Putin Forever: Russians Given Money As Vote That Could Extend Putin's Rule Draws To A Close

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

10 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Plus killing his own people if they insist on voicing inappropriate opinions. 

Yup, there is that.  Putin dislikes you, and you get whacked with a spike umbrella tip in the shin, complete with plutonium poison, right smack on London Bridge.  Ghosts of the old KGB. 

For the life of me I cannot understand why anyone has any truck with this guy.  Lock him up. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 7/2/2020 at 7:06 PM, Tomasz said:

 

I don't want to argue, I will just state a fact how western coverage and demonization of Putin looks like from Russian point of view

The West especially US Clinton administration could not boast of Yeltsin in 90s when the Russian people fell into total misery, the country was stolen by thieves and Western speculators in the style of Bill Browder and the average life expectancy fell by more than 5 years. But most important for the West was the fact that Russian foreign mintry Kozyriev was called MISTER YES and agree to everythng because he once said Russ doesnt how vital national interests outside Russian Federation. So he was called a perfect Democrat and best russian leader despite the fact russian GDP fall by 40 % during his presidency and he made a coup of etat in 1993 shelling Parliament.

Then come Putin, who disciplined  the oligarchs and prevent Russia from iminent collapsing. During his reign, men's life expectancy increased by 10 years and the earnings in dollars of population increased many times with fast growing economy.

But this is Putin not Yeltsin who according to western press is curse for Russia and Russian people.

From this it can be clearly seen that the West was not disturbed by the tragedy and misery  of the Russians in the 1990s and simply did not like the reborn assertive Russia even worse now in an alliance with China.

From this comes the conclusion not to worry about the opinion of the West, because West dont care about russian people and does not wish Russia well and dreams of a second Sober Yeltsin.

And by this common conclusion in Russia about western press and authorities you can close this thread and all articles blaming and demonizing Putin.

In pair with articles trying to prove Russia should not seek alliance with China but ask West for mercy.

So, you really think that Russia is a legitimate democracy and that Putin is a noble leader? The facts are that the Russian people know there is no hope of changing their system because of the iron fist in the velvet glove. Putin and his oligarchy are not in power in the interests of the people but in their own interests. Otherwise they would do more for their own people and less for themselves. 

Male life expectancy in Russia is 66.4 years. 

Females live to 77.2 

Rank of lifespan worldwide is 105

https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/russia-life-expectancy

Income 70 rubles equals one dollar. 

110,000 rubles equals about $1,572 per month. Half of Russian workers earn more, half less. 

http://www.salaryexplorer.com/salary-survey.php?loc=179&loctype=1

 https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/07/03/data-scientist-claims-staggering-fraud-at-russias-constitution-vote-a70769

 

Edited July 4, 2020 by ronwagn
added reference

[Strangelovesurfing + 737]

20 hours ago, Tomasz said:

19 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Russia today is a backwater country.  Its total GDP is less than that of Brasil.  On a per-capita basis, the per-capita GDP is lower than that of Portugal.  You could forget about Russia, except - it has this military hardware, and nuclear weapons, and that makes the place dangerous. 

 

There is so much sad truth to this statement. For a country that has excelled in many technical disciplines, physics, rocketry, medicinal peptides (one of the biggest, mostly unknown areas of expertise IMO) it's a shame Russia hasn't been able to produce marketable industries in these areas.

I order a nano-sized form of carbon from an outfit in St. Petersburg. Whenever I pick up a shipment from the UPS store they always give me strange looks when they see Cyrillic lettering on the package. Apparently even shippers who see packaging all the time are surprised to see packages from Russia.

Edited July 3, 2020 by Strangelovesurfing

[dukeNukem + 80]

On 7/3/2020 at 10:06 AM, Tomasz said:

The West especially US Clinton administration could not boast of Yeltsin in 90s when the Russian people fell into total misery, the country was stolen by thieves and Western speculators in the style of Bill Browder and the average life expectancy fell by more than 5 years. But most important for the West was the fact that Russian foreign mintry Kozyriev was called MISTER YES and agree to everythng because he once said Russ doesnt how vital national interests outside Russian Federation. So he was called a perfect Democrat and best russian leader despite the fact russian GDP fall by 40 % during his presidency and he made a coup of etat in 1993 shelling Parliament.

 

Just one more little interesting remark - Mr. YES Kozyriev was so good for US interests, that moved to Miami and lives there.

[Tomasz + 1,608]

I suggest all our US users reading this piece russian blogger Anatoly Karlin

Quote

 

At the tail end of the Cold War, there was an incredible atmosphere of Americanophilia throughout the USSR, including amongst Russians.

