RUSSIA CLEARLY WANTS WAR with the USA!

[Sbiker]

I am someone to question Russia's motives. I'm a human being. Assad might be like Saddam was, a strong man who prevented such a thing. US foreign policy has been a mess for a long time, often creating enemies to give reason to make fear and spend heavily.

What business is it of the US's? Well about as much as it is Russia's I would guess. Yes, the US likes to interfere when their oil is threatened.

What business is it of the US's? Well about as much as it is Russia's I would guess.

Morally or ethically there is no equivalence between Russian and US actions in Syria. Russia clearly stands on the high ground, the US has no business there.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Of course it does. Russia has been welcomed by the officially recognized, elected government of the sovereign state of Syria, and is defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

And what does "official recognized" mean? It means they managed to convince others they should have that power. As for "elected government", seriously? The Assad regime has been passed from father to son. Oh, there is an elected parliament, well, kind of seeing as the ruling party got 200 of the 250 seats. Germany refused to accept the results and the US too, simply because it was impossible to do so. But the Assad regime has ruled since 1963 without the need for a fair election. His "election" saw him get 99.7% of the votes, only 8.6 million people voted, that's three time less than voted in the war influenced parliament elections.
Opposition to the election was not allowed. That's not an election. It's a rubber stamp.

So, do you see it for what it is?

I doubt Putin wants war with the USA. I am not so sure about the powers that control the US government. They may want war with Russia and the politician they support is Hillary.

War is always about the health of the STATE!

Maybe, it's a good for all world, Putin has cold head and nerves of steel, and don't want a war...

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Putin is really elected by Russian majority, instead of his careness... This "regime" is really not enough "brutal", majority wants more respect to law from some groups of richmen in Russia...

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

How interesting As I know, Putin doesn't control a lot of media, only a few official resources. Is he controls economics? He trying, but who said you, Russian economics in hell? It's not a good time now for consumers, but a lot of chances for new businesses, replacing foreign... The level of life now is significantly lower, but if it a fee for solving at least a part of problems with US aggression - no any Russians could worry about it...

Russians are strongly dislike wars after WWII, which took every seventh life here. But don't have an illusion - after a years of "peaceful" and "compromised" US politics all Russians are ready to total war with US. It's interesting, when a lot of US civilians discussing about "another lesson to Russia", do they really ready to bid their lives in a "Big Game" for the "some interests" of US government?

Putin, as far as I know, controls the whole of the media.

Take the TV. Two of the three main channels are owned by the state. NTV, the third channel is owned by Gazprom-Media, which is owned by Gazprom, which the state owns.

Of the top 16 TV channels, 11 are owned by the state, one by the Moscow city government which is Sergey Sobyanin who is in the United Russia Party, which is Putin's party.

Only Dozhd is a non entertainment channel, owned by Natalya Sindeyeva. A truly non-govt tool. The govt tried to shut the channel down, but they moved to a private apartment. i.e. they got hassled a lot by the govt.

So all in all most of the TV media is owned by the state.

Too many journalists have been killed, and suspected of being killed by Putin or his supporters.

That's not a free media.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I am someone to question Russia's motives. I'm a human being. Assad might be like Saddam was, a strong man who prevented such a thing. US foreign policy has been a mess for a long time, often creating enemies to give reason to make fear and spend heavily.

What business is it of the US's? Well about as much as it is Russia's I would guess. Yes, the US likes to interfere when their oil is threatened.

What business is it of the US's? Well about as much as it is Russia's I would guess.

Morally or ethically there is no equivalence between Russian and US actions in Syria. Russia clearly stands on the high ground, the US has no business there.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Of course it does. Russia has been welcomed by the officially recognized, elected government of the sovereign state of Syria, and is defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

And what does "official recognized" mean? It means they managed to convince others they should have that power. As for "elected government", seriously? The Assad regime has been passed from father to son. Oh, there is an elected parliament, well, kind of seeing as the ruling party got 200 of the 250 seats. Germany refused to accept the results and the US too, simply because it was impossible to do so. But the Assad regime has ruled since 1963 without the need for a fair election. His "election" saw him get 99.7% of the votes, only 8.6 million people voted, that's three time less than voted in the war influenced parliament elections.
Opposition to the election was not allowed. That's not an election. It's a rubber stamp.

So, do you see it for what it is?

Assad regime has been passed from father to son. It's an indisputable evil...

US regime has been passed from father-Bush to son-Bush, and it seems to be passed from Clinton-husband to Clinton-wife... Do you really mean, US regime is double evil? )

Well, this isn't about the US, but yes, the US isn't exactly the best, is it?

 

[Sbiker]

Putin ..... In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

In a true Democracy he might have been kicked out, as you say. Then again, in a true Democracy, Bush Baby Jr. - Donald Rumsfeld - Richard Cheney - Tony Blair - and Silvio Berlusconi would all have been given the electric chair ..... after a fair trial of course.

Well yes, but we're not talking about those others. Russia is far less transparent than the US, and the US isn't very good.

Russia is more transparent, than western countries... You really don't need to use doublethink to understand Russia...

 

[gipper]

Putin is really elected by Russian majority, instead of his careness... This "regime" is really not enough "brutal", majority wants more respect to law from some groups of richmen in Russia...

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

How interesting As I know, Putin doesn't control a lot of media, only a few official resources. Is he controls economics? He trying, but who said you, Russian economics in hell? It's not a good time now for consumers, but a lot of chances for new businesses, replacing foreign... The level of life now is significantly lower, but if it a fee for solving at least a part of problems with US aggression - no any Russians could worry about it...

Russians are strongly dislike wars after WWII, which took every seventh life here. But don't have an illusion - after a years of "peaceful" and "compromised" US politics all Russians are ready to total war with US. It's interesting, when a lot of US civilians discussing about "another lesson to Russia", do they really ready to bid their lives in a "Big Game" for the "some interests" of US government?

Putin, as far as I know, controls the whole of the media.

Take the TV. Two of the three main channels are owned by the state. NTV, the third channel is owned by Gazprom-Media, which is owned by Gazprom, which the state owns.

Of the top 16 TV channels, 11 are owned by the state, one by the Moscow city government which is Sergey Sobyanin who is in the United Russia Party, which is Putin's party.

Only Dozhd is a non entertainment channel, owned by Natalya Sindeyeva. A truly non-govt tool. The govt tried to shut the channel down, but they moved to a private apartment. i.e. they got hassled a lot by the govt.

So all in all most of the TV media is owned by the state.

Too many journalists have been killed, and suspected of being killed by Putin or his supporters.

That's not a free media.

Putin doesn't need war to expand the power and wealth of the State. He has that power today.

US pols and the Oligarchy that own them need war to expand the power and wealth of the State.

See the difference?

 

[defcon4]

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Putin is really elected by Russian majority, instead of his careness... This "regime" is really not enough "brutal", majority wants more respect to law from some groups of richmen in Russia...

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

How interesting As I know, Putin doesn't control a lot of media, only a few official resources. Is he controls economics? He trying, but who said you, Russian economics in hell? It's not a good time now for consumers, but a lot of chances for new businesses, replacing foreign... The level of life now is significantly lower, but if it a fee for solving at least a part of problems with US aggression - no any Russians could worry about it...

Russians are strongly dislike wars after WWII, which took every seventh life here. But don't have an illusion - after a years of "peaceful" and "compromised" US politics all Russians are ready to total war with US. It's interesting, when a lot of US civilians discussing about "another lesson to Russia", do they really ready to bid their lives in a "Big Game" for the "some interests" of US government?

The rhetoric is ratcheted up against Russia over here. The propaganda machine is creating a Baba Yaga. They are doing it systematically since the old sentiments of the Cold War Era are as good as dead with the new generation. Now they are fueling and stoking the fire to reignite those sentiments. It is unfortunate that life over here became panem et circenses and people are easily mislead since they pay no attention to anything else but to their little pleasures and entertainment.

 

[Sbiker]

Putin is really elected by Russian majority, instead of his careness... This "regime" is really not enough "brutal", majority wants more respect to law from some groups of richmen in Russia...

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

How interesting As I know, Putin doesn't control a lot of media, only a few official resources. Is he controls economics? He trying, but who said you, Russian economics in hell? It's not a good time now for consumers, but a lot of chances for new businesses, replacing foreign... The level of life now is significantly lower, but if it a fee for solving at least a part of problems with US aggression - no any Russians could worry about it...

Russians are strongly dislike wars after WWII, which took every seventh life here. But don't have an illusion - after a years of "peaceful" and "compromised" US politics all Russians are ready to total war with US. It's interesting, when a lot of US civilians discussing about "another lesson to Russia", do they really ready to bid their lives in a "Big Game" for the "some interests" of US government?

Putin, as far as I know, controls the whole of the media.

Take the TV. Two of the three main channels are owned by the state. NTV, the third channel is owned by Gazprom-Media, which is owned by Gazprom, which the state owns.

Of the top 16 TV channels, 11 are owned by the state, one by the Moscow city government which is Sergey Sobyanin who is in the United Russia Party, which is Putin's party.

Only Dozhd is a non entertainment channel, owned by Natalya Sindeyeva. A truly non-govt tool. The govt tried to shut the channel down, but they moved to a private apartment. i.e. they got hassled a lot by the govt.

So all in all most of the TV media is owned by the state.

Too many journalists have been killed, and suspected of being killed by Putin or his supporters.

That's not a free media.

Ha-ha... Let's take the largest TV channels (except advertising):
1 (State) and 2 (Russian) channels - offcourse, this is official channels, Putin controls them...
NTV - former opposite channel, now they not to abuse Putin - but it's all they can.
5TV (St.Petersburg) - indirectly depends... In a situation of Mannerheim memory plate, for example, it was neutral, not pro-Putin...
OTR - independent
Spas (a church channel) - independent
Star (in fact, a communist' channel) - opposite to Putin
REN - independent...

An I'm not saying about a lot of regional channels - they, maybe, partially controlled by local administration... or no...

Almost all of media channels in Russia - commercial, first, they're making money, not provide politics. As for Dozhd - it's not an opposite, it's anti-russian channel, why do you surprised, Russians in mass don't want to watch it?

About killed journalists - yes, I agree. There's a big wave of journalists murders at Ukraine in last two years, and Putin do nothing to save them from growing nazism of Potroshenko-Ripper...

 

[Sbiker]

Morally or ethically there is no equivalence between Russian and US actions in Syria. Russia clearly stands on the high ground, the US has no business there.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Of course it does. Russia has been welcomed by the officially recognized, elected government of the sovereign state of Syria, and is defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

And what does "official recognized" mean? It means they managed to convince others they should have that power. As for "elected government", seriously? The Assad regime has been passed from father to son. Oh, there is an elected parliament, well, kind of seeing as the ruling party got 200 of the 250 seats. Germany refused to accept the results and the US too, simply because it was impossible to do so. But the Assad regime has ruled since 1963 without the need for a fair election. His "election" saw him get 99.7% of the votes, only 8.6 million people voted, that's three time less than voted in the war influenced parliament elections.
Opposition to the election was not allowed. That's not an election. It's a rubber stamp.

So, do you see it for what it is?

Assad regime has been passed from father to son. It's an indisputable evil...

US regime has been passed from father-Bush to son-Bush, and it seems to be passed from Clinton-husband to Clinton-wife... Do you really mean, US regime is double evil? )

Well, this isn't about the US, but yes, the US isn't exactly the best, is it?

So, "Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone at her." John 8:6 )

 

[frigidweirdo]

Putin ..... In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

In a true Democracy he might have been kicked out, as you say. Then again, in a true Democracy, Bush Baby Jr. - Donald Rumsfeld - Richard Cheney - Tony Blair - and Silvio Berlusconi would all have been given the electric chair ..... after a fair trial of course.

Well yes, but we're not talking about those others. Russia is far less transparent than the US, and the US isn't very good.

Russia is more transparent, than western countries... You really don't need to use doublethink to understand Russia...

I disagree. Russia is also full of nonsense. It might be easier to understand, simply because Putin controls everything.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

How interesting As I know, Putin doesn't control a lot of media, only a few official resources. Is he controls economics? He trying, but who said you, Russian economics in hell? It's not a good time now for consumers, but a lot of chances for new businesses, replacing foreign... The level of life now is significantly lower, but if it a fee for solving at least a part of problems with US aggression - no any Russians could worry about it...

Russians are strongly dislike wars after WWII, which took every seventh life here. But don't have an illusion - after a years of "peaceful" and "compromised" US politics all Russians are ready to total war with US. It's interesting, when a lot of US civilians discussing about "another lesson to Russia", do they really ready to bid their lives in a "Big Game" for the "some interests" of US government?

Putin, as far as I know, controls the whole of the media.

Take the TV. Two of the three main channels are owned by the state. NTV, the third channel is owned by Gazprom-Media, which is owned by Gazprom, which the state owns.

Of the top 16 TV channels, 11 are owned by the state, one by the Moscow city government which is Sergey Sobyanin who is in the United Russia Party, which is Putin's party.

Only Dozhd is a non entertainment channel, owned by Natalya Sindeyeva. A truly non-govt tool. The govt tried to shut the channel down, but they moved to a private apartment. i.e. they got hassled a lot by the govt.

So all in all most of the TV media is owned by the state.

Too many journalists have been killed, and suspected of being killed by Putin or his supporters.

That's not a free media.

Putin doesn't need war to expand the power and wealth of the State. He has that power today.

US pols and the Oligarchy that own them need war to expand the power and wealth of the State.

See the difference?

Of course. War could be a way of gaining some Nationalist fervor if he needs it, the Ukraine was good for his popularity.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

How interesting As I know, Putin doesn't control a lot of media, only a few official resources. Is he controls economics? He trying, but who said you, Russian economics in hell? It's not a good time now for consumers, but a lot of chances for new businesses, replacing foreign... The level of life now is significantly lower, but if it a fee for solving at least a part of problems with US aggression - no any Russians could worry about it...

Russians are strongly dislike wars after WWII, which took every seventh life here. But don't have an illusion - after a years of "peaceful" and "compromised" US politics all Russians are ready to total war with US. It's interesting, when a lot of US civilians discussing about "another lesson to Russia", do they really ready to bid their lives in a "Big Game" for the "some interests" of US government?

Putin, as far as I know, controls the whole of the media.

Take the TV. Two of the three main channels are owned by the state. NTV, the third channel is owned by Gazprom-Media, which is owned by Gazprom, which the state owns.

Of the top 16 TV channels, 11 are owned by the state, one by the Moscow city government which is Sergey Sobyanin who is in the United Russia Party, which is Putin's party.

Only Dozhd is a non entertainment channel, owned by Natalya Sindeyeva. A truly non-govt tool. The govt tried to shut the channel down, but they moved to a private apartment. i.e. they got hassled a lot by the govt.

So all in all most of the TV media is owned by the state.

Too many journalists have been killed, and suspected of being killed by Putin or his supporters.

That's not a free media.

Ha-ha... Let's take the largest TV channels (except advertising):
1 (State) and 2 (Russian) channels - offcourse, this is official channels, Putin controls them...
NTV - former opposite channel, now they not to abuse Putin - but it's all they can.
5TV (St.Petersburg) - indirectly depends... In a situation of Mannerheim memory plate, for example, it was neutral, not pro-Putin...
OTR - independent
Spas (a church channel) - independent
Star (in fact, a communist' channel) - opposite to Putin
REN - independent...

An I'm not saying about a lot of regional channels - they, maybe, partially controlled by local administration... or no...

Almost all of media channels in Russia - commercial, first, they're making money, not provide politics. As for Dozhd - it's not an opposite, it's anti-russian channel, why do you surprised, Russians in mass don't want to watch it?

About killed journalists - yes, I agree. There's a big wave of journalists murders at Ukraine in last two years, and Putin do nothing to save them from growing nazism of Potroshenko-Ripper...

