PDA

View Full Version : America's Pathetic Putin-Envy



VovaLee
25 Sep 06,, 21:12
That do you think this text about?



http://www.exile.ru/images/authors/1.gif
By Mark Ames

America's Pathetic Putin-Envy
The Fear of Falling
This week's edition of Newsweek features one of the most bizarre articles I've read in a long time. It's called "Why Russia Is Really Weak," and as the schoolyard-taunting title suggests, it's a desperate attempt to convince Newsweek readers that Russia isn't as strong as they think. Really. No, really, Russia really isn't! Dontcha believe us?

It's the "Really" in the headline that's really, really revealing. Because it suggests nervousness on the part of the authors--a pair of academic beigeocrats with appropriate ethnic names: Rajan Menon and Alexander Motyl.

They're nervous--they and the presumed Newsweek reading public--for the obvious reason that Russia is actually getting much stronger. As we know, the American way to react to unpleasant turns in events is to simply deny they're happening, and then to posit their opposite, and leave it at that.

Russia wasn't supposed to get stronger, certainly not on its own, without the West's help. It just doesn't make sense. Moreover, it's somehow cosmologically wrong that Russia should become stronger right at the time when American power is in a freefall. That just ain't right...so therefore, the authors offer a solution: cup your ears, close your eyes, and scream, "Russia is really weak! Russia is really weak!" and it'll all go away, like a bad dream...

Oddly enough, the authors claim in the first paragraph that alleged Western "news stories" uniformly tout a "predictable theme"--that theme being Russia's growing strength. Moreover, these Western media outlets are guilty of an even worse sin: they're supposedly going farther by calling on Western leaders to "adjust to this new reality." In other words: appeasement.

And now Newsweek is out to set the record straight.

Umm...what the **** are Menon and Motyl talking about? What media outlets have they been smoking? And can I score some of that ****? Seriously, where are these alleged rah-rah-Russia articles appearing? In the Washington Post? The Wall Street Journal? The New York Times?

Let's take a look over the recent past at these three leading papers, the most influential opinion-formers in mainstream America, and see just how predictable and pro-Russian their editorials have been.

First, the right-wing, pro-Republican Wall Street Journal. If you went into a drug-induced coma in 1986 and woke up last week on September 14th, 2006 with a copy of the Journal on your face, you'd be happily reassured that you didn't miss much in the way of historical events: the Cold War's still going strong, according to that edition's editorial, "The New New Russians," which argues that doing any business with Russia is dangerous for the free world: "For the Kremlin, gas, oil, metals, aircraft are not just tradeable goods. They are also tools of political power and security leverage. To devise the proper response on this side of the old Iron Curtain, that must be kept in mind." After reading that, you could smile, bang a couple more baggies of pure Persian Grey, and hibernate another 20 years without worrying about missing much.

Indeed, there's something comforting about the Journal editorial's choice of words and imagery: a nefarious Kremlin, the Iron Curtain, and the ever-naive West, which is such a decent, trusting fella, and so dedicated to keeping business and geopolitics apart, that it simply cannot fathom that another country, especially a country run by white guys, could be so cynical as to cheat, mixing business with politics. Wake up, guys! Before it's too late!

On the other side of the mainstream media political spectrum from the Journal is the Washington Post, whose Op-Ed page leans towards what you might call "Lieberman Democrats." You know, real leftie stuff. Because America has such a diverse and free press. So how does the Post's take on Putin's Russia differ from the Journal's? I won't keep you hanging, so here goes, the concluding paragraph to an August 23rd editorial: "The West relies on Russian energy supplies at its peril."

Wait, what? Isn't that what the Journal's point was? Bingo. But you wouldn't need to have read to the end to figure that out: the Post's editorial was headlined: "An Energetic Bully, Kremlin-backed energy monopolies are bad for Russia and Europe." Okay, it's a little strange that America's right-wing paper and its center-left paper repeat each other in ways not predicted by Newsweek. Indeed, the "right" and the "center-left" repeat each other so much--in the leadup to the G-8 summit in July, both the Journal and the Post essentially called on the West to either boycott or throw Russia out of the organization--you'd almost think that the same guy is penning both papers' Russia editorials.