Blue – approve of USA; orange – disapprove.

Around 75%-80% of Russians approved of the United States around 1990, versus <10% disapproval.

By modern standards, this would have put Russia into the top leagues of America fans, such as Poland, Israel, and the United Kingdom. It was also around 10%-15% points higher than contemporary US approval of Russia.

The blogger genby dug up a VCIOM poll from 1990 asking Russians – that is, Russians within the RSFSR, i.e. the territory of the modern day Russian Federation – what they thought about Americans.

The poll was redone in 2015, keeping the same questions, which allows a direct comparison between the two dates.

What in your opinion characterizes the United States?	1990	2015
High criminality and moral degradation	1	15
No warmth in people’s relations	1	15
High living standards	35	12
Large gap between rich and poor	5	11
Racial discrimination	1	9
Highly developed science and technology	15	7
Success depends on personal effort	20	7
Free society	13	5
Other	.	6
Can’t say for sure	10	12

I would wager Russian opinions on America were more positive c.1990 than the opinions of the average American on his own country today!

 

 

Is US government friendly or hostile to Russia?1990 2015

Friendly	35	3
Not very friendly	40	32
Hostile	2	59
Can’t say	23	6

hese results speak for themselves and hardly need more commentary.

Nowadays, of course, things are rather different. Suffice to say the numbers of America fans have plummeted, while the percentage of Russians with actively negative views emerged essentially out of nowhere to constitute majority opinion. According to other polls, Russian approval of the US rarely breaks above 30%, and the sentiments are quite mutual. Just 1% (that’s one percent) of Russians approved of US leadership by 2016. Although there were hopes that this trend would turn around after Trump, which seemed plausible in early 2017 and indeed seemed to be happening, this was in the end not to be.

What I think is more significant is that nobody likes to talk about it now, because it reflects badly on pretty much everyone.

Russians would have to acknowledge that they were naive idiots who threw away an empire centuries in the making to end up within the borders of old Muscovy in exchange for… jeans and “common human values.” These figures testify to the complete and utter failure of Soviet propaganda, which spent decades spinning tales about American criminality, unemployment, and lynched Negroes only to end up with a society with some of the most Americanophile sentiments in the entire world. It also makes it much harder to scapegoat Gorbachev, or the mythical saboteurs and CIA agents in power that feature prominently in sovok conspiracy theories, for unraveling the Soviet Union, when ordinary Soviets themselves considered America the next best thing since Lenin and the US government to be their friend.

For their part, Americans would have to acknowledge that Russians do not have a kneejerk hatred of America, and that the “loss of Russia” was largely of their own doing. The arrogant refusal to take into account Russian interests after the Cold War, instead bombing their allies, expanding NATO to Russian borders in contravention of verbal commitments made to the USSR, and for all intents and purposes treating it as a defeated Power, may have made sense when it seemed that the US would be the world’s dominant hyperpower for the foreseeable future and Russia was doomed to die anyway – as was conventional wisdom by the late 1990s. And from a purely Realpolitik perspective, the results have hardly been catastrophic; the US gained a geopolitical foothold in Eastern Europe, tied up further European integration into an Atlantic framework, and closed off the possibility of the “Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok” envisaged by Charles de Gaulle. On the other hand, in a world where China is fast becoming a peer competitor – with the implicit backing of a resentful Russia – this may, in retrospect, not have been the best long-term play.

 

 

 

Quote

 

His voice is a bit frail now, but the mind, even at age 94, is as sharp as ever. So when I reached George Kennan by phone to get his reaction to the Senate's ratification of NATO expansion it was no surprise to find that the man who was the architect of America's successful containment of the Soviet Union and one of the great American statesmen of the 20th century was ready with an answer.

''I think it is the beginning of a new cold war,'' said Mr. Kennan from his Princeton home. ''I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their graves. We have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so in any serious way. [NATO expansion] was simply a light-hearted action by a Senate that has no real interest in foreign affairs.''

''What bothers me is how superficial and ill informed the whole Senate debate was,'' added Mr. Kennan, who was present at the creation of NATO and whose anonymous 1947 article in the journal Foreign Affairs, signed ''X,'' defined America's cold-war containment policy for 40 years. ''I was particularly bothered by the references to Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe. Don't people understand? Our differences in the cold war were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime.

''And Russia's democracy is as far advanced, if not farther, as any of these countries we've just signed up to defend from Russia,'' said Mr. Kennan, who joined the State Department in 1926 and was U.S. Ambassador to Moscow in 1952. ''It shows so little understanding of Russian history and Soviet history. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then [the NATO expanders] will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are -- but this is just wrong.''

