International News
See other International News Articles
Title: For once it isn't trump making all the noise
Source:
ABC.net.au
URL Source: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03- ... n-spy-row-with-britain/9545730
Published: Mar 13, 2018
Author: paraclete
Post Date: 2018-03-13 22:03:38 by paraclete
Keywords: Russia, esponaige
Views: 882
Comments: 16
With the poisoning of former Russian agents in the UK, relations are deteriorating between Russia and the UK. The British PM has given Russia an ultimatum regarding the source of the nerve agent used in the attack and Russia has issued a definite threat to escalate So Trump fires the Russian agent in his administration while May accuses Putin of murder on British soil it is becoming very sticky out there in the cold and all this on the eve of the Russian election. Could someone be trying to interfere in the Russian election?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: paraclete (#0)
If Russia wanted to kill someone, they certainly wouldn't have to resort to using a nerve agent that leaves a splash big enough to attract international attention to themselves as the instigators. What murderer leaves a business card at a crime scene? Someone WANTED Russia to be blamed for this. The only explanation for Russia (Putin) doing this that I can think of is to foment national pride in Russia and raise Putin's ratings for the upcoming election. Everyone knows that international rivalry raises the popularity of incumbents. If it wasn't that, then Russia is being framed.
It is very coinicendial either way and there is another one
Or Russia just doesn't care and thinks it can bluster through. I don't doubt there are plenty of state actors (CIA, Israel, etc.) who would love to gin up a hate-Russia story. They conduct multi-story campaigns against Russia and have done so for many decades. But Russia is not so innocent either. They are the ones creating these vicious toxins, they have a long history of producing the worst toxins for wartime use and for assassins to use. This is and was the stated purpose for developing these toxins. They have always maintained their official philosophy of making use of the worst CBN weapons as a routine method of war against civilians and for use by saboteurs and assassins. This policy has never been altered from the Soviet era. Or they're guilty as hell but think they can get away with it. That alone has an intimidating effect. Beyond that, the spy and daughter didn't die. Instead, they are in a private hell of suffering. Apparently, this class of nerve gas leads to excruciating and unimaginable pain for weeks or months, assuming you survive it at all. I wouldn't be too quick to think that Russia is innocent. Russia is far more often guilty of everything it is accused of than being innocent of what it is accused of. And I am normally willing to at least consider what Russia claims on various issues like Crimea.
I'm not going to click your crappy Aussie-infested website. If you have a real news story (other than the usual Aussie crap plagiarized from real news reporting in Britain and America), then post that article in full here at LF. Otherwise: shaddup.
On the world stage, Putin is on the defensive. He's suffered a coup in allied Ukraine and NATO is now on his doorstep. The Russian defense budget is much smaller than is the USA and it also has a smaller population and GDP. Furthermore, the Russian economy has seen turmoil around year 2000 or so. So no, I don't see Russia wanting to provoke anyone. It's not in their interests. To maintain it's status on the world stage, Russia must be very wise and shrewd, and I see Putin as having both qualities. That on it's face says they don't want to recklessly infuriate the UK or anyone else. I see the casual regard by Americans of Russia as the "evil empire" being a holdover from the Soviet era. But unlike the USA, Russia is no longer even an empire. The USA is, however, an empire, and one that has done at least as much ill throughout the world as Russian is presented as having done. I think that's what gets me the most in these discussions about Russia. It's usually from the perspective of the USA being some kind of saint country, and I can only regard those who see things that way as being very naive and easily duped.
So we both read various news stories. You disbelieve their central premise (Russia's guilty) and pat yourself on the back while quietly despising those rubes who think Russia did what they're accused of. You have not one shred of evidence for this view. You have no credible sources to support it. Your sole viewpoint here seems to boil down to "America bad, they must be framing poor Vlad". And all those Russian journalists and political rivals that get murdered on a regular basis? Just more bad-Vlad propaganda, no doubt. Yet you do continue to read and consume information from these media sources that you are convinced are systematically lying to you. But only you and some few other "woke" individuals can see through the giant sham, unaided other than by your own wit, some conspiracy theories, and a general view of the West as the inevitable villains on history's stage. How do you even know there is a person called Vlad Putin, that there was a Soviet Union, or anything else? From things you read that you do believe with no greater direct evidence than you are getting in this report. So you do not have a nuanced evidence-based view of the world but just choose to believe or not believe any news story based on entirely arbitrary and evidence-free opinion. So someone else used nerve poison on the ex-spy and daughter and they're just framing poor Vlad for it? Just like they framed poor Vlad for murdering all those journalists and political rivals in Russia? Maybe Kim Jong-il didn't use VX nerve gas to poison his older half-brother either. Another frame job for innocent little Kim (who, BTW, just happens to be a close ally of Vlad's). Russia looks a lot like the Soviet Union. It has its Russian heartland and incorporates many autonomous ethnic states and enclaves, as it has since the days of the tsars. It has the entire southern belt of despicable Turkic/Iranic Muslim countries under its thumb. It has Belorussia. So the CIS is an empire. It just isn't as large as the Soviets were when they held the Iron Curtain countries of eastern Europe.
If you look at territory, losing eastern Europe hardly made a dint, in fact Russia may have been better off without the basket case countries, however NATO has come much closer and Russia doesn't like losing their buffer Russia cannot afford war, their force in Syria is small
Exactly. They are a gas station country, as McStain calls them. They produce nothing else that anyone wants. They are way below replacement birth rates.
You are off the deep end on this one TC. I've simply stopped cheering for a particular country because I was born in it, and I don't subscribe to the notion that God ordained the USA to lead the world in holy, righteous rule that can do no wrong. People world over, as a rule, believe *their* country is in the right and I've simply risen above that. Is my perspective perfect? No, I wouldn't say it is. I'm still biased and with incomplete information as everyone is. But I do apply some critical analysis to the news reports I do receive and I recognize, I think accurately, that the US government is no more moral than the Russian government is, and that since the fall of the USSR, the USA has no counterpart empire to act as a deterrent to America's expanding influence throughout the world. You want a source showing US "meddling" in Ukrainian politics and encouraging the coup there? Leaked audio reveals embarrassing U.S. exchange on Ukraine, EU Check out the photo and caption:
I guess as a follow up, TC, if you do concede that the US did interfere and encourage the coup in the Ukraine (and I'll give you the chance to contest that) would you be willing to condemn it? Or would you take the position that expanding US influence worldwide this way is morally justified for some reason? This is an honest question. Some people no doubt feel that US influence in the domestic affairs of foreign countries is simply better in the big picture, perhaps in the sense of "the ends justifies the means" type thinking. I will admit myself to having some sympathy to the idea that the US would see some benefit to returning to a monarchy, reasoning that the current congressional system is basically dysfunctional, and while a particular king may impose terrible rule making things worse, there's a chance the king would instead be benevolent and actually fix so much that cannot be fixed by Congress due to special interest corruption, and that it might actually be worth the gamble try to correct the otherwise irreversible course of financial destruction the country is on. So, I freely admit to my own sympathy of "the ends justifies the means" philosophy. How about you?
It's an outdated notion. You're shaped by a dualism in which the American yin must be balanced by a Soviet (or Chinese) yang. But we are not some bunch of ignorant Zoroastrians. The history of empires and civilizations indicates that the rule is that of a dominant empire that raises trade and diplomacy and science to new levels. And that is America. Russia is a big ol' nothing historically. China at least does have some real potential as a rival global civilization. Russia does not.
I was consistently pro-Russia as were several others at LP. Our neocons, in particular Victoria Nuland and her husband, Robert Kagan, were in on the overthrow of the government. The Kagans (two brothers and their wives) are the main neocons in America. When we say 'neocons', that is exactly who we are talking about. However, that does not mean I am pro-Russian at all. Russia handled eastern Ukraine and Crimea very poorly overall.
Most of the Russian territory is cold, remote and of little hospitable value. If it were otherwise, I think it would have been well populated by now. But yes, Russia is a much more minor military threat today in terms of conventional military might with a smaller military budget than they used to be. On the other hand, they have responded to this by focusing on key technological breakthroughs with missiles, torpedoes and drones. Putin announced such breakthroughs recently, and it does appear Russia is actually technologically superior in these ways to the US. I think the difference is they have no military industrial complex self feeding it's existence with big budget projects. I would guess in Russia, the motive instead is spend what limited funds they have wisely. It's ironic, actually, as during the Soviet era, they were known to waste so much money because of their refusal to respect free market capitalism. And today, it seems the US wastes so much money on defense because the "free market" is demanding more and more money for projects like the way over budget & behind schedule F-35. Today, for whatever reason, Russia is doing better with their defense money than the USA is. True, but no one can afford war with Russia either. At least an all out war. They have the strategic military power to lay *complete* waste to the USA and Europe. What Russia lacks in military might, they make up for in wise spending AND diplomacy, exploiting the sentiments in so many countries that have experienced the heavy hand US foreign policy. Having a big military force in Syria is not the goal. It's instead accomplishing the desired military goal with the smallest force reasonably possible in Sun Tsu fashion. And in Syria, they have done a *masterful* job in that regard.
Oh - that wasn't sarcasm. and your point is we don't want it. Russian territory is rich in resources, resources Europe needs to continue their wasteful life style. Unlike the US, Europe has no taste for war, having experienced the devastation of WWI and WWII. The Russians tried to populate Siberia, but unfortunately they only sent dissidents. The Russians have proven themselves to be intellectually superior in many ways and this comes from those long winters with nothing better to do
Seems to fit the Putin persona. "I can kill who I want anywhere and will leave a calling card."
#2. To: Pinguinite (#1)
#3. To: Pinguinite (#1)
If Russia wanted to kill someone, they certainly wouldn't have to resort to using a nerve agent that leaves a splash big enough to attract international attention to themselves as the instigators. What murderer leaves a business card at a crime scene? Someone WANTED Russia to be blamed for this.
If it wasn't that, then Russia is being framed.
#4. To: paraclete (#0)
Click for Full Text!
#5. To: Tooconservative (#3)
#6. To: Pinguinite (#5)
I think that's what gets me the most in these discussions about Russia. It's usually from the perspective of the USA being some kind of saint country, and I can only regard those who see things that way as being very naive and easily duped.
But unlike the USA, Russia is no longer even an empire.
#7. To: Tooconservative (#6)
So the CIS is an empire. It just isn't as large as the Soviets were when they held the Iron Curtain countries of eastern Europe.
#8. To: paraclete (#7)
Russia cannot afford war, their force in Syria is small
#9. To: Tooconservative (#6)
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland (C) and U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt walk in the opposition camp at Independence Square in Kiev in this December 10, 2013.
So yes, I'm of the opinion that US hypocrisy is at an all time high. Putin and Russia has a right to be pissed at the US over what happened in the Ukraine. So if you think I'm wrong to be a bit sympathetic to Russia, and you think there is no concerted effort by the west to wall off Russia and frame them by staging this very sloppy nerve gas attack then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
#10. To: Tooconservative (#9)
#11. To: Pinguinite (#9)
Is my perspective perfect? No, I wouldn't say it is. I'm still biased and with incomplete information as everyone is. But I do apply some critical analysis to the news reports I do receive and I recognize, I think accurately, that the US government is no more moral than the Russian government is, and that since the fall of the USSR, the USA has no counterpart empire to act as a deterrent to America's expanding influence throughout the world.
#12. To: Pinguinite (#10)
I guess as a follow up, TC, if you do concede that the US did interfere and encourage the coup in the Ukraine (and I'll give you the chance to contest that) would you be willing to condemn it? Or would you take the position that expanding US influence worldwide this way is morally justified for some reason?
#13. To: paraclete (#7)
If you look at territory, losing eastern Europe hardly made a dint, in fact Russia may have been better off without the basket case countries, however NATO has come much closer and Russia doesn't like losing their buffer
Russia cannot afford war,
their force in Syria is small
#14. To: Tooconservative (#4)
....real news reporting in Britain and America
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.
#15. To: Pinguinite (#13)
Most of the Russian territory is cold, remote and of little hospitable value. If it were otherwise, I think it would have been well populated by now.
#16. To: Tooconservative (#3)
Or they're guilty as hell but think they can get away with it. That alone has an intimidating effect.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]