Moreover, one might point out the raw hypocrisy of the Post attacking the Kremlin for mixing geopolitics with energy supplies when, after all...well, I'll just quote the Post's own story:

Politics Of the Pipelines: U.S. Seeks Ways to Route Natural Gas Around Russia

By Steven Mufson

Washington Post Staff Writer

July 11, 2006

For a low-profile State Department official, Matthew J. Bryza gets around. A member of the bureau of European and Eurasian affairs, he frequents places such as Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan. This year, he's also popped in on people in Brussels, Rome and Berlin. One key item on his agenda: persuading governments and energy companies to build natural gas pipelines that skirt Russia.

Right, so there goes that argument.

But anyway, I don't want to dwell here about insane Western double-standards towards Russia, a problem as rampant as oral herpes. We're all sick of hearing about that. This article is focusing on something new: Newsweek's claim that a) the Western press is uniformly touting Russia's power and calling on the West to submit to the new reality, and b) the Western press is wrong, because what neither you, I, nor John Q Public knows is that in fact, Russia is weak. "Really" weak.

So back to our hunt for evidence of Newsweek's claim, let's look at the bane of Republicans and Fox News viewers everywhere, the radical-left-wing New York Times -- you know, the paper that mainstream America is accusing of having committed treason? If anyone's gonna be predictably rah-rah-Russia and pro-appeasement, it's gotta be the Times, right?

Welp, read this recent Times editorial and tell me what you think: "With energy prices high and money pouring in, it would be easy for the Russians to see themselves in a position of strength and refuse to give ground. But behind the facade of strength are long-term weaknesses." Hey! Wait a minute! Did I just quote the New York Times or Newsweek? Let's go back and quote the first paragraph to the current Newsweek story: "News stories about Russia these days follow a predictable theme. The country is resurgent and strong, and the West must adjust to this new reality. But that story line is wrong. Russia is weak and getting weaker." And now the Times: "But behind the facade of strength are long-term weaknesses."

If Newsweek is right about anything, it's that stories about Russia do follow a predictable theme. And that theme is this: they all sound like the Newsweek article. Which is to say, they're all desperately scrambling for a way to convince themselves that Russia is not getting back on its feet, while at the same time, Russia is a menace. That's the point of the Newsweek article, and just about every other American media outlet opinion on Russia, as summed up in the conclusion:

"So, the received wisdom is wrong. What the West must live with is a weak Russia. And history shows that states that talk loudly while carrying a small stick often overreach, creating problems for themselves and others." Hell, who cares if this is completely self-contradictory and illogical. After all, Newsweek's readers probably also read the Bible. The less sense it makes, the more persuasive it is.

Why the gloating and hatred? What bothers all of these journalists and opinion-makers more than anything is the fact that Russia is "confident," even "overconfident"--a word that they come back to over and over. "Confidence": it's a state of mind that America hasn't been feeling for, oh, about 3 years now. And that...hurts.

You have to understand that America values self-confidence more than life itself, more than health or happiness or family or food. Confidence=Winner= America. The only other people allowed to feel confident are those who are grateful to us. Their confidence is permissible only as a sub-set of our confidence--they can be confident only after adopting our way of life, like the Czechs, for example.

The nerve of Russia to both reject the US, to get back on its feet without our help (indeed in spite of what we've done here), and then, to top it all off, to publicly display confidence!

Suddenly Uncle Sam is turned into Yosemite Sam, steaming red and stomping around, shaking his fist at Bugs Russia: "Why you no good varmint! I'll show you confidence! I'm a gonna blast your self-confidence intah smithereens! Yup, I'll fill our newspapers with articles callin' yuh 'weak'! That's right! 'Weak'! Yuh hear that? Yer 'really weak,' even, Russia! Now how's that self-confidence of yers doin', yuh long-eared galoot! Mwah-hah-hah!"

* * *

The Newsweek article proving that Russia is "really weak" is not just one of the sloppiest examples of propaganda you'll ever read, it's downright nasty in a way that Americans are usually pretty good at concealing beneath a veneer of sentimental concern. If Russia is really as pathetically weak as the authors claim, then shouldn't the West feel compassion for its 142 million citizens? Shouldn't we want to help?

**** no, *****! Celebrate! The point that the authors want to make is that Russia is weak, and so therefore...are you ready?...if we want to, we can treat Russia like ****, and not worry about it much. Except that they're so weak that they're also a danger. Which is to say, it's okay to hate Russia and to despise it for being weak, because that's all the bastards deserve. But also have a kind of contemptuous caution towards them...you know, like how we used to in the good old days.