One only wonders what future historians will say. If we are lucky they will say that NATO expansion to Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic simply didn't matter, because the vacuum it was supposed to fill had already been filled, only the Clinton team couldn't see it. They will say that the forces of globalization integrating Europe, coupled with the new arms control agreements, proved to be so powerful that Russia, despite NATO expansion, moved ahead with democratization and Westernization, and was gradually drawn into a loosely unified Europe. If we are unlucky they will say, as Mr. Kennan predicts, that NATO expansion set up a situation in which NATO now has to either expand all the way to Russia's border, triggering a new cold war, or stop expanding after these three new countries and create a new dividing line through Europe.

But there is one thing future historians will surely remark upon, and that is the utter poverty of imagination that characterized U.S. foreign policy in the late 1990's. They will note that one of the seminal events of this century took place between 1989 and 1992 -- the collapse of the Soviet Empire, which had the capability, imperial intentions and ideology to truly threaten the entire free world. Thanks to Western resolve and the courage of Russian democrats, that Soviet Empire collapsed without a shot, spawning a democratic Russia, setting free the former Soviet republics and leading to unprecedented arms control agreements with the U.S.

And what was America's response? It was to expand the NATO cold-war alliance against Russia and bring it closer to Russia's borders.

Yes, tell your children, and your children's children, that you lived in the age of Bill Clinton and William Cohen, the age of Madeleine Albright and Sandy Berger, the age of Trent Lott and Joe Lieberman, and you too were present at the creation of the post-cold-war order, when these foreign policy Titans put their heads together and produced . . . a mouse.

We are in the age of midgets. The only good news is that we got here in one piece because there was another age -- one of great statesmen who had both imagination and courage.

As he said goodbye to me on the phone, Mr. Kennan added just one more thing: ''This has been my life, and it pains me to see it so screwed up in the end.''

 

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html

Edited July 4, 2020 by Tomasz

[Tomasz + 1,608]

I recommend to all those who say that Putin introduced authoritarianism in Russia and Yeltsin was, of course, a sincere democrat.

A 1993 article about the Yeltsin coup and bombing of parliament with the full support of President Clinton.

Until 2020, as part of the presidential system that was then established, Putin ruled and changed the constitutions only after 20 years of rulling.

A Democratic Russia Goes Up in Smoke : Yeltsin the dictator snuffs out Parliament with U.S. approval; why is the West cheering? By ALEXANDER COCKBURN OCT. 5, 1993

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-10-05-me-42283-story.html

Quote

The analogy to the events in Moscow is the Reichstag fire. In 1933, Adolf Hitler was a newly installed chancellor facing the prospect of an opposition Parliament. As the election drew near, an arsonist set fire to the Reichstag, the parliamentary building. Hitler then seized dictatorial powers, pleading as an excuse the threat to “democratic rule.”

Sunday’s foolish demonstration by the Russian Parliament presented Boris N. Yeltsin with the opportunity he had been waiting for. As his tanks and elite guards opened fire on the Parliament building--the Russian White House--the West roared its support for the would-be dictator. In 1933, the West supported Hitler, too.

But if Alexander V. Rutskoi and Rhuslan I. Khasbulatov, respectively vice president and parliamentary Speaker, were suicidally foolish in their sponsorship of Sunday’s face-off against Yeltsin’s military, Yeltsin was already guilty of the far greater crime of destroying Russian political reform.

The Russian Congress dissolved by Yeltsin on Sept. 21 had authentic democratic credentials. The deputies elected to it in March, 1990, had faced the voters under conditions far from the one-party rituals of the past. It was this same Congress of People’s Deputies that awarded Yeltsin his own political ascendancy and his executive post. Khasbulatov and Rutskoi stood shoulder to shoulder with Yeltsin on the balcony of the Russian White House to denounce the attempted putsch of 1991. It was this Congress that brought not only the executive presidency into being, but also the Constitutional Court, modeled on the U.S. Supreme Court.

So on Sept. 21, amid rising public resentment at his leadership, Yeltsin undertook the equivalent of suspending the Congress, the court and the constitution.

He did all this amid the cheers of the political leaders of the United States and other Western powers. Yeltsin sought and won Washington’s support for the final bloody assault, in which tanks set fire to a Parliament filled with civilians. The would-be putschists of 1991 never did that. If Clinton had been honest--if he had said, “My fellow Americans, democracy has nothing to do with it. This is about security for Western investments. My friends at the International Monetary Fund and the banks tell me Boris is their man, so we must stand with him"--one could at least have acknowledged the realism even while deploring the sentiment.

