2 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

What your report misses out is what happened just before they, "quietly deployed advanced anti-ship cruise missiles and anti-air missiles", which was the US buzzing their lighthouse construction with nuclear capable bombers, it would be extraordinarily biased to attempt to pretend that China deployed defences on the island without prior provocation.

 

The provocation is the Chinese setting up them islands/bases, and their ongoing presence there. But again, topic is about Russia.

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'm always amazed that so few recognise this, and can only assume that some feel somehow 'safer' believing any tripe 'sold' to them by their govts.? Edit - even though said tripe is an 'about face' to previous preferences!

 

'1984' springs to mind.... but obviously those believing all the propaganda are too intelligent to fall for such tactics....

 

Only problem with this is the relative consistency of Russia being perceived as an adversary to the West.

1 hour ago, Dumbastheycome said:

I agree in general terms.But  that Governments   "don't lie in order to  protect" I can  not  agree. ( And  yes,  I do understand  the  context/ wording intended).

The   vested interests  of those   motivated  to  attain  political influence I perceive as  being  more interested  in protection of their  own interests . 

How  many  Shepherds   don't  eat   mutton ? 

Actually I was being sarcastic when i wrote that politicians lie to protect us, so I think we are well aligned.

winston churchill summed it up nicely

40 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

winston churchill summed it up nicely

It seems unlikely to me that he was thinking of Brexiteer leadership when he wrote "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But who am I to disagree with you?

3 hours ago, bristolboy said:

It seems unlikely to me that he was thinking of Brexiteer leadership when he wrote "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But who am I to disagree with you?

The good Dr Samuel Johnson was certainly not thinking of Brexit when he uttered that line-which was duly recorded by James Boswell.However there is no doubt that he was commenting on Jonathan Swift's description of the everlasting wars between "big endians" and "little endians" (Gulliver's Travels) and the profits that can be made in such seemingly pointless conflicts.

Biggest threat to world peace is USA, NATO and all it's allies ... empire building is always a threat to world peace until history shows the empire crumbles which has already started happening to today's empire builder

1 hour ago, Odysseus123 said:

The good Dr Samuel Johnson was certainly not thinking of Brexit when he uttered that line-which was duly recorded by James Boswell.However there is no doubt that he was commenting on Jonathan Swift's description of the everlasting wars between "big endians" and "little endians" (Gulliver's Travels) and the profits that can be made in such seemingly pointless conflicts.

 

I should have known it was too good to be true. But your explanation that he was commenting on Swift's work is extremely dubious. Johnson's attention was very much engaged by the politics of his day. It's fare more likely that he was commenting on the deeds of some politician. Perhaps one who backed the revolutionaries in North America. 

EDIT: I found this in Wikipedia. 

"On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."^[8] This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term "patriotism" by William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham (the patriot-minister) and his supporters. Johnson opposed "self-professed patriots" in general, but valued what he considered "true" self-professed patrioI .^[9]"

 

I can't vouch for the source but it does seem to be more likely to be the case.

Woman dies after being exposed to Soviet-era nerve agent, UK authorities say

 

They killed another one. Lovely Russians. 

 

The woman, identified by police as Dawn Sturgess, 44, was exposed to Novichok last week after handling a contaminated item. The same nerve agent was used to poison former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in March.

"This is shocking and tragic news. Dawn leaves behind her family, including three children, and our thoughts and prayers are with them at this extremely difficult time," Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu, head of UK Counter Terrorism policing, said Sunday.

11 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The provocation is the Chinese setting up them islands/bases, and their ongoing presence there. But again, topic is about Russia.

 

No, they were building a lighthouse and then the US buzzed them with nuclear bombers, that is the provocation.  Following that they installed temporary guns on beach mounted on vehicles, and the US responded to sending a flotilla, and it was then that they started putting permanent defense on them.  

 

Even faced with the fact that all the dates posted were after the US provocation you still want to claim that it was China who was provocative, that is entirely without evidence, its just a random claim.

 

And China has had a presence in the area for thousands of years, I note that China is the only country you are criticizing in the Spratly's, that you do not take issue with any of the other military bases on the other islands, not even those built by the Americans, how ridiculously biased of you.