The problem is, to convince readers today in the face of so much contrary evidence, the authors have to flat-out lie, both by omission and by, well, lying. Interestingly, to prove Russia is weak, they start by noting that a new Russian missile designed to evade Bush's Star Wars system failed in a test launch a few weeks ago. That's odd, because the entire ABM program has been marked by nothing but a series of highly-rigged tests which repeatedly fail. Over and over.

You'd think that the authors wouldn't want to make this their first piece of evidence, but they do, and very consciously so: "The United States experiences such mishaps, too, of course. But in Russia they are signs of something deeper." Now you start to see the purpose of this article: it's about making America feel better about its own gaping problems, via a false comparison, something it desperately needs. America's highly-touted, highly-corrupt, highly-insane ABM system -- which caused the first big rift in US-Russian relations post-9/11 -- has failed and failed and failed; so what you do is you find a Russian system that failed a test, and then use that to make America feel better about itself.

And we need it. The Bush years are such a throbbing bummer that they're making the Carter years look like the '84 LA Olympics. The anti-depressant to counteract Bush-Era Reality? Point out that Russia is having the same problems we have--only worse. Their problems "are signs of something deeper," implying that America's inability to rig two successful Star Wars tests in a row is not a sign of anything deep at all, such as massive corruption, militarism, stupidity and evil. No, it's just that our tests are failed tests, while Russia's failed tests actually mean its military is in total chaos.
That's funny, because the accompanying article in the same Newsweek issue announces that Russia has "won" the war in Chechnya. A war that was considered unwinnable by every Western pundit and journalist...including this Newsweek article's coauthor. In 2004, Rajan Menon wrote, "Then as now, no military or political solution was in sight...The Chechen war, in short, is a stalemate, no matter the bravado of those waging it." And a few years before that, Menon wrote, in a Foreign Affairs article titled "Decline and Fall?" that "The Russian Federation may be falling apartand its war against Chechnya is showing why."

So here's the awful reality: Russia won a war it was thought impossible to win, even by Newsweek's own calculations; and America lost a war it was thought impossible to lose. What a ****ing bummer.

http://www.exile.ru/transient/247/lead1.jpg
The authors follow that up with this strange bit of evidence: "India has bought more Russian tanks since 2001 than the Russian Army." India, with a population almost 10 times that of Russia, has fought a series of major wars with neighbors China and Pakistan, with whom it has major territorial disputes. Russia's biggest threat comes from guerrilla insurgency campaigns. Why the **** would Russia buy more tanks than India, unless it planned to do something as idiotic as America and run around invading other countries? For which tanks are eventually useless anyway... The sad truth is that, despite serious problems, Russia's military is on the ascendancy. And even Newsweek announces that on its cover: "Putin's Hollow Victory: He's Won The War in Chechnya, But At What Cost?"

Is that supposed to be a put-down? My god, what any American would give, what George Bush would give, to win a "hollow victory" in Iraq! At literally any cost! Give us a "hollow victory" any day, and let us rue the consequences. Anything but this horrible failure and defeat, please!

Pulling back, we have to ask, "Why did Newsweek publish this? Why does a story like this resonate with its readers?" The reason, again, is simple: Newsweek's middlebrow Western/American readers desperately need to believe that Russia's military is a joke, the joke that it used to be. Because, well, as it turns out, America--you know, the "hyperpower," the most powerful empire in the history of mankind? 'member?-- welp, turns out that America can't even manhandle a few restive dust monkeys. The wars America thinks it won...it actually lost. And the war that Russia should have lost....according to Newsweek, has been "won."

Nothing could gall a nation of Bible-thumping, pious militarists more than this awful picture of opposing trajectories, America's pointing downward. Yet it's fitting: America thought they'd beaten the Taliban, and now they're back; thought they'd conducted an historical invasion/occupation of Iraq, and now they're getting their asses ground down; and thought they'd defeated Russia with the Cold War, only to see Russia rejecting the US, and worst of all, acting "confident."

Then there's the economy. We hate to think that Russia has been growing against all of our advice and help, which is why we desperately want and need to believe that whatever the case about Russia's booming economy, Russia had nothing to do with it: "What happens when--not if--oil and gas prices begin to retreat?" the authors posit, sticking their tongues out at Mother Russia.

Note the glee and hope in the sentence: "when--not if." Yeah, what happens then, huh?! Hey, I'm talkin' to you! I said, what happens then?! You're gonna be REALLY poor again, Russia, that's what'll happen. And you're gonna come runnin' back to us, America, for help. But this time, we may not be there for yuh! Think about that, Russia! Cuz even if you don't think about it, we in America will.