Economically, Russia remains stricken, plunged ever deeper into ruin by Yeltsin’s team, coached by the same gang of international advisers whose failures in Poland recently prompted that nation’s voters to give their biggest cheer to the former Communist Party.

Yeltsin dissolved Parliament on Sept. 21 because he was at the end of his tether. The breathing space and popular license of approval he had won with his victory in April’s referendum had been squandered.

The Yeltsin-controlled news shows and the parrot media in the West portrayed Parliament as nothing but a cabal of old hacks trying to turn the clock back.

There were hacks in the Russian White House, but there are hacks in every congressional chamber. That’s not normally taken as just cause to suspend the constitution. The Russian White House also had its idealists who took their responsibilities with the utmost seriousness.

The Yeltsin coup of Sept. 21, Rutskoi and Khasbulatov’s stupid countermove on Sunday, and now Yeltsin’s tanks have most likely closed the book on the democratic period in Russia that began in 1985 and peaked in 1990 and 1991.

There may be a new congress vested under a new constitution, but it will have far weaker countervailing powers against the boss in the Kremlin. The Constitutional Court will also have its powers drastically curtailed--if it survives at all.

Yeltsin is one of those politicians whose creativity is entirely destructive in nature. As a builder and policy-maker he has been a disaster. But time and again, he buys a new lease on life by forcing confrontation, as on Sept. 21, or by seizing opportunity presented by his enemies, as with the attempted coup of 1991 and Sunday’s folly by the parliamentary leadership. Then, at the moment of victory, his creativity expires.

At least there is symmetry. The West’s leaders greeted the onset of reform in Russia in the mid-1980s by saying it was a fraud. Now, by contrast, as dusk settles on the era of reform, as Yeltsin shuts down newspapers and bans political parties, they hail the gathering darkness as though it were the dawn.

 

 

Edited January 3, 2021 by Tomasz

[Tomasz + 1,608]

So let me recommend 2 articles to farting stupid things in this thread. Both from the NATIONAL Security Archive, not Russia Today

Article I - the 1993 coup in Russia and the attitude of US establisment to Yeltsin assault on parliament

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2018-10-04/yeltsin-shelled-russian-parliament-25-years-ago-us-praised-superb-handling

Edited December 28, 2021 by Tomasz

[Tomasz + 1,608]

US and russian elections in 1996. Maybe some food for thought about Russiagate

[Tomasz + 1,608]

Nato eastward expansion

Article one

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

Now a word from Mr X - George Kennan architect of policy of containment after WWII about NATO expansion and its consequences

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html

 

Post-1991 Russia, with its confused and disoriented society emerging from the totalitarian prison, embraced the West with open arms. It’s US establishment  who blew the chances of integrating it in the West - your pompous idiocy and your short-sighted selfishness.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

On 7/2/2020 at 12:34 AM, ronwagn said:

The Russian people, in general, are suffering greatly. The Muscovites are doing better. Russia has been a nuclear threat to the West since they got the technology. The Ruble is worth 1/70th of a dollar. Oil and natural gas are the backbone of the Russian economy. Putin has neglected to diversify the economy of Russia so they are going down fast due to low oil and natural gas prices! They are in the same basket as the Saudis and others who have made the fatal mistake of not thinking ahead to the next move in international chess. 

Russia is now just an annex of China. Their partnership is very unequal. All that is protecting them is their missiles. 

If Russia had a wiser leader they would be much better off financially. 

The Russian people are not suffering. It is also, yet again, none of your business.

The share of oil and gas in Russian economy is dropping year-to-year

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Oil-Gas-Share-Of-Russias-GDP-Dropped-To-15-In-2020.html

That's less that many a "reputable" country like Norway.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

On 7/3/2020 at 5:11 AM, Jan van Eck said:

Yup, there is that.  Putin dislikes you, and you get whacked with a spike umbrella tip in the shin, complete with plutonium poison, right smack on London Bridge.  Ghosts of the old KGB. 

For the life of me I cannot understand why anyone has any truck with this guy.  Lock him up. 

If you are referring to the

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_umbrella

the story deserves a revisiting now, that the Western spooks been all over Bulgarian KGB records and found nothing. They really didn't know. IMHO, using way exotic means to poison somebody never seen before or since are a telltale sign of British intelligence trying to attract the tabloid attentions to frame the Russians.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

On 7/3/2020 at 5:23 AM, ronwagn said:

So, you really think that Russia is a legitimate democracy and that Putin is a noble leader? The facts are that the Russian people know there is no hope of changing their system because of the iron fist in the velvet glove. Putin and his oligarchy are not in power in the interests of the people but in their own interests. Otherwise they would do more for their own people and less for themselves. 

Male life expectancy in Russia is 66.4 years. 

Females live to 77.2 

Rank of lifespan worldwide is 105

https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/russia-life-expectancy

Income 70 rubles equals one dollar. 

110,000 rubles equals about $1,572 per month. Half of Russian workers earn more, half less. 

http://www.salaryexplorer.com/salary-survey.php?loc=179&loctype=1

http://www.salaryexplorer.com/charts/russia/median-and-salary-distribution-monthly-russia.jpg

 https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/07/03/data-scientist-claims-staggering-fraud-at-russias-constitution-vote-a70769

 

Democracy is overrated. If you are one like you claim to be, you certainly are setting a horrible example.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

On 7/2/2020 at 6:48 AM, BradleyPNW said:

"Russia and China are not hostile to the US. Their goal is only the end of the US hegemony as the only superpower which is in the vital interest of the world and should not disturb the typical Americans because it does not harm their daily interests in any way." - IRA

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency

Has been confirmed as Mueller's fabrication by a US court

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/07/12/concord-management-and-the-end-of-russiagate/

Just some SEO company involved in legal clickbaiting scams

Edited December 29, 2021 by Andrei Moutchkine

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

On 7/3/2020 at 4:58 AM, ronwagn said:

Plus killing his own people if they insist on voicing inappropriate opinions. 

Nothing but hearsay

[notsonice + 1,266]

39 minutes ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

Nothing but hearsay

Russia is nothing but a place to get drunk....Not hearsay ...fact.

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rates of Alcohol Use Disorder/Alcoholism (males):

1. Russia - 36.9%
2. Hungary - 36.9%
3. Belarus - 33.9%
4. Latvia - 28.8%
5. Slovenia - 23.5%
6. Slovakia - 22.8%
7. Poland - 22.7%
8. Estonia - 22.2%
9. South Korea - 21.2%
10. Lithuania - 19.9%

This is the reason why Russia is the worlds largest trailer park. No wonder why Ukraine wants nothing to do with the Russian way of life.

Edited December 28, 2021 by notsonice

[Tomasz + 1,608]

17 minutes ago, notsonice said:

Russia is nothing but a place to get drunk....Not hearsay ...fact.

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rates of Alcohol Use Disorder/Alcoholism (males):

1. Russia - 36.9%
2. Hungary - 36.9%
3. Belarus - 33.9%
4. Latvia - 28.8%
5. Slovenia - 23.5%
6. Slovakia - 22.8%
7. Poland - 22.7%
8. Estonia - 22.2%
9. South Korea - 21.2%
10. Lithuania - 19.9%

This is the reason why Russia is the worlds largest trailer park. No wonder why Ukraine wants nothing to do with the Russian way of life.

Well you should read some even hostile to Russia western press. Maybe BBC for example

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49892339

Quote

 

 Russian alcohol consumption decreased by 43% from 2003 to 2016, a World Health Organization (WHO) report says. It attributed the decline to a series of alcohol-control measures implemented by the state, and a push towards healthy lifestyles.

The WHO said the drop in alcohol consumption was linked to a significant rise in life expectancy.

It noted that Russia had previously been considered one of the heaviest-drinking countries in the world.

"Alcohol consumption has long been recognised as one of the main driving factors of mortality in the Russian Federation, especially among men of working age," the report said.

But from 2003 to 2018, alcohol consumption and mortality decreased, with the most significant changes occurring in causes of death linked to alcohol.

In 2018, life expectancy in Russia reached a historic peak, at 68 years for men and 78 years for women.

Alcohol-control measures introduced under former President Dmitry Medvedev included advertising restrictions, increased taxes on alcohol and a ban on alcohol sales between certain hours.

The restrictions on alcohol are one of the most striking changes in Russia in recent years.

In Moscow, the all-night kiosks crammed full of vodka, beer - and whole, dried fish taped to the glass - are long gone. You can only buy alcohol in shops, or from delivery firms, until 11pm. That includes beer which wasn't even classed as booze in the old days.

And if you do buy a bottle, you can forget drinking it in the street. That's banned here now, and police fines are common enough for most people to stick to the rules.

Alongside the new restrictions, there's been a big push on healthy living that's coincided with an expansion of the middle class. Many Russians are increasingly health-conscious, like their European and American counterparts - and like their president, who's filled calendars with his action-man photoshoots over the years.