 

 

This thread is about Russia.   Stay on topic.  

 

2 hours ago, bristolboy said:

 

I should have known it was too good to be true. But your explanation that he was commenting on Swift's work is extremely dubious. Johnson's attention was very much engaged by the politics of his day. It's fare more likely that he was commenting on the deeds of some politician. Perhaps one who backed the revolutionaries in North America. 

EDIT: I found this in Wikipedia. 

"On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."^[8] This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term "patriotism" by William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham (the patriot-minister) and his supporters. Johnson opposed "self-professed patriots" in general, but valued what he considered "true" self-professed patrioI .^[9]"

 

I can't vouch for the source but it does seem to be more likely to be the case.

Sorry Bristol Boy-I didn't have a clue about who Sam Johnson was referring to-I was being sarcastic as I tend to be in agreement with Dean Swift's description of the irrationality of wars between "big endians" and "little endians" and how easily such patriotic fervour can be aroused, no matter at which end you crack your egg.

 

My apologies for digressing from the topic.

 

 

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

 

I should have known it was too good to be true. But your explanation that he was commenting on Swift's work is extremely dubious. Johnson's attention was very much engaged by the politics of his day. It's fare more likely that he was commenting on the deeds of some politician. Perhaps one who backed the revolutionaries in North America. 

EDIT: I found this in Wikipedia. 

"On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."^[8] This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term "patriotism" by William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham (the patriot-minister) and his supporters. Johnson opposed "self-professed patriots" in general, but valued what he considered "true" self-professed patrioI .^[9]"

 

I can't vouch for the source but it does seem to be more likely to be the case.

Or

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."

    A variation on quote attributed to Huey Long.

 

Anyway, no point  engagning in any "poll" from the SVR SF ,  when they can't spelll "insidious" correctly 

 

 

5 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

The good Dr Samuel Johnson was certainly not thinking of Brexit when he uttered that line-which was duly recorded by James Boswell.However there is no doubt that he was commenting on Jonathan Swift's description of the everlasting wars between "big endians" and "little endians" (Gulliver's Travels) and the profits that can be made in such seemingly pointless conflicts.

 

What gave you the impression that he was commenting on Gulliver's Travels?  Why would he be commenting on a satire of a subject they were discussing instead of the actual subject itself?  Makes no sense.

2 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

Sorry Bristol Boy-I didn't have a clue about who Sam Johnson was referring to-I was being sarcastic as I tend to be in agreement with Dean Swift's description of the irrationality of wars between "big endians" and "little endians" and how easily such patriotic fervour can be aroused, no matter at which end you crack your egg.

 

My apologies for digressing from the topic.

 

 

On the contrary,  I owe you. You corrected an error of mine.

It is very strange to read about your country (Russia) as an enemy. It is sad.

My country is regularly attacked from many sides, but this is normal. Our economy is on the rise. The country becomes richer and stronger. But any new geopolitical competitor is bad for the United States. When Russia was weak (20-30 years ago), everyone was happy. The Russians were also pleased, until they realized that they had been deceived. Yes, now we have a tough leader, but it was he who made Russia strong.

Russia stands for dialogue, and equal partner relations, and any tricks, deceit and forgery is about the US and EU. Of course, Russia is also cunning, but within the law.

Yeah sure Russia acts within the law. Crimea a river. It's comedy gold here.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

14 hours ago, Maltsovsky said:

It is very strange to read about your country (Russia) as an enemy. It is sad.

My country is regularly attacked from many sides, but this is normal. Our economy is on the rise. The country becomes richer and stronger. But any new geopolitical competitor is bad for the United States. When Russia was weak (20-30 years ago), everyone was happy. The Russians were also pleased, until they realized that they had been deceived. Yes, now we have a tough leader, but it was he who made Russia strong.

Russia stands for dialogue, and equal partner relations, and any tricks, deceit and forgery is about the US and EU. Of course, Russia is also cunning, but within the law.

The law of the jungle.