Just like in America. When the right don't like something, they call it "anti-American", rubbish.

I get the feeling you're being a little biased here.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Of course it does. Russia has been welcomed by the officially recognized, elected government of the sovereign state of Syria, and is defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

And what does "official recognized" mean? It means they managed to convince others they should have that power. As for "elected government", seriously? The Assad regime has been passed from father to son. Oh, there is an elected parliament, well, kind of seeing as the ruling party got 200 of the 250 seats. Germany refused to accept the results and the US too, simply because it was impossible to do so. But the Assad regime has ruled since 1963 without the need for a fair election. His "election" saw him get 99.7% of the votes, only 8.6 million people voted, that's three time less than voted in the war influenced parliament elections.
Opposition to the election was not allowed. That's not an election. It's a rubber stamp.

So, do you see it for what it is?

Assad regime has been passed from father to son. It's an indisputable evil...

US regime has been passed from father-Bush to son-Bush, and it seems to be passed from Clinton-husband to Clinton-wife... Do you really mean, US regime is double evil? )

Well, this isn't about the US, but yes, the US isn't exactly the best, is it?

So, "Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone at her." John 8:6 )

Oh great, getting the Bible thrown at me.

Try this

"And Jesus said, "stuff you all, I don't care, I'm going home to play on the playstation" and his sheep all said "yes, we're going to your home to play on your play station" and Jesus said "fuck off you wankers" and his sheep said "yes, let's go to your home to fuck off and wank" Fuckthis 9:45

 

[GLASNOST]

Russia is far less transparent than the US, and the US isn't very good.

It was Russia that introduced Glasnost into the international vocabulary .... just as Poland introduced Solidarity into the international vocabulary. The US has yet to understand what those two words mean.

GLASNOST: The US is transparent to neither the outside world nor to its' own population.
SOLIDARITY: The US treats its' 'partners' like dogs. It dictates rather than share thought and ideas.

 

[GLASNOST]

Assad regime has been passed from father to son. It's an indisputable evil...

US regime has been passed from father-Bush to son-Bush, and it seems to be passed from Clinton-husband to Clinton-wife... Do you really mean, US regime is double evil? )

VERY, VERY GOOD, Bikko!

 

[frigidweirdo]

Russia is far less transparent than the US, and the US isn't very good.

It was Russia that introduced Glasnost into the international vocabulary .... just as Poland introduced Solidarity into the international vocabulary. The US has yet to understand what those two words mean.

GLASNOST: The US is transparent to neither the outside world nor to its' own population.
SOLIDARITY: The US treats its' 'partners' like dogs. It dictates rather than share thought and ideas.

No, the US isn't transparent, and nor is Russia.

 

[gipper]

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

How interesting As I know, Putin doesn't control a lot of media, only a few official resources. Is he controls economics? He trying, but who said you, Russian economics in hell? It's not a good time now for consumers, but a lot of chances for new businesses, replacing foreign... The level of life now is significantly lower, but if it a fee for solving at least a part of problems with US aggression - no any Russians could worry about it...

Russians are strongly dislike wars after WWII, which took every seventh life here. But don't have an illusion - after a years of "peaceful" and "compromised" US politics all Russians are ready to total war with US. It's interesting, when a lot of US civilians discussing about "another lesson to Russia", do they really ready to bid their lives in a "Big Game" for the "some interests" of US government?

Putin, as far as I know, controls the whole of the media.

Take the TV. Two of the three main channels are owned by the state. NTV, the third channel is owned by Gazprom-Media, which is owned by Gazprom, which the state owns.

Of the top 16 TV channels, 11 are owned by the state, one by the Moscow city government which is Sergey Sobyanin who is in the United Russia Party, which is Putin's party.

Only Dozhd is a non entertainment channel, owned by Natalya Sindeyeva. A truly non-govt tool. The govt tried to shut the channel down, but they moved to a private apartment. i.e. they got hassled a lot by the govt.

So all in all most of the TV media is owned by the state.

Too many journalists have been killed, and suspected of being killed by Putin or his supporters.

That's not a free media.

Putin doesn't need war to expand the power and wealth of the State. He has that power today.

US pols and the Oligarchy that own them need war to expand the power and wealth of the State.

See the difference?

Of course. War could be a way of gaining some Nationalist fervor if he needs it, the Ukraine was good for his popularity.

Ukraine was a coup by the US government. Putin merely responded to that coup, which was expected of him by his nation. He did not instigate it.

In the USA, the MSM works with government to shape public opinion for war. This is always been the case and continues today. Much media in the US has been very critical of Putin and Russia. However, you will find few in the MSM that will inform Americans that the coup in Ukraine was perpetrated by US operatives.

 

[jillian]

Or is it the other way round?

no. russia wants to have a US president it owns.... like it's puppet dumb donald.

 

[gipper]

Or is it the other way round?

no. russia wants to have a US president it owns.... like it's puppet dumb donald.

We can ALWAYS count on Silly Jilly being silly.

Partisans like Silly don't know they are dumb...but one day it will hit her like a ton of bricks. We can only hope.

 

[GLASNOST]

Oh great, getting the Bible thrown at me.

Try this

"And Jesus said, "stuff you all, I don't care, I'm going home to play on the playstation" and his sheep all said "yes, we're going to your home to play on your play station" and Jesus said "fuck off you wankers" and his sheep said "yes, let's go to your home to fuck off and wank" Fuckthis 9:45

I am disappointed. You need a day off. The real you is a much better person than this.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

How interesting As I know, Putin doesn't control a lot of media, only a few official resources. Is he controls economics? He trying, but who said you, Russian economics in hell? It's not a good time now for consumers, but a lot of chances for new businesses, replacing foreign... The level of life now is significantly lower, but if it a fee for solving at least a part of problems with US aggression - no any Russians could worry about it...

Russians are strongly dislike wars after WWII, which took every seventh life here. But don't have an illusion - after a years of "peaceful" and "compromised" US politics all Russians are ready to total war with US. It's interesting, when a lot of US civilians discussing about "another lesson to Russia", do they really ready to bid their lives in a "Big Game" for the "some interests" of US government?

Putin, as far as I know, controls the whole of the media.

Take the TV. Two of the three main channels are owned by the state. NTV, the third channel is owned by Gazprom-Media, which is owned by Gazprom, which the state owns.

Of the top 16 TV channels, 11 are owned by the state, one by the Moscow city government which is Sergey Sobyanin who is in the United Russia Party, which is Putin's party.

Only Dozhd is a non entertainment channel, owned by Natalya Sindeyeva. A truly non-govt tool. The govt tried to shut the channel down, but they moved to a private apartment. i.e. they got hassled a lot by the govt.

So all in all most of the TV media is owned by the state.

Too many journalists have been killed, and suspected of being killed by Putin or his supporters.

That's not a free media.

Putin doesn't need war to expand the power and wealth of the State. He has that power today.

US pols and the Oligarchy that own them need war to expand the power and wealth of the State.

See the difference?

Of course. War could be a way of gaining some Nationalist fervor if he needs it, the Ukraine was good for his popularity.

Ukraine was a coup by the US government. Putin merely responded to that coup, which was expected of him by his nation. He did not instigate it.

In the USA, the MSM works with government to shape public opinion for war. This is always been the case and continues today. Much media in the US has been very critical of Putin and Russia. However, you will find few in the MSM that will inform Americans that the coup in Ukraine was perpetrated by US operatives.

I don't believe that for a second. If Putin merely responded, then how come he suddenly responded by taking what he wanted? And he's tried the same shit with other places, like Georgia, and less successfully with places like Estonia and Latvia etc. If a guy just responds by doing what he's done before, and in that case all just "responded" then he must be a very lucky guy.

Yes, I know the media works to make opinion. It's part of the Powell Doctrine. But that doesn't mean that Putin didn't know anything or do anything. That's a real lack of logic. Even if the media is critical of Putin, that doesn't mean it's outright lies. Putin doesn't usually resort to outright lies either, they twist the truth. But you're making the assumption that I believe everything I'm told.