Page 288 of 295 FirstFirst ... 188238278286287288289290 ... LastLast
Results 2,871 to 2,880 of 2941

Thread: RussiaGate

  1. Top | #2871
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Lebanon, OR
    Posts
    5,806
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    22,635
    Rep Power
    76
    'Russian trolls' promoted California independence - BBC News
    The California independence movement has been spearheaded by a group called Yes California. One of the group's co-founders, Louis Marinelli, opened a self-styled California embassy in Moscow, and later moved to Siberi

    Marinelli attended a conference of Western secession movements in 2016, along with representatives from similar groups from Texas, Puerto Rico and Northern Ireland. The conference was organised by the Anti-Globalisation Movement, a group that has received money from the Russian government, according to Casey Michel, a reporter for the left-wing news site ThinkProgress.

    "It had received funding from the Kremlin to organise this conference to pay for the travel and lodging of American and European secession movements," Michel says.
    Map of the Day: Ex-KGB Analyst Predicts Balkanization of U.S. - The Atlantic According to a certain Igor Panarin:
    He seems to suggest that each would be its own republic, but if not, that the North would fall under Canadian influence, the South would fold into Mexico's sphere of influence, the West would go to China, the East to the E.U., Hawaii to Japan or China, and of course Alaska would be returned to Russia.

    Crazy, right? Well, the Wall Street Journal reports: "Panarin is not a fringe figure. A former KGB analyst, he is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats. He is invited to Kremlin receptions, lectures students, publishes books, and appears in the media as an expert on U.S.-Russia relations."
    In 1998, he predicted that the US would break up in 2010. It didn't happen. But the idea of breaking up the US seems alive and well in the Kremlin.

  2. Top | #2872
    Industrial Grade Linguist Copernicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Bellevue, WA
    Posts
    2,248
    Rep Power
    11
    To me, the most interesting thing about the White House version of the Helsinki sound byte was that they botched the editing. They edited out the part of the question where the reporter asked if Putin wanted Trump to win, but they left in the part where he was asked if he directed his officials to meddle. So they actually made it look like Putin was admitting that he meddled in the US election, when he wasn't admitting that at all. Nobody was going to blame him for wanting Trump to win. What bothered everyone was that he engaged in espionage activities to influence the election.

    Usually, world leaders are careful about not taking public stances on elections in other countries until they are over, but Putin was speaking after the fact here. I found Maddow's reporting a little confusing, because she did not really address the fact that the wrong part of the reporter's question was edited out. In any case, the press largely reported the incident as if Putin were admitting to interference in the US election. The Russians solved the problem by editing out the whole thing, because Putin embarrassed himself by jumping in with a positive answer before he had had time to digest the second part of the two-part question. Had he been more patient, he would have handled the question better. Then again, he isn't really used to getting a lot of adversarial questions from reporters. He usually controls and scripts the questions that he gets asked in news conferences.

  3. Top | #2873
    Contributor barbos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Mlky Way galaxy
    Posts
    9,651
    Archived
    8,047
    Total Posts
    17,698
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    'Russian trolls' promoted California independence - BBC News
    The California independence movement has been spearheaded by a group called Yes California. One of the group's co-founders, Louis Marinelli, opened a self-styled California embassy in Moscow, and later moved to Siberi
    Chechen separatists had all kind of embassies/representation all over Europe and US.
    Oh wait, we can't talk about that, some fallacy, sorry.

    In 1998, he predicted that the US would break up in 2010. It didn't happen. But the idea of breaking up the US seems alive and well in the Kremlin.
    Why should not it be? US broke up Soviet Union and still want to break Russia further.

  4. Top | #2874
    Industrial Grade Linguist Copernicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Bellevue, WA
    Posts
    2,248
    Rep Power
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    In 1998, he predicted that the US would break up in 2010. It didn't happen. But the idea of breaking up the US seems alive and well in the Kremlin.
    Why should not it be? US broke up Soviet Union and still want to break Russia further.
    You are obsessed with the idea that the US is responsible for the consequences of the bad behavior of the people who ruled the Soviet empire, often by intimidation and force of arms. The fact is that the Soviet Union fell apart because of changes that happened inside of the Soviet Union itself, not external enemies. The same kinds of ethnic rivalries that plagued the Yugoslav empire also existed in the Soviet empire. That is why the satellite countries were the first to rebel and quickly join with Western Europe and NATO. Ukraine is largely Russian speaking but not anxious to return to dominance by another self-appointed tsar. Not even Belarus is happy with its aggressive neighbor. All of that was caused by historic tensions and tribal animosities that never had anything to do with the United States.

    The US government itself has absolutely no interest in seeing Russia disintegrate into more rival states, some of which could become sponsors of terrorism. In fact, a lot of people were unhappy that the Soviet Union fell apart the way it did, since a lot of weapons of mass destruction ended up in newly formed states that might see some value in controlling and/or selling off those assets. Russian stability is far more in the interests of US security.

  5. Top | #2875
    Veteran Member Ford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    'Merica
    Posts
    4,487
    Archived
    2,675
    Total Posts
    7,162
    Rep Power
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    In 1998, he predicted that the US would break up in 2010. It didn't happen. But the idea of breaking up the US seems alive and well in the Kremlin.
    Why should not it be? US broke up Soviet Union and still want to break Russia further.
    You are obsessed with the idea that the US is responsible for the consequences of the bad behavior of the people who ruled the Soviet empire, often by intimidation and force of arms. The fact is that the Soviet Union fell apart because of changes that happened inside of the Soviet Union itself, not external enemies.
    My understanding is that the Soviet Union collapsed in no small part due to the policies of Gorbachev, whose "openness" and "restructuring" exposed the fact that it was already failing long before he took over. It wasn't too hard to see. In fact I recall one of my history professors (and I graduated college in 1987) saying "you wanna make money? Go to business school and learn to speak Russian."