14 hours ago, Maltsovsky said:

It is very strange to read about your country (Russia) as an enemy. It is sad.

My country is regularly attacked from many sides, but this is normal. Our economy is on the rise. The country becomes richer and stronger. But any new geopolitical competitor is bad for the United States. When Russia was weak (20-30 years ago), everyone was happy. The Russians were also pleased, until they realized that they had been deceived. Yes, now we have a tough leader, but it was he who made Russia strong.

Russia stands for dialogue, and equal partner relations, and any tricks, deceit and forgery is about the US and EU. Of course, Russia is also cunning, but within the law.

Yes. Russia is doing great. The government just raised the age for pension eligibility because its economy is strengthening?

On 7/8/2018 at 7:50 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

It all depends on who is believing what propaganda. 

 

 

Out of curiosity:

 

How often do you tune into RT or visit their website?

 

I had to think for a moment there!  Presumably RT is something along the lines of russia today?

 

The answer is - NEVER.

 

Why on earth would anyone "tune into RT or visit their website" (assuming my guess is correct)?  We have enough propaganda from our own countries to sift through, without looking into other countries' propaganda!

On 7/8/2018 at 5:52 PM, dick dasterdly said:

I'm always amazed that so few recognise this, and can only assume that some feel somehow 'safer' believing any tripe 'sold' to them by their govts.? Edit - even though said tripe is an 'about face' to previous preferences!

 

'1984' springs to mind.... but obviously those believing all the propaganda are too intelligent to fall for such tactics....

 

On 7/8/2018 at 8:54 PM, Morch said:

 

You seem to embrace one set of propaganda narrative, while (lamely) trying to discredit another. How's that much different then what you criticize?

How on earth did you come to this conclusion from ANY of my posts?? ?

12 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yeah sure Russia acts within the law. Crimea a river. It's comedy gold here.

If you decide to start this discussion, I propose to discuss the legitimacy of the coup d'etat in Kiev, the Nazi processions, the genocide in the Donbass (you know about the region from the media, and I have friends there). Maybe you know about the tragedy in Odessa on May 2, 2014? Maybe you saw a video on YouTube about how supporters of the new government burned people alive? Or maybe you recently were in Ukraine and you know what level of life there is? Maybe you know about the aggressive mood for Russian speakers? You do not know Ukraine, Russia, our peoples, and you know about the conflict from the media. Are you sure that you are ready for a discussion?
 

My opinion - the coup in Kiev was illegal, the persecution of the leader of the country is illegal. He was a corrupt and not a good person, but that does not mean that he had to seize power in this way. Look at the change of power in Armenia. There were also protests and riots, but no one was hurt, and other people came to power who are more critical of Russia than the last leader. It's not bad. He is objective, and it is necessary to criticize Russia, but not to blame without reasons.

Crimea is a strategic point for Russia in the military plan. The fact that the Crimea has become part of the Russian Federation, I consider cunning, but within the law and without violence. Have you seen violence in the Crimea? Russia captured the Crimea? Crimea, as an autonomous republic held a referendum. There were 2 votes, about independence or joining the Russian Federation. People chose Russia. Did Crimea have legal grounds for a referendum? - Oh sure. Did Crimea have grounds to hold a referendum after the violent change of power? - Of course.
 

Who proposed the referendum? I think this is Russia. It was advantageous for us to maintain stability on the peninsula, and if the authorities did not change, there would not be these events. Despite the legality of the referendum, I'm sorry that it happened. Ukraine had to follow the path of Armenia, and the Crimea had to be Ukrainian.
 

Do not blame only Russia, you are not objective. Blame the new Ukrainian authorities, the oligarchy, and the sponsors. Russia left no other choice. He is tough, and has consequences, but, Russia was not the source of the problem.

 

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Yes. Russia is doing great. The government just raised the age for pension eligibility because its economy is strengthening?

Unfortunately, you do not understand well in the economy, so make such statements.

The problem was known for a long time, and sooner or later it was necessary to do it. Unfortunately, this is a problem of demography. In Russia there was a problem of birth rate in the period 1980-1990.
 