But drinking patterns are linked to wealth as well as health. In poorer communities, away from the big cities, drinking cheap surrogates and home-made alcohol is still common.

 

 

Edited December 28, 2021 by Tomasz

[Tomasz + 1,608]

But yeap this terrible bad Putin murdering his own population

 

Edited December 28, 2021 by Tomasz

[Tomasz + 1,608]

Russians should support western puppet Yeltsin not Putin

Edited December 28, 2021 by Tomasz

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

2 hours ago, notsonice said:

Russia is nothing but a place to get drunk....Not hearsay ...fact.

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rates of Alcohol Use Disorder/Alcoholism (males):

1. Russia - 36.9%
2. Hungary - 36.9%
3. Belarus - 33.9%
4. Latvia - 28.8%
5. Slovenia - 23.5%
6. Slovakia - 22.8%
7. Poland - 22.7%
8. Estonia - 22.2%
9. South Korea - 21.2%
10. Lithuania - 19.9%

This is the reason why Russia is the worlds largest trailer park. No wonder why Ukraine wants nothing to do with the Russian way of life.

And the source of this peculiar statistic is? Russia is not even in the Top10 anymore in per-capita consumption of alcohol.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-countries-by-alcohol-consumption-per-capita/

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/alcohol-consumption-by-country

[SUZNV + 1,197]

8 hours ago, Tomasz said:

Nato eastward expansion

Article one

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

Now a word from Mr X - George Kennan architect of policy of containment after WWII about NATO expansion and its consequences

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html

 

Post-1991 Russia, with its confused and disoriented society emerging from the totalitarian prison, embraced the West with open arms. It’s US establishment  who blew the chances of integrating it in the West - your pompous idiocy and your short-sighted selfishness.

Tomasz, your info is out of date  and reflects the quality of EU &US mainstream media. Here is the the truth from the summary with scanned documents about the matter, published last year:

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/new-sources-nato-enlargement-clinton-presidential-library

Some quotes inside the article:

Quote

 Polish President Lech Walesa told Bill Clinton that “it is possible that the reform process in Russia will reverse. This would spoil the progress that has been made in building peace in Europe…If you succeed in ensuring that Europe is not again faced with a threat from Russia, you will win a Nobel Prize.”

Quote

 

PfP signaled that NATO pursued a policy of two tracks: the aim was to open up NATO, but slowly and cautiously, and combined with an expanded effort to engage Russia. Clinton emphasized repeatedly that Russia was not excluded from NATO and would be eligible to join the alliance someday.

Yeltsin, on the other hand, did not want Russia to be treated as just one among the many PfP countries. He insisted on “a statement or ‘protocol’ that makes clear that Russia is different from all other countries joining PfP – ‘a great country with a great army with nuclear weapons.’”

 

Quote

Germany and France were particularly cautious, arguing that a strong open-door package was sufficient as a reassurance. In 1997, with regards to Romania, for instance, Germany’s President Roman Herzog told Bill Clinton that “the conclusion I draw is that we did the right thing in not inviting them to join NATO just yet. Their per capita income is less than one-half of Poland's. To meet their military responsibilities in NATO, they would need to spend five or six percent of their GDP. They should not do that at this point.”

Quote

 

In particular, the war in Bosnia signaled that history and old conflicts had the potential to upset NATO’s order-building diplomacy and the emergence of a peaceful and prosperous Europe. In February 1995, Helmut Kohl told Bill Clinton that “with respect to Russia, Central and Eastern Europe, NATO expansion, and the status of Ukraine, these are the essential points. No matter what we do with Moscow, if we fail in Ukraine (and the former Yugoslavia) we are lost...The situation in Europe is very vague and ambiguous.”

 

Neither France, or Germany, or countries in the Warsaw bloc trusted Russia in the first place and they suggested Clinton to expand the NATO and EU after that. Do you think they applied for joining NATO and EU or NATO and EU invited them?

This is my opinion from analyzing geopolitical advantages and  disadvantages from history until now between nations (again my dad has an master of engineer degree from West Germany. His father went to  French military school in Vietnam(first generation), his father in law came to the north to fight against French's recolonization after WW2, then the US and later has an chemical engineer degree  from Russia. Each has their own ideology and my mum is a historical teacher so I love history and geopolitics along with engineer and macro economics). 

From Russia's point of view:

-Historically they desperately needed Ukraine to have the choke point to defense them from the West (past that point it is wide flat plan so it is impossible to organize a defense up to Moscow and the only things Russia can do is scorch Earth tactics while waiting for Russian winter, and that's how they defeated Napoleon and  Hitler.

-Russia need the ports in the in Ukraine to have access to the Black Sea, again for their defensive strategic position.

There is no doubt Russia wanted to normalize relationship with the West and they gave up both of the above in Yeltsin era. They have a tremendous benefit from good relationship with EU and the US. But since US wasted so many chance, Putin took back the ports in Black Sea.

From Eastern Europe's point of view:

-They wouldn't trust Russia before and after WW2 and possibly until now.  What if Russia got stronger later and came back to dictatorship? 

From France and Germany and others EU countries:

-Russia labors are cheaper than even Eastern Europe, has a large population, good engineers, with lots of natural resources, a shared border with China  and can be a bridge between EU and Asia. By normalize the relationship, surely EU has no chance to compete geopolitically.

-This leads to the need to isolate Russia to unite EU and keep their status quo, and by doing this, they will need to keep a strong NATO.

From US's point of view:

- Democrat Party: Need good relationship for global markets in Europe and Asia (tends to have support in North East Coast next to Europe and Western Coast next to Asia). Global technocrats, Wall Streets and love exporting USD and hegemony. A weird hate for Russia (Clinton, Obama, Biden) so naturally align with EU's interest. Import liberal ideologies from Europe, left leaning for people who are lack behind and kind of control freak and kind of feeling bad about US history. Have an extrovert personality and striving to match EU's progressive welfare standard with Big Government and raise tax tendency (at the end of the day, global corporations can avoid income tax from oversea easily)

Clinton, Obama and Biden all have law degrees

-Republican Party: emphasize on military and manufacturing industry, prioritize farmers, oil and Main Street so tends to got support from Mid West. Have more empathetical view towards Russia after Cold War (Bush father, son, Trump). Both Bushes have a weird taste for invasion and interference, can be viewed as traditional arrogant.  

2 Bushes and Trump both went to military school, although later on Trump went into real estate business and show biz. 

Don't know why when I was young, I hate Bush son from the first sight and liked Clinton more. 

Traditionally Dem and Rep is like Ying and Yang, one dovish one hawkish, one diplomacy one brute force,  each try to solve problem in their own ways to ensure US hegemony (in the cost of gradually losing US traditional values).

Trump is more about MYOB, more jobs for unskilled labor in the US, reduce tax but the reduction of importing goods and exporting USD can cause the world's economy get a big adjustment , especially EU and China. This also undermine US hegemony.

Anyone foreign country  who hate Trump would have the need to direct US hegemony in their favor (even if they hate it). 

Quote

"In international relations, there are no permanent friends or permanent enemies, only permanent interests." 

 

 

 

[Starschy + 211]

Obviously US fools haven't been to Russia. Fact is that Russians don't care about the .BBC, Nawalny, US Media or the State Department.

The Russian Focus is on the real life. 
Meaning the Superhiway from Moscow to St. Petersburg. The excellent High Spead Trains which are by a Mile better as NY -Boston.

US Cities look like junk yards compared to every Russian City with >3 Mio. Inhabitants.

Don't compare Moscows Metro with something between Berlin und LA.

Thats the priority for every Russian Citizens. 

Edited December 29, 2021 by Starschy

[mick mooney 0]

For a detailed summary of how thoroughly corrupt the US government, Wall Street and Pentagon all are, check out The Spoils of War by Andrew Cockburn. Democrat or Republican makes no difference. Sarah Chayes is also very good on the subject. 

I'm not defending Putin in any way, he's a grotesque killer and dictator. 

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

2 hours ago, mick mooney said:

For a detailed summary of how thoroughly corrupt the US government, Wall Street and Pentagon all are, check out The Spoils of War by Andrew Cockburn. Democrat or Republican makes no difference. Sarah Chayes is also very good on the subject. 

I'm not defending Putin in any way, he's a grotesque killer and dictator. 

Putin will grow on you just yet

[SUZNV + 1,197]

2 hours ago, mick mooney said:

For a detailed summary of how thoroughly corrupt the US government, Wall Street and Pentagon all are, check out The Spoils of War by Andrew Cockburn. Democrat or Republican makes no difference. Sarah Chayes is also very good on the subject. 

I'm not defending Putin in any way, he's a grotesque killer and dictator. 

In the Cold War, the US didn't have much of a choice but support their Western Allies, both Rep and Dem. An example is Truman couldn't stop France to get back to Vietnam and Algeria because he needed supports from France and UK in the Cold War against Eastern Bloc.