* * *

It's that pathetic. America really has fallen that hard and that fast. From the not-so-long-ago Golden Days of triumphalist Russia-bashing, to today's dumped-ex-girlfriend whining that Russia ain't shee-yit, and someday they'll need us again.

Folks, we have truly gone from the world's *****-slappers to the world's *****-niggaz.

And it all happened so quickly. If you google your way back in time a few years, to that Golden Age between early 2002 and the summer of 2003, you'd find a slew of insane articles describing America as, in the words of Newsweek, "the most powerful country in the history of the world." Or as best-selling historian Niall Ferguson argued, "The most powerful empire the world has ever seen." One winces when reading an article in the Washington Post from a couple of years ago, quoting neocon uberfag William Kristol boasting, "What's the point of being the greatest, most powerful nation in the world and not having an imperial role?" And no one around to smack him with a wet fish. Or a cold tire iron.

But what the hell am I saying, expecting Americans to have learned a lesson from their recent disasters and failures? I keep hearing from American friends that somehow "America is going to come to its senses" and "finally learn a lesson" because, hell, "we've lost the war." Wrong.

There's an antidote to learning lessons from harsh reality. Complete mass insane stupidity, combined with utter shamelessness. Kristol has absolutely no shame whatsoever for having led his country down the shithole to pursue his nerdoid imperial fantasies. He's been all over the airwaves lately, looking and talking all confident-like, first calling on America to support Israel's doomed war in Lebanon...and when that war went so well for Israel, Kristol was back bigger than ever, fresh from total defeat, calling for Bush to attack Iran. "Why wait?" he asked. I don't mean that paraphrasingly-like--Kristol actually used the "why wait" argument in an editorial in July. I'll quote it: "For that matter, we might consider countering this act of Iranian aggression with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait?" Yeah, because heck, what's the point of being the most powerful nation in the world if you can't invade Iran on your own time schedule, and not someone else's?

The kicker here is that not only has Kristol NOT been pulled out of his mansion and had his head shaven by angry Americans, but rather, he speaks their language! This is where, unless you're lying to yourself, anyone who's trying to understand America needs to look. Past Kristol, past the editorial offices and think tanks in coastal America, and into its rank, mean, stupid heart. In a poll released earlier this week, Bush's approval rating has soared--SOARED!-- to 44%, the highest in ages. Even more shocking, Americans no longer believe that the war in Iraq was a mistake. The Bertrand Russell theorem applies to us too: we're getting what we deserve.

When I read that poll this past Monday, I exploded in laughter. The absolute, pure gullibility of the American public is without limit, bottomless...Everyone was asking last week "Why do they hate us?" all over again.

What a silly question! I mean, what's not to hate?! I hate us! We hate us! Anyone in his right mind would hate us!

The Republicans have thoroughly skull-****ed America, but the suckers are squealing for more! The denial has reached new, hemorrhage-fever dimensions, exemplified in, for example, a recent US News and World Report cover with an American soldier and the headline: "The Battle For Baghdad: For U.S. Troops, this may be the last chance to head off a full-blown civil war. There's a plan, but will it work?"

Duh, gee George, I dunno if it'll work, doyee! It's only been 3-1/2 years, George. Duh, you think we can pull it off, doyee? Like Joe Montana, huh George? Boy, that's a toughee! Gimme a minute to scratch my balls, George... Doyeee...I'm the American public, and I just need ta scratch my balls, and then I'll give you my opinion... doyeeeee...

I can't help it, suddenly I find Americans not merely contemptible but also funny as hell, I mean if you imagine them as literary characters. Because even in the world of fiction, you couldn't possibly invent a nation of such grotesque, abject suckers if you tried. For one thing, it wouldn't sell. No one would buy it. If the American public were characters in a novel, no editor would let them pass without massive reworking: "Your American public are simply not believable. They're too stupid and credulous and predictable...not to mention completely unlikable...no reader will identify with them! You can only suspend reader belief so much! Fiction has its limits!"

* * *

This is the essence of the Newsweek article, and so many others like it. While annoying, what they really reflect is something much more disturbing (or funny, depending on your tastes): the sharp and savage decline of American power, and with it, America's self-confidence. What's left are festering new complexes.