Due to the fact that in 10-20 years old pensioners will become much more than workers it was necessary to raise the retirement age. Or, workers should work 2 times more to provide all pensioners. The demographic problem has led to economic difficulties, this is a fact.

Please consider the fact that the retirement age will increase gradually until 2030. Also, amendments are made to our parliament on softening the law. Take into account that the standard of living, as well as the average life expectancy, regularly increases, and for 12 years we expect to raise it to 80 years. It will be very difficult, since the state medicine in Russia is not very good, but we are improving our skills and efficiency. Perhaps we will not be able to fulfill the plan, but we will try to do it.

Why are you so negative about our country? I was in Thailand (Pattaya, Phuket, Bangkok), and I know about your problems. And I will be glad if you can solve them.
 

Do not read the media about other countries. Communicate with people. In Russia there is also propaganda. But you have the opportunity to communicate with people, and find out the truth if you want it. Check the sources. Check the information. You and I are often told lies, but this is not a reason to hate each other. I am for creating strong and friendly relations, and believe our people think as much as I do. Who was at the World Championships can confirm that we have the same friendly people who are ready to help others. Do not get involved in politics. Do not let it interfere with you.

I answered they are innocent and used as scape goats , I am talking about the Russian population, not the corrupted politicians that I do not support. And I do not support regimes.  

 

But you have to look at their history , everything from Stalin and up to our time. Russians want to feel safe , their generation still remember the living conditions they had to survive in the 70's and 80's .  Everything changed for the better in the 90's and after Putin took over.  We are talking about a big population here, be friendly with them, we don't want to go back to a cold war . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cunning is apparently the current Russian propaganda code word to rationalize invading sovereign nations and claiming their land using illegal fake elections. It's nice we have the official Putin regime talking points here. Saves the click to go to them directly.

 

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

12 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Cunning is apparently the current Russian propaganda code word to rationalize invading sovereign nations and claiming their land using illegal fake elections. It's nice we have the official Putin regime talking points here. Saves the click to go to them directly.

You have not answered my questions, are not ready to discuss, you are not inside this situation, are not objective. But you boldly accuse.

I do not defend Putin. I do not defend our government. But you can not be objective. It is sad. ?

 

Ask the Crimean population about fake elections. They will not understand you. You imagine Russia a militaristic, totalitarian country. As much as you do not want to believe it, it's not.
Watch a video about hundreds of thousands of Crimeans during a referendum. Look at them now. It was their choice.

I do not deny that Russia helped to make a referendum, and that this was the will of Russia (the Crimea would not have the political power to do so), but nevertheless no one forced the people to vote. Have you ever been in Crimea? If not, then I invite you there. Look at how people live. Ask them about the referendum. Ask about "Russian aggression".
 

There are Crimeans dissatisfied with entering Russia, but this is normal. There are very few of them, but different opinions are good.
 

Notice. If Russia "seized" the Crimea, then why is the population silent about this? Where are the riots, protests and insurrections? Diversions?

OK. Russian troops are threatening the population, so everyone is silent (probably, you think so). Look at the reaction of the West. Why did they impose sanctions against the Crimea? If Crimean victims, why do they isolate them from the whole world like North Korea? Despite the status of the Crimea (now it is part of Russia) there live people who need help. But the West only limited the Crimea. Now Crimeans are negative towards the west. Did they expect that the Crimeans would love Europe and the United States for pressure on them?

Crimeans did not have the legal right to make that choice because they were NOT a separate county from Ukraine. It would have only been legal if the matter was addressed by the national government of Ukraine. You know that too but you try to obscure that. Most people aren't that stupid to buy into that game no matter how hard you try to shower them with Putin talking points. I get it though. These kinds of Putin talking points are being used on "trump" and he's too gullible and ignorant to not buy them. The dufus actually suggested what happened in Crimea was OK because they speak Russian. There are many U.S. counties that mostly speak Spanish. I suppose it would be OK for them to vote to remove themselves from the USA. I wouldn't blame them for wanting that, but they shouldn't be able to. 

Also, dude, do not even bother trying to bait me into your cunning game of demanding I answer your questions.