  6. Top | #2876
    Contributor barbos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Mlky Way galaxy
    Posts
    9,651
    Archived
    8,047
    Total Posts
    17,698
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    In 1998, he predicted that the US would break up in 2010. It didn't happen. But the idea of breaking up the US seems alive and well in the Kremlin.
    Why should not it be? US broke up Soviet Union and still want to break Russia further.
    You are obsessed with the idea that the US is responsible for the consequences of the bad stupid behavior of the people who ruled the Soviet empire, often by intimidation and force of arms. The fact is that the Soviet Union fell apart because of changes that happened inside of the Soviet Union itself, not external enemies.
    I fixed some of it. But in general you are wrong here. Soviet Union fell apart because of economic mismanagement, not because it was oppressing people. China proves that you can oppress people and yet be economically successful.

    The same kinds of ethnic rivalries that plagued the Yugoslav empire also existed in the Soviet empire.
    No, not the same, not even close. Soviet Union pretty much had none.
    That is why the satellite countries were the first to rebel and quickly join with Western Europe and NATO.
    Wrong again. Nobody rebelled, Soviet union simply was no longer able to afford them.
    Ukraine is largely Russian speaking but not anxious to return to dominance by another self-appointed tsar.
    You keep repeating propaganda.
    Not even Belarus is happy with its aggressive neighbor.
    Oh, boy, am I glad you stepped into this one
    You need to educate yourself on this particular subject. 10% of their GDP is direct and indirect subsidies from Russia.
    That have been fine with Putin and nobody complained about aggressive Russia. But when their Tsar started to make Putin look stupid by importing (to Russia) seafood and growing bananas in enormous quantities then Putin decided that russian help should be scaled back over time.
    Belarusian Tsar is well known for playing both sides. As far as I am concerned Russia should have got rid of Belarus long time ago (same with Ukraine) I am sick and tired of Putin paying "prostitutes" Good fucking riddance. Of course that's unlikely to happen because of NATO but I can hope.


    All of that was caused by historic tensions and tribal animosities that never had anything to do with the United States.
    Again, you are projecting, none of it really existed in any measurable amount. Yes, there was some caucasus but it had nothing to do with Russia, these people just like to hate each other. Again, if it was up to me I would have left them all to their own devices and watched them getting extinct.

    The US government itself has absolutely no interest in seeing Russia disintegrate into more rival states,
    Which government are you talking about? current one? US neocons have absolute interest in Russia being further reduced.
    some of which could become sponsors of terrorism.
    Neocons are fine with some terrorism.
    In fact, a lot of people were unhappy that the Soviet Union fell apart the way it did, since a lot of weapons of mass destruction ended up in newly formed states that might see some value in controlling and/or selling off those assets.
    No, they were not unhappy, they were worried but then they forced Ukraine and Kazakhstan to give it up. Kazakhstan was not really interested in keeping it anyway.
    Russian stability is far more in the interests of US security.
    That's a thing, neocons think they can safely reduce Russia to nothing.

  7. Top | #2877
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,138
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
    The fact is that the Soviet Union fell apart because of changes that happened inside of the Soviet Union itself, not external enemies.
    I fixed some of it. But in general you are wrong here. Soviet Union fell apart because of economic mismanagement, not because it was oppressing people.
    That’s what Cop just said.

    Quote Originally Posted by bar
    Quote Originally Posted by Cop
    All of that was caused by historic tensions and tribal animosities that never had anything to do with the United States.
    Again, you are projecting, none of it really existed in any measurable amount. Yes, there was some caucasus but it had nothing to do with Russia, these people just like to hate each other.
    So, iow, because of historic tensions and tribal animosities.

    You don’t read very goodly.

  8. Top | #2878
    Content Thief Elixir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    10,697
    Archived
    707
    Total Posts
    11,404
    Rep Power
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by Koyaanisqatsi View Post

    That’s what Cop just said.
    Reading comprehension deficits are hard to address online.

    You don’t read very goodly.
    That's somewhat excusable. What is not so excusable is denial of facts, such as the fact that Pootey tells his minions to get him what he wants.

  9. Top | #2879
    Contributor barbos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Mlky Way galaxy
    Posts
    9,651
    Archived
    8,047
    Total Posts
    17,698
    Rep Power
    61
    People who can't find Chechnya on a map (forget ever seeing chechen/dagestanian) giving lecture about ethnic problems in Russia.

  10. Top | #2880
    Industrial Grade Linguist Copernicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Bellevue, WA
    Posts
    2,248
    Rep Power
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
    That is why the satellite countries were the first to rebel and quickly join with Western Europe and NATO.
    Wrong again. Nobody rebelled, Soviet union simply was no longer able to afford them.
    Barbos, I give you credit for being better than a совок*, but you are incredibly ignorant, if you know nothing about the rebellions and ethnic oppression that took place during the Soviet period. Every country tends to whitewash its past, but you have access to more of the history of your country than is in Russian history books. Is this the excuse you have been given for why all of the satellite countries, including the Baltic Republics, moved swiftly to join NATO and Western Europe? For why Ukraine would still like to join NATO? You never heard of the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 or the Czech Velvet Revolution, when demonstrators tore down street signs to confuse invading Soviet tanks and painted swastikas on them? Seriously? You don't understand why the Orange Revolution happened in Ukraine and Yanukovych fled into Russia?

    It's too bad that you have no respect for the social sciences. That may explain the gaps in your knowledge of the history of your own country. You need to educate yourself.

    *Russian slang for person who idealizes Soviet ideology, morals, and habits.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •