Russia General

[pedeathtrian 99]

Don't you think this goes a bit too far? I'm not exactly a Putin admirer, but if I were Russian I think I would find him better than Yeltsin.

No, I don't think so.

I thought we were talking about situation where there was some decent press in Russia, and free media and all that stuff, right? Where people used to discuss problems substantially and not only in comparison to previous disaster. Where people could  easily get all information about authorities' crimes.

Where did I get those 20%? It is not that hard to estimate part of russian society profiting from current situation. The rest is losing one way or the another. Why would someone support worse tomorrow? Because they're "explained" with the false reasons of their problems and that Putin is heroically fighting it. At the same time there's absolutely no chance of real public discussion of any real problem.

Putin probably was better than Yeltsin in some period, but now he's off completely, irretrievably gone to parallel reality, unable not only to react appropriately to what happens in society but even to understand it.

---

1. It is not a fake.

2. Just people are satisfied with their current existence.

3. Vote for the stability that now is

4. because people are afraid of change for the worse.

5. Putin is ready to maintain stability on the present.

6. People are afraid of a repeat of the 90s due to any revolutions.

1. It is.

2. No. Just no. People in Russia are not satisfied with their current existence (excl. maybe Moscow and St. Peterburg).

3. There is no stability nowadays in Russia since income of many households is connected to oil prices (and to insanity of authorities).

4. This fear is unduced. Somehow everybody think that any change can lead to worse only. Here we have stability, where we don't need it.

5. This stability (as in 4) he's ready to maintain for some time.

6. See 4.

---

Call me schizophrenic, but I'm sure Putin (et al.) would be brought to tribunal before his current term ends.

[spooky lynx 73]

And who will judge him and maintain such tribunal?

[pedeathtrian 99]

And who will judge him and maintain such tribunal?

We, the People.

[Sanya 97]

We, the People.

Like the people of Ukraine, performing the role of an extra.

[dontknowhow 33]

I thought we were talking about situation where there was some decent press in Russia, and free media and all that stuff, right? Where people used to discuss problems substantially and not only in comparison to previous disaster. Where people could  easily get all information about authorities' crimes.

Where did I get those 20%? It is not that hard to estimate part of russian society profiting from current situation. The rest is losing one way or the another. Why would someone support worse tomorrow? Because they're "explained" with the false reasons of their problems and that Putin is heroically fighting it. At the same time there's absolutely no chance of real public discussion of any real problem.

Putin probably was better than Yeltsin in some period, but now he's off completely, irretrievably gone to parallel reality, unable not only to react appropriately to what happens in society but even to understand it.

yes.

What I was trying to say is that there might also be reasons to actually like Putin. The economy probably improved, and I didn't even mention the fact that he stands up to the evil West, which probably makes some people happy.

Even if more decent press comes, the less decent press stays, especially if Putin has friends with money. So at one point the quality of the press is not so important anymore, but rather what people want to believe. And people can be very stupid.

Look at what happened in the UK. The consequences of the brexit were made more than clear everywhere, yet people voted for it, often against their own interest, only to regret it a few hours later.

 

Putin probably was better than Yeltsin in some period, but now he's off completely, irretrievably gone to parallel reality, unable not only to react appropriately to what happens in society but even to understand it.

I don't think things changed a lot, he only reached his limit. He probably still is better than Yeltsin, if he starts in the same situation.

[ProfTournesol 956]

(BBC News) Russia state-sponsored doping across majority of Olympic sports, claims report

[pedeathtrian 99]

(BBC News) Russia state-sponsored doping across majority of Olympic sports, claims report

I'm very well sure China (and probably some other countries being successful in Olympics lately) has similar system (or even worse).

But nobody cares, since there was no political contract other than ban russians from the Olympics yet. WADA recommended that "Russian government officials should also be banned from this summer's Games". What? Do they have government officials' probes too?  :D

I don't say russian athletes never used doping, they probably did. Let's just check everyone. For now I can't see any major independent investigations in anti-doping agencies in countries other than Russia. I don't hear any former sport officials (other than Rodchenkov) saying that they doped entire team (why would anyone do this if not paid for?). And all this mouseholes in walls, KGBFSB agents, scratches on bottles and stuff... smell like good old antisoviet propaganda from 40 years ago. Surprisingly, nobody has eaten enough polonium yet.

Why do we have "tamperproof lids" that can be "removed in a manner which does not break the seal"? WTF?

Why don't we have multiple independent anti-doping institutions, having parts of the same probes available for analysis and comparison in case of different investigations? One for Eurasia, one for Eastasia and one for Oceania. This would be just fine.

[ProfTournesol 956]

While i agree that some other countries are probably organizing doping too (maybe China, i don't know), Russia is well known for sponsoring it at the state level. Instead of talking of 'anti soviet propaganda', you'd better ask why your country is STILL doing the same thing as it was done during USSR. Sotchi Olympics are also very well known to be a huge system of wide corruption, particularly in the building of sports facilities. The Olympics have never been so expensive, IIRC the cost of the motorway leading to it is a world record, which makes any specialist of Public Works smile.

