled back before they reached Tbilisi, the capital. Saakashvili basically tried to start a war to retake South Ossetia by force believing that NATO would offer military support against Russia. He was wrong and ended up eating his tie (literally).


    Quote from Minos

    Anyway, this is very circumstantial evidence but the idea doesn't surprise me: Kiev snipers hired by Maidan leaders - leaked EU's Ashton phone tape

    http://rt.com/news/ashton-maidan-snipers-estonia-946/


    Whether RT is propaganda or not, audio recordings don't lie, as they didn't when Nuland the US ambassador to Ukraine were caught on tape. This is very very interesting, I will have to delve deeper...


    Whilst I wont disagree on your point about communism, Soviet leaders did not however nearly wipe out an entire people in a direct campaign of genocide. The largest number of people killed in the USSR were under Stalin, an ethnic Georgian and out of those killed the majority were Russians.


    When exactly was Russian law changed? The constitution allows for a president to serve a six year term which can be renewed once upon winning the election again. After this, the leader must step down and sit out from running for office in the next election. Putin was voted into office after Yeltsin during the elections in 2000. In the 2004 election he was voted in for a second term. In 2008 he stepped down and was not allowed to run for office. Medvedev won the elections instead and was president for a six year term appointing Putin as PM. In 2012, since he was able to run again, he ran for a new term and won.


    Sure, those elections were deemed as being unfair and corrupt (most of it coming from claims of the OCSE, known for being anti-Russian). If Putin was/is a "dictator", he'd just change the constitution to make him president for life and hold mock elections where the results would be 90% + (like the faux elections by Saddam and Bashar al-Assad) as it is, in the latest election even with the alleged fraudulent votes ommited, would still result in victory. Putin is very popular in Russia and the majority of those who are against him are those from the Communist Party and those who dislike him for not being Nationalist enough (they would like him to be more firm on the West and not have so many relations with the EU/US). It's worth noting that his popularity at the moment is extremely high because of Sochi, the gay Propaganda bill (around 85% of the population supports that) and now the invasion of Crimea to protect Russia's interests. That can change though obviously, if the situation in Ukraine escalates and Russians start dying in an actual war...


    On the other points:


    - On imprisoning political rivals: ...like who exactly? How many political rivals does Putin actually have? Navalny? Pussy Riot?!!


    - Separatist movements? Chechnya? Read what I said in the post above. The only people interested in Chechen independence are fanatics and terrorists, vast majority of Chechens are happy under Kadyrov under his own islamic leadership.


    - Pretty much only state media? There are nearly 100,000 media outlets in Russia, 10 of which are state owned... yeah that's really "pretty much only state media" clearly...


    Ultimately I've made it clear I'm no supporter of Russia's actions in Crimea, I understand their position but invasion of a neighbour is not the way to go about it. We will have to just wait and see what happens here...

    Quote from D3ads

    Sure, those elections were deemed as being unfair and corrupt (most of it coming from claims of the OCSE, known for being anti-Russian). If Putin was/is a "dictator", he'd just change the constitution to make him president for life and hold mock elections where the results would be 90% + (like the faux elections by Saddam and Bashar al-Assad) as it is, in the latest election even with the alleged fraudulent votes ommited, would still result in victory.

    Oh, you wouldn't think he would that stupid, right?

    It's a similar situation of our Berlusconi: popular and influential enough to maneuver and scheme. Just because you don't wipe out a parliament doesn't mean you're that kind of person, Berlusconi uses his influence over media to shift people's perception in his favour... i'm sure Putin has his ways to.


    Quote

    the gay Propaganda bill (around 85% of the population supports that)

    I can see why a spot for an American fast food was considered a big opening to the west and modernity back then As per the Olympics, yeah didn't want to derail; just meant thay my perception is not that because of those Russia is benevolently looked upon by the other countries around the world. But it's not like i'm constantly attached to news outlets, quite the contrary.

    Just to be clear though, i'm not anti-Russia or have some kind of hate toward you guys. (again, i'm uninformed so biased, so) I despise the leadership... who like most of world country leaders is not worthy of appreciation.

    Thanks for all the info, interesting nonetheless.

    Quote from D3ads

    - Pretty much only state media? There are nearly 100,000 media outlets in Russia, 10 of which are state owned... yeah that's really "pretty much only state media" clearly...


    First of all this is leaving out all stations, papers etc. that are owned by companies which are controlled by the state and those whose owners have direct or indirect ties to the Kreml. Then it is obviously not about numbers but about reach (state-run media have the upper hand) and last but not least you do not take into account various anti-critic policies that lead to self-censorship and further stiffle objective journalism in Russia. Not going to get into this mess that is going on in the Ukraine right now, but I couldn't leave that uncommented...

    Did someone said that RT was truthful to what's happening (or biased)?