Indeed, as I said, it's Russia's confidence that galls the most.

http://www.exile.ru/transient/247/lead2.jpg
"On the wider global stage, Putin displays seeming strength and new confidence," the Newsweek article notes. And then there's the "but"--a pretty funny "but," in fact--because the authors claim that Russian confidence is not merely misplaced, but that it is leading to racial violence and could plunge the region into chaos, while at the same time increasing Russia's weakness. I swear I'm not making this kitchen-sink-of-evils up: "However much it resonates with a particular Russian political class, that [confident] rhetoric can itself breed weakness. You see this in the sharp rise of race-related hate crimes in Russia..."

There is no logic from A to B, but then again, there is no logic to A: Bush destroys American power while enriching his plutocrat donors, and so therefore B: the nation supports him and his party over and over again.

Perhaps an even sadder example of America's syphilitic decline comes from the Washington Post's Jim Hoagland. In a column published the same day as the Newsweek issue, he made this incredible, jaw-dropping claim:

"An ambitious American effort to spread democracy into Russia under President Bill Clinton in the 1990s faltered and was stalemated when Putin came to power. But seen from today, it did help create a reference point and toehold for future advances. This should offer some solace to Clinton, and perhaps for President Bush's beleaguered push for democracy in the Middle East as well."

If I go into every reason why Hoagland is talking Holocaust-denial nonsense here, my article will be even more unnecessarily long than it is. So I'll be brief: Russians themselves fought to instill democracy into their country in the late perestroika/early-Yeltsin years. The first huge blow to democracy came when Yeltsin destroyed the opposition parliament with tanks--with full support from newly-elected President Clinton. The next blow to democracy came from the creation of an oligarchy and the mass impoverishment of Russia, all due to economic policies that came straight out of the US Treasury Department. The last big blow came in 1996, when the once-free Russian media was coapted by the pro-government oligarchy. The media in turn was used to support Yeltsin's presidential run that year--which he lost, but which he stole with massive manipulation, with the help and support and cover of the Clinton Administration.

By the time of the economic collapse in 1998, democracy had become known as "****-ocracy," a dirty word and a cruel joke. The Clinton Administration sacrificed every decent value here, starting with the concept of democracy, in order to both enrich their backers on Wall Street and to make sure that the Communists didn't return to power, whether the Russians wanted them or not.

That is America's legacy here.

But we need to feel good about ourselves. That's what Hoagland's soothing message is: "Yes, Russia is entering the darkness of authoritarianism as it slips out of our orbit, but hey, it's not our fault, and moreover, there's a little bit of yearning for democracy left, and that's all thanks to us! So smile, reader! I'm smilin'!"

So this, it seems, is how America is dealing with its horrific case of cognitive dissonance: rewriting the recent past to cast themselves as a force of good and light when in fact we ****ed the whole thing up horribly, relieving what should be a guilty conscience (but isn't--don't be fooled, Americans know only fear, not remorse); and even more desperate attempts to rewrite the unbearable present tense, to deny our own weakness and decline by projecting it on others whom we think SHOULD be weaker. Russia, again, is the fall guy.

Nothing speaks more clearly of the total decline of America than this: Russia going from its former role as punching bag which the Western media would smack around to celebrate its own triumph and superiority...to today's anti-creation, in which every cheap rhetorical weapon is employed to ward off having to face the reality of a resurgent Russia. It's like the old Hollywood adage about success, only now applied at the national level, and it's a lesson we didn't learn: as much as we enjoyed dissing Russia on our way up to hyperpower stardom, today we can't cope with passing by Russia--now ascendant, confident-- as we freefall down to god knows where.

YellowFever
25 Sep 06,, 22:31
"After all, America's wealth was essentially created by slavery and the slave trade. Scholars have traced how the Industrial Revolution was funded directly by capital accumulated slave industry [sic]. . . The American corporate magnates of today aren't derived from a different species than their slave-trading ancestors--they have merely evolved by adapting to different conditions and altering their metaphors with the times."

Mark Ames -Going Postal 2005

"When I look back at America now, I shudder. All those millions of poor sad ****s who spend their lives on the Internet, "meeting" people--they scare me the most. I remember my life those last six months in California. Had I stayed, I might have wound up in chat room number 12 myself, jerking off with one hand, desperately wooing some socially terrified woman with the other. But now that I've been in Russia, where people aren't quite as afraid and alienated from each other, I realize that I didn't HAVE to endure that--the social/sexual scripts I'd been handed in suburban California is one of the bleakest in man's history. Turns out there are several other scripts out there in the global village far superior, with far happier beginnings, middles and endings than the American one."