[pedeathtrian 99]

why your country is STILL doing the same thing as it was done during USSR. Sotchi Olympics are also very well known to be a huge system of wide corruption, particularly in the building of sports facilities. The Olympics have never been so expensive, IIRC the cost of the motorway leading to it is a world record, which makes any specialist of Public Works smile.

Same personalities still rule the country. Corruption, corruption everywhere. Everything is corruption in my country, not only Sochi Olympics.

Russia itself is a world record in corruption. You have no idea how much I hate this.

[dontknowhow 33]

Same personalities still rule the country. Corruption, corruption everywhere. Everything is corruption in my country, not only Sochi Olympics.

Russia itself is a world record in corruption. You have no idea how much I hate this.

Transparency International puts Russia at number 119 of 167, so I can understand the situation is pretty bad. Add that to the problems with the freedom of expression (148 of 180 in the world press freedom index).

But you sound really bitter. Have you considered moving abroad?

[pedeathtrian 99]

Transparency International puts Russia at number 119 of 167, so I can understand the situation is pretty bad. Add that to the problems with the freedom of expression (148 of 180 in the world press freedom index).

But you sound really bitter. Have you considered moving abroad?

TI have their numbers right. Worse, the trend is negative, but not for long, I hope. This can't last forever; I expect changes in next few years.

Thx to corruption in education system, I had to quit university on 4th year (of 5), so I have no degree, but clean and out of this shit. That complicates moving abroad significantly. 

And finally, and mainly, I love my country (I hate this state, not country) and I simply don't want to leave.

[spooky lynx 73]

I'm very well sure China (and probably some other countries being successful in Olympics lately) has similar system (or even worse).

But nobody cares, since there was no political contract other than ban russians from the Olympics yet.

Professional sport had become impossible without different kinds of drugs long time ago. Now it is more pharmaceutical competition than sport one. The main thing in this novel is that who has more influence over organizations - has cleaner reputation of its sportsmen. Sure the country which can easily arrest any sport official anywhere and hosts many headquarters may influence on them. "Those who pay - order the music".

[ProfTournesol 956]

Professional sport had become impossible without different kinds of drugs long time ago. Now it is more pharmaceutical competition than sport one. The main thing in this novel is that who has more influence over organizations - has cleaner reputation of its sportsmen. Sure the country which can easily arrest any sport official anywhere and hosts many headquarters may influence on them. "Those who pay - order the music".

Come on, why can't you just accept the obvious, for once. You still find excuses to your country cheating at state level.

[spooky lynx 73]

Come on, why can't you just accept the obvious, for once. You still find excuses to your country cheating at state level.

Because those who accuse are the same cheaters. The only reason of this scandal is bad Russia-US relations, not some will to clean the sport.

Oh and I don't like professional sports and against all that championships and olympics.

[zooloo75 833]

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/07/22/russian-warplanes-reportedly-bombed-us-base-in-syria.html

[zooloo75 833]

[Dwarden 1124]

so while Russia has all around it's country highly mobile highly precise S300 and S400 and derivate systems

NATO can't have own anti-missile security even against 'minor' scale attack ;) ... weird logic ....

[pedeathtrian 99]

NATO can't have own anti-missile security even against 'minor' scale attack ;) ... weird logic ....

The point is all that anti-missile systems are easily converted into offensive systems reaching most russian military facilities (including nuclear). Not saying these rockets can carry nuclear warheads.

[oxmox 73]

.....worrying and very interesting video.

 

Of course there was no nuclear threat by the Iran against Europe, that was just an attempt to widen out NATO/US influence in Europe.

Its about first strike ability aswell....

 

 

 

As a side info: Interesting to see the coverage of the forward radar of such missile systems (2007)

 

The THAAD system will be maybe deployed in Korea and we saw the reaction of China

 

The Aegis Ashore forward radar has a much bigger coverage and is actually the mentioned NATO system deployed in Romania. 

 

Image: 2007- former planned defence missile shield in Poland

 

[Dwarden 1124]

The point is all that anti-missile systems are easily converted into offensive systems reaching most russian military facilities (including nuclear). Not saying these rockets can carry nuclear warheads.

reaching ? considering the AAA and AA layered defense Russia has ... that's just non-sense

also the nuclear deterrent works as Russia has submarines, ships, mobile (trucks, trains) and static platforms with nukes (and more likely even something in space (cause treaties don't matter for them))

the USA would need to have 101% working protective system to even think about attacking other nuclear power as ICBM aren't the only threat either ...

so w/e someone claims about possible 'strike' it's just brainwashing

because in terms of military tactic, you would need to annihilate every single asset of enemy at once otherwise the risk is too great

[pedeathtrian 99]

reaching ? considering the AAA and AA layered defense Russia has ... that's just non-sense

also the nuclear deterrent works as Russia has submarines, ships, mobile (trucks, trains) and static platforms with nukes (and more likely even something in space (cause treaties don't matter for them))

The good and the best defence systems have fallen in the past. Does that say something to you?