Historically US culture picked up a branch of capitalism since the Independence war, decentralized churches, individualism and detached before the movements of Europe ideologies started with Imperialism and Colonialism, Capitalism, French Revolutions, World communism, Socialism...It is perfectly understandable in Europe because resources are geopolitically limited, need a strong central government to distribute them and to get the resources from somewhere else.  In the economic crisis time this easily leads to war between powerful nations.

The solution of forming a Euro zone for no more war on Europe and encourage trust among historical opponents  but they need a common enemy to stick together and they use Russia as a boogeyman conveniently as an extension of Cold War. And EU still need resources somewhere to maintaining living standards and  compete to other sections of  the World, like Eastern Asia and to do so they need Ally in the US, and naturally Dem is the best fit and EU and need to export liberalism to the US to help their Ally's voting base to compete with individualism made in USA.

Republican at least their sales pitches are smaller government, less spending, keep the working ethics and jobs in the US to please their voting bases especially in Red States. But the 2 Bushes were specially aggressive in costly wars, must be because of the military background and please their voting bases in arm industries. This leads to more spending and dependence on Allies for moral support with is not very conservative and gave room for anti US world wide. Trump and Reagan are more conservatives than the 2 Bushes. 

Democrats are more to the benefit of EU politicians for the benefiting of  Wall Street and global corporations. Their sales pitch is US Leadership. More abusing the power of hegemony of USD as world reserve currency. Wall Street is a kind of global stock market as many oversea investors invest on to get USD, both international institutions or individual levels. At the end of the day, elites in EU and banking would love to invest on Wall Street and they are both major part of the big Eurodollar bubble.  Most of elections in US nowadays is Wall Street vs Main Street. 

Both Parties in the US have to please their voter bases and persuade the independents to choose their approaches, and many US voters don't understand what they votes for, just believe in short term promises that they think would benefit their jobs or investment in next term, or from the loyal to their parties, family traditions or following celebrities.  That is why Democrats import and brewing Modern Liberal progressive cultures from the EU and always strive for Germany or Scandinavian welfare standard  to increase their votes.

US even now is not overcrowded. One thing I like in the US, if you disagree with a party or your state, you can just pack up and move to the opposite ideology State. If you couldn't find job in one state, you can always move to other state for jobs and better living standard without being considered as immigrants or expat.  In the EU countries there are much differences in languages and cultures and background to do this efficiently with general labors. 

[surrept33 + 612]

 

19 hours ago, Tomasz said:

Russians should support western puppet Yeltsin not Putin

 

why should the people of russia support either? This seems like learned helpnessness. 

anyway, how putin is cracking down on the opposition is interesting. What is he scared of with his great record? Surely unfettered access to information is not going to turn Navalny into Nelson Mandela?

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2021/11/13/vladimir-putin-has-shifted-from-autocracy-to-dictatorship

 

Quote

 

In 2019 Mr Putin signed a “sovereign internet” law which forced internet providers to install special equipment that allows the state to block, filter and slow down websites. Gregory Asmolov, an expert on the internet at King’s College London, says the goal is not to build a Chinese-style firewall but to influence people’s choices. If people don’t know what they are missing, they will not look for it.

The Kremlin has cracked down on “influencers” and independent media outlets that feed interest in politics, while herding web users towards local social-media networks—which happily share information with the security services—and video-hosting platforms that are easy to control. International services are harried with fines and hobbled with slow download and upload speeds, making video sharing almost impossible. Most Russian opposition figures believe that within two years YouTube will not be available in Russia.

 

 

https://www.economist.com/the-world-ahead/2021/11/08/vladimir-putin-will-renew-his-attacks-on-elections-and-the-internet

Quote

 

The Kremlin has banned all websites linked to Mr Navalny by deeming them “extremist”. It has installed equipment and compelled providers to hamper access to Twitter so that pictures and videos do not upload. It has threatened the Russian staff of Apple and Google with criminal proceedings in order to remove Mr Navalny’s app from their stores. Media organisations and journalists have been declared “foreign agents”, making it almost impossible to operate in Russia.

But the biggest problem it has is with YouTube, Google’s video-hosting platform. Though Google is increasingly compliant with Russia’s demands to remove content, it continues to host Mr Navalny’s films, which attract tens of millions of views. Blocking YouTube is problematic. The service is used by millions of Russians who have little interest in politics but would be outraged if it were unavailable.

The Kremlin will increase pressure on Google to fall into line: it may slow down its search engine and impose fines. And it will continue to develop its own video-hosting platform, RuTube, to which it can move popular content, then switch off YouTube if necessary. Restoring a monopoly over information is central to Mr Putin’s power. The war over the internet will define Russia’s near future.

 

 

 

Edited December 29, 2021 by surrept33