Mark Ames -The Exile, 2000, p. 134-37

The guy couldn't make it in America so he had to go somewhere else and spend all his time dissing it now...LoL



http://www.exile.ru/archive/by_author/mark_ames.html

joey2
25 Sep 06,, 22:54
Well i dunno bout any kinda propaganda... but Russians aint tht weak as it seems.
definitely USA is right now strongest period. but russians not much technologically behind are catching up economically very very slowly if not near US , close to something thats sustainable.
with huge arms sale , India [another highly developing nation with growth economics being better than chinas "export based"] being a good trusted ally, it'll take some time but i wont be surprised if i see a india-china-russia triad forming in the coming decade.
personally i like russia as a nation, doesnt means i admire communism which was the sole reason for its fall.

and i'll love to see the triad formation , india needs to settle the border disputes and pakistan needs some treatment.pakistan is the only thorn in the friendship with china and india.

it may sound funny but i'm quite sure india and china isnt going in a war anymore within next 30 years.they cant afford it -- both cant.

VovaLee
26 Sep 06,, 09:07
and that do you think this text about?

GO!-ing, Go!ne: Freedom of Speech is Finished
http://www.exile.ru/transient/226/murphy.jpg
By Kim Murphy, Los Angeles Times

MOSCOW -- At a popular pizza joint/night club called "Papa John's," located just down the street from the headquarters of the former KGB, the delivery man places the new issue of the Moscow Times into its usual rack. Only now, there is something missing: Go!, the restaurant and club guide which many people, including this reporter, found indispensable.

Without Go!, many foreigners are essentially reduced to the rank of second-class citizens, stripped of their rights, humiliated, and forced to communicate directly with a culture which is, at its very essence, not American. The canceling of Go! is brutal and counter to Western ideals, but it is not surprising.


This, after all, is Putin's Russia.

Until two weeks go, the newsstand here at Papa John's was guaranteed to have a Go! insert in the Moscow Times every other Thursday. Not that the guide was popular with the powers-that-be. According to sources, for several months President Vladimir V. Putin managed to resist calls by the KGB-backed "siloviki" faction in the Kremlin to have Go! shut down after it had given a poor review to the Mexican restaurant Coyote, which was slammed for not having spicy food, criticism which sent tremors down Red Square and infuriated none other than deputy administration chief Igor Sechin.

Then, without fanfare, the Go! insert suddenly was canceled last week. The disappearance of the nightlife guide comes on the heels of its controversial critical review of the French-Russian restaurant Brasserie Pourboire. And, significantly, the Brasserie Pourboire is located just six kilometers away from the memorial on Red Square commemorating the battle of Stalingrad which names the word "Stalingrad" on its plaque. Proof that something dark and evil is afoot.

"Clearly, we are in a situation today that is at least as bad as the height of Stalin's Terror in 1937," commented Yulia Latynina, a completely objective journalist who just happens to promote everything Mikhail Khodorkovsky stands for through no financial incentive whatsoever. "Only there is one difference: When Stalin's terror happened, people then didn't have the luxury to compare it to Putin's reign of terror. I envy those people."

Some observers see an even darker, more ominous sign. "Even Stalin wouldn't have closed down Go!" commented liberal politician Irina Khakamada.

Indeed, as winter sets in, there is a palpable terror spreading throughout the capital. People can be seen suppressing their screams of total fear as they drive their cars or walk the streets. Indeed they are so terrified that they completely mask their fear by not even showing fear, but rather, by pretending, as best as they can, to lead normal lives. But not everyone is buying that.

As one pro-Western politician who asked to remain anonymous in order to give this story an increasing sense of urgency commented, "It is no exaggeration to say that what is going on today makes Stalin's time look like Disneyland." He pointed to the fact that already, at least 40 million Russians have been shot or worked to death in Gulags just in the past three weeks alone.

"If this keeps up, every single Russian will have been shot and killed four times over in the same period it took Stalin to kill one thirtieth of the population over a much longer period of time," he said. "And remember, they just shut down Go! Even Stalin wouldn't have done that."

While it is true that these mass shootings haven't started yet, it doesn't mean that they won't start, and once they do, that the mass killings will happen at a much more terrible rate than during Stalin's time. "What is incredible is that bodies will have to be dug up, tried, and shot again, several times over," said the pro-Western liberal. "Now I ask you, did Stalin execute bullet-riddled corpses? Of course not! And neither did he shut down Go!"

Skeptics can no longer ignore this harsh truth. And nowhere is this brought home more clearly than at the magazine rack at Papa John's, which is located down the street from the Lubyanka headquarters of the former KGB. Literally a five minute walk. The link is too powerful to miss.

"People understand what's going on here," said Khakamada. "They see LifeStyle gone after a bad review. They see Go! disappear. And now, we hear that the American Cinema is closing down. The message is clear: 'Foreigners, get out of Russia now. And if you don't, we will shoot and kill every single one of you, and then we will burn your corpses in a large pagan orgy of death and celebration, with vodka, bears, and balalaikas. We will then launch our nuclear missiles against the West, and we will set our timers to keep firing every missile long after we ourselves have died, with the aim of wiping out all carbon-based life forms on this planet.' Today, Go! is canceled. Tomorrow, the world will be canceled."

Kim "Bigfoot" Murphy contributed this harrowing article. She is currently at work on a book investigating the whereabouts of the Yeti, which she believes is located in a Beslan widow's house.

YellowFever
26 Sep 06,, 09:17
I think it's about some stupid american reporter with too much time in her hands.

VovaLee
26 Sep 06,, 09:54
I think it's about some stupid american reporter with too much time in her hands.

I read a lot of foreign press every day.
The press for foreigner living into Russia are very distinguish from press for people wich living in the rest countries.
The propaganda have an effect if you can't to verify it.

Lunatock
26 Sep 06,, 22:34
I think it's about some stupid american reporter with too much time in her hands.


If you mean the first one you forgot a venomous comment about the pic of that Soldier and the Stryker he's trying to get out of both being on fire.

It's a few seconds past the time for whoever snapped that pic to put the camera down and make himself usefull. :mad:

HistoricalDavid
26 Sep 06,, 22:38
Hm, it was a British soldier trying to get out of a Warrior after it was petrol-bombed.

Tronic
27 Sep 06,, 00:25
it'll take some time but i wont be surprised if i see a india-china-russia triad forming in the coming decade.
it'll never happen.... Russia-India can still be possible.... India-China-Russia... errrmm... It'll never happen because India-China can never happen...

joey2
27 Sep 06,, 00:53
it'll happen if pakistan gets off rom china .. pakistan is acting like a catalyst in the degradation of our relationship.
india china cant afford a war we all know neither we can disoute over silly small issues.

Tronic
27 Sep 06,, 02:51
it'll happen if pakistan gets off rom china .. pakistan is acting like a catalyst in the degradation of our relationship.
india china cant afford a war we all know neither we can disoute over silly small issues.
even if China stops supporting Pak, India-China can still never happen... you're just re-talking Nehru's India-Chin Bhai Bhai.... When we are competing with China on every level, no way can we be "good friends"... especially with China trying to restrain India to domestic affairs only....

texasjohn
27 Sep 06,, 04:57
even if China stops supporting Pak, India-China can still never happen... you're just re-talking Nehru's India-Chin Bhai Bhai.... When we are competing with China on every level, no way can we be "good friends"... especially with China trying to restrain India to domestic affairs only....

The reason Indo-China friendship ( genuine) won't happen is because they want to use Pakistan as a "cat's paw" to keep India tied down. That's why Pakistan has Chinese nuclear designs and N. Korean missiles ( another proxy of China).

It's a stupid long term strategy, cause when you lose your " paw" you now have a pissed off neighbor, who will always remember what you did, and not trust you. You can't wish your neighbors away.:rolleyes:

Archer
27 Sep 06,, 15:52
That article does make some valid points about Putin being good for Russia but its so full of too clever by half polemic that it overdoes it, and fails to provide more telling data. But its from exile.ru, which is the habitat of the famed war nerd, so that should have been expected.

Having said that, its still unclear what Russias long term economic future is going to be like. With the rise of China and India, is Russia doing more to reinvent its economy and put it on a sustainable footing, rather than just a specific export oriented military industry, or is it going to continue to rely on its strategic metals and minerals which it is busy using up like there is no tomorrow?

Tronic
27 Sep 06,, 16:51
The reason Indo-China friendship ( genuine) won't happen is because they want to use Pakistan as a "cat's paw" to keep India tied down. That's why Pakistan has Chinese nuclear designs and N. Korean missiles ( another proxy of China).

It's a stupid long term strategy, cause when you lose your " paw" you now have a pissed off neighbor, who will always remember what you did, and not trust you. You can't wish your neighbors away.:rolleyes:
right... Pakistan is merely a Chinese puppet to tie down India.... and that is what the Chinese plan is... to put as much burden on the other rising Asian economy as they possibly can so China alone can arrive at the international level undisputed by any other Asian country.... that is why India-China friendship can never happen... I agree with you... and its not only Pakistan, but China is trying to rake up other Indian neighbours too... most notably Burma and Bangladesh now... and also we can already see the Chinese trying to get a foothold in Sri Lanka...

VovaLee
27 Sep 06,, 18:34
But its from exile.ru, which is the habitat of the famed war nerd, so that should have been expected
The press for foreign citizenry in Russia:
http://www.themoscowtimes.com
http://www.russiajournal.com
http://www.exile.ru
http://www.russiaprofile.org

highsea
27 Sep 06,, 22:03
VovaLee, I don't think you'll get a rise out of anyone here for those articles. Ames is pretty much considered an idiot. That article is just more of the same wrt his moonbatty rants.

I don't think anyone can seriously say America has "Putin envy", lol.

Dreadnought
04 Oct 06,, 17:35
VovaLee, I don't think you'll get a rise out of anyone here for those articles. Ames is pretty much considered an idiot. That article is just more of the same wrt his moonbatty rants.

I don't think anyone can seriously say America has "Putin envy", lol.

I dont think I can keep a straight face without laughing while discussing Putin envy. Yeah I want to live in that country...NOT!:biggrin: I could think of atleast 10 other countries I would rather live in then Russia. But no need I live in the BEST!:tongue: The only way Russia will ever need us again is if we are needed to intervene between them and Georgia or if they need some military hardware to copy...LMAO

VovaLee
04 Oct 06,, 18:37
I dont think I can keep a straight face without laughing while discussing Putin envy. Yeah I want to live in that country...NOT!:biggrin: I could think of atleast 10 other countries I would rather live in then Russia. But no need I live in the BEST!:tongue: The only way Russia will ever need us again is if we are needed to intervene between them and Georgia or if they need some military hardware to copy...LMAO
We can solve the Georgian problem without USA. :biggrin:
And USA can't to prevent to us.

But I agree with highsea, this text author is very "original" person.

Dreadnought
04 Oct 06,, 19:19
We can solve the Georgian problem without USA. :biggrin:
And USA can't to prevent to us.

But I agree with highsea, this text author is very "original" person.

The only way is by cutting them off from the money their families that work in Russia provides and hitting them with sanctions. God forbid democracy take root people just might open their eyes and realize how much it sucks to live in Russia's shadow. I do hope they join Nato amoung the other countries that want better for themselves reason being not just for their democracy from Russia but also for being a thorn in the U.N. over Iran and NK you know the countries you sell arms to that threaten their neighbors. And we'll be there to help in one way or another;)

VovaLee
04 Oct 06,, 19:41
The only way is by cutting them off from the money their families that work in Russia provides and hitting them with sanctions. God forbid democracy take root people just might open their eyes and realize how much it sucks to live in Russia's shadow. I do hope they join Nato amoung the other countries that want better for themselves reason being not just for their democracy from Russia but also for being a thorn in the U.N. over Iran and NK you know the countries you sell arms to that threaten their neighbors. And we'll be there to help in one way or another;)
Then you should to give billions dollars to Georgia.
But Georgia wanna to join to NATO now and Russia loses nothing by economic sanctions. ;)

Dreadnought
04 Oct 06,, 19:59
Then you should give billions dollars to Georgia.
But Georgia wanna to join to NATO now and Russia loses nothing by economic sanctions. ;)

True, The US has given billions to nations for the very same reason. Russia doesnt loose anything by sanctions. But in the big picture it looses part of its own back yard to Democracy and if it joins NATO then you may be looking at a NATO base there as well. So now who looses?:biggrin:

SRB
04 Oct 06,, 20:56
So you are talking about some NATO-Russia war?

I dont see that Georgians live much better today than before revolution.
USA give large amount of money for weapons but not too much for people.
Also Georgian police arrest couple of oposition leaders couple of weeks before, is it democracy?
And year earlier major opponent to Gerogian president was found dead in his firend flat,very strange death.

VovaLee
04 Oct 06,, 20:58
True, The US has given billions to nations for the very same reason. Russia doesnt loose anything by sanctions. But in the big picture it looses part of its own back yard to Democracy and if it joins NATO then you may