Reaching, exactly. What's the problem with this? It is very tightly tied with time. Look at Europe's map: rockets based in latest NATO countries (like Estonia) could reach russian military facilities in 6 minutes. Six minutes, Carl! Long before all those trains and submarines are ready to fire. This is reaching. When you've gone full retard and want this world burn to ashes, place multi-purpose anti-missile systems here.

 

the USA would need to have 101% working protective system to even think about attacking other nuclear power as ICBM aren't the only threat either ...

For today, probably...

 

so w/e someone claims about possible 'strike' it's just brainwashing

because in terms of military tactic, you would need to annihilate every single asset of enemy at once otherwise the risk is too great

Brainwashing is making people think that the ability to place rockets (incl. silo-based) in Europe would not be used when such necessity appears.

Nuclear powers balance is not what you discuss in terms of military tactics. Every small step can pay off in the future, and not making this step can cost you everything. Not being able to eliminate enough of enemy's facilities today does not mean you will not be able tomorrow. And you prepare today. This is called strategy btw.

[Dwarden 1124]

you missing the fact that most of those 'systems' Russia is complaining against is already used and deployed by Russia itself all around it's countryside ;)

did anyone noticed Russia is the largest country on Earth ...

S300/S400 systems can be upgraded (S350) and improved and replaced (container type of launchers, unified)

same goes about coastal batteries with cruise missiles etc.

so again, it's nothing new already been there done that

Russia should be quiet or someone in NATO leadership come up with unified defense system

and then Russia would need to go start from scratch or reason to whine ...

[pedeathtrian 99]

asd

you missing the fact that most of those 'systems' Russia is complaining against is already used and deployed by Russia itself all around it's countryside ;)
did anyone noticed Russia is the largest country on Earth ...

That makes it harder to defend these areas and in no way makes it easier to attak other countries. Russia does not have those 'systems' at US borders.

 

S300/S400 systems can be upgraded (S350) and improved and replaced (container type of launchers, unified)
same goes about coastal batteries with cruise missiles etc.
so again, it's nothing new already been there done that

You missing the time factor again. Even if converted (S350 could not be), it has thousands of kilometers more in distance to reach US.

 

Russia should be quiet or someone in NATO leadership come up with unified defense system
and then Russia would need to go start from scratch or reason to whine ...

Both sides should be quiet and negotiate and not leave treaties for strained reasons.

 

[Rydygier 1302]

Russia does not have those 'systems' at US borders.

 

 

But certainly can "reach" Russia's neighbours, also making them want to NATO (Russia as a country has somehow very poor reputation amongst them), fueling it's so criticized expansion east, so in the result, can reach NATO. And if so, why these neighbours can't have defensive/whatever they want systems on, their own after all, territory? Because are smaller, and doesn't count in US-Russia equasion? That's why imperial ambitions are bad and harmful - doesn't see the smaller and single people, that are harmed where "big boys" are playing their game of power. And such ambitions was a cause of WWI, then WWII. Putin, even if assumed honest, defends "strategic balance" of the world, that actually is the past, no matter, who is guilty of that, if anyone, he thinks the past way. Saying not the truth. This balance didn't ensure a peace, there are many wars at any decades you look all around the world. There was pretty hot wars caused by/as a part of the Cold War, not counting rest of the crap of these times. It doesn't ensured no nuclear war either, because there wouldn't be one, if only one country/side had nuclear advantage, on the contrary, makes the risk of it higher, there was pretty close. What they defend, seem to be rather their injust, imperial influence share on geopolitics, giants blind on the lives of simple, trampled people, which is stupid, unwise and wrong. That's how it looks from here. Hasn't Russia enough problems with herself to care of this times? What's better - to be a respectful, prosperous country, or trying to be overambitous (in current state), hated and rotting from inside, unstable global quasi-empire? Why? What for? Being big brings big moral responsibility, requiring big resources and efforts. It's wiser not trying to be bigger, than you are.

[pedeathtrian 99]

But certainly can "reach" Russia's neighbours ...

Don't get me wrong. I'm for disarming, arms proliferation control and making serious treaties. We had a treaty on anti-missile systems, then US decide they need no rules anymore and leave. There was a resolution in UN General Assembly to support that treaty. US, Israel, Micronesia and Paraguay voted against and 80 countries supported it. US leaves. Somehow it did not affect their reputation (somehow it never happens at all). Then they start to arm Russia's neighbours. Can't we have defensive/whatever we want systems on, our own after all, territory? This is the only option when other side does not want to negotiate and wants to arm instead. That's how it looks from here.