    External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    "The constitution allows for a president to serve a six year term " changed under Medvedev (quite blatently under Putins orders, he couldn't have done it during his own term that would have been a tad too obvious) to allow Putin to serve another 12 years, guess what will happen then, he will sit down for a term, allow one of his cronies to be president and its a sure bet that Putin will be back for another 12 years. Definitely democracy.


    " Separatist movements? Chechnya? Read what I said in the post above. The only people interested in Chechen independence are fanatics and terrorists, vast majority of Chechens are happy under Kadyrov under his own islamic leadership." Yeah, Putin enacted a law that makes secessionist demands a crime, punishable by 3 years in jail and 5 years if done through any form of media. Totally not a dictator.


    "Pretty much only state media? There are nearly 100,000 media outlets in Russia, 10 of which are state owned... yeah that's really "pretty much only state media" clearly..." As Friechamp said, literally every single one of the largest media outlets are owned by the state (run by Putin), Putin or his friends.


    "On imprisoning political rivals: ...like who exactly? How many political rivals does Putin actually have? Navalny? Pussy Riot?!!" http://www.khodorkovsky.com/memorials-full…ners-in-russia/ Locking up business and political rivals is pretty much what Russia is world known for doing.


    That you think Russia is a country to be admired stuns me.

    While I won't pretend to know a great deal about the complexities of Russia, it has struck me for quite some time that it just doesn't feel right that Putin has been in the hot seat for as long as he has. It was widely said even when he was 'merely' Prime Minister that he was the one really pulling the strings, and in all honesty it just isn't good for a country to be led for so long by effectively one man — even if the country's people do approve (or at least appear to).


    That's how dictatorship and cults of personality are born, as when the leaders in question manage to sufficiently bend the country's laws and earn unconditional military support, etc they are essentially untouchable. All the photos of him looking cool and awesome and hardcore are propaganda, and the saddest part is it works. Do we not learn from the past? Stalin and Lenin were (and sometimes still are) popular and similar strategies were used to cement that perception.


    Of course, it could very well be that any leader other than Putin is a far worse thing for the world. On top of that, it isn't lost on me that there's a certain degree of typical Western arrogance to dismissing Russia's political system as wrong. But then, how many alternative systems that don't adhere to the principles of democracy have actually worked out? Russia itself learnt the hard way just how much of a fall a country can have when the system is rotten and the people blind to what's coming.

    Let's not forget other important state owned outlets: PBS, BBC, Deustche Welle and France 24.


    RT's mission is to provide Russia's perspective on current affairs, this is on their frontpage if I'm not mistaken. To me, that's what makes it special. When something happens you can compare what CNN/FOX are reporting against RT and use a middle ground to paint a picture of reality. The truth usually stands in between two extremes.


    I'll reserve my judgement for Putin's actions for later, but so far not a single person has been hurt as a direct result of his actions in Crimea and that's a fact.

    Quote from Minos

    Let's not forget other important state owned outlets: PBS, BBC, Deustche Welle and France 24.


    RT's mission is to provide Russia's perspective on current affairs, this is on their frontpage if I'm not mistaken. To me, that's what makes it special. When something happens you can compare what CNN/FOX are reporting against RT and use a middle ground to paint a picture of reality. The truth usually stands in between two extremes.


    I'll reserve my judgement for Putin's actions for later, but so far not a single person has been hurt as a direct result of his actions in Crimea and that's a fact.


    You're right. BUT, don't take this as a sign that Putin has somehow become the holy spirit in shape and form. I'm sure if the whole world wasn't watching and the Barraco Barner hadn't issued a threat, he'd be on his merry way to another massacre or genocide.

    Quote from Minos

    Let's not forget other important state owned outlets: PBS, BBC, Deustche Welle and France 24.


    lol what is france 24 it's not airing on french tv

    It's a worldwide propaganda service in several languages paid by my taxes, and i didn't even knew it was existing, and it's a brazilian guy in the US who inform me it exist on mapcore, that's amazing

    Quote from Minos

    Let's not forget other important state owned outlets: PBS, BBC, Deustche Welle and France 24.


    RT's mission is to provide Russia's perspective on current affairs, this is on their frontpage if I'm not mistaken. To me, that's what makes it special. When something happens you can compare what CNN/FOX are reporting against RT and use a middle ground to paint a picture of reality. The truth usually stands in between two extremes.


    I'll reserve my judgement for Putin's actions for later, but so far not a single person has been hurt as a direct result of his actions in Crimea and that's a fact.

    The BBC is not state owned.

    Quote from Warby

    i dont know what deutsche welle is but ARD and ZDF are not state owned either in germany


    The deutsche welle is apparently the same thing france 24 is, and you too don't know about it, that's amazing


    I didn't knew you could have a tv channel broadcasting what your country "thinks" on the international scene (like maybe it's not the opinion of the majority of the citizens in the country), it's paid with your taxes, and you didn't know about it. I'm blown away

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login