Try that on someone else that doesn't see your talking points as pure Putin propaganda. 

1 hour ago, balo said:

I answered they are innocent and used as scape goats , I am talking about the Russian population, not the corrupted politicians that I do not support. And I do not support regimes.  

 

But you have to look at their history , everything from Stalin and up to our time. Russians want to feel safe , their generation still remember the living conditions they had to survive in the 70's and 80's .  Everything changed for the better in the 90's and after Putin took over.  We are talking about a big population here, be friendly with them, we don't want to go back to a cold war . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"we don't want to go back to a cold war"

But the US sure does.

For two reasons-the first being their primitive dualistic notions of the world as they are are more comfortable with this notion than any other.

The second being is that there is money in them thar guns..lots and lots of glorious money..world without end..glorious money...

24 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Crimeans did not have the legal right to make that choice because they were NOT a separate county from Ukraine. It would have only been legal if the matter was addressed by the national government of Ukraine. You know that too but you try to obscure that. Most people aren't that stupid to buy into that game no matter how hard you try to shower them with Putin talking points. I get it though. These kinds of Putin talking points are being used on "trump" and he's too gullible and ignorant to not buy them. The dufus actually suggested what happened in Crimea was OK because they speak Russian. There are many U.S. counties that mostly speak Spanish. I suppose it would be OK for them to vote to remove themselves from the USA. I wouldn't blame them for wanting that, but they shouldn't be able to. 

Also, dude, do not even bother trying to bait me into your cunning game of demanding I answer your questions.

Try that on someone else that doesn't see your talking points as pure Putin propaganda.  

Crimea was an autonomous republic in Ukraine.
+ Study the UN charter and the 1970 declaration.

Why was Kosovo recognized by the world community?
Why Crimea does not recognize?

I agree with you that the referendum must be recognized by the government, but what if the government is absent? (The legitimate government is overthrown, oligarchs come to power, which at that time are not the power.) In fact, the country is in chaos, anarchy.
Unfortunately, this case is not described in the constitution.

If we say that a referendum should be considered by the government, then we must say that the violent overthrow of power is also illegal. I would say so - the overthrow is illegal, the new government is illegal, the referendum is illegal, the Crimea's joining Russia is illegal. It was necessary to solve the problem peacefully. Do you agree?

That's a moot point. He does not have an unambiguous answer. Everyone has violated laws and regulations. Everyone is to blame. Russia, Ukraine and the United Nations. Now we need to come to a truce.

P.S. In my opinion you are obsessed with Russian aggression and Putin. It seems to you everywhere. I'm not trying to convince you. I tried to understand your point of view. And I'm not trying to fool you. But you blame me. Thus, discussions are not conducted. Stupid and insidious, you (probably) think me, the Russians and Putin. It is your right.

I do not think Putin is stupid. That's silly. He's a very cunning strong man dictator and his people like things that way because democracy never took to root in Russia.

 

It's also part of Putin's clear and cynical agenda to try to convince the world that democracy is a crappy form of government in the first place and Russia is no worse than liberal western democracies. With his amazing good luck in helping "trump" win lots of people are seriously considering that view may have merit. It doesn't have merit but the anti-democratic forces of authoritarianism are indeed trending up and democratic values are trending down, and that's a win for Putin. 

 

I do think "trump" is stupid about everything but the skills of being a demagogic con man (with that he's a freakin' genius). He's about to be totally owned by Putin in Finland (just as Kim owned the baby man president in Singapore).

 

As far as a new cold war, we're largely already there. Putin is actively messing with the current U.S. elections and the current U.S. president is doing nothing about it, so in that sense Putin is winning. There does need to be talks on controlling nuclear programs between a U.S. president and Putin. Sadly for the U.S. and indeed the world, the man in that role is an absurd clown. 

Disappointed the vote was split over the last two questions I think an accurate reflection of members views is those last two added together. A 60/40 split which is still surprising as I'd have thought 80% of us would have realized the 'reds under the bed' scenario is an outdated farce. USA does and Russia does and I wish they'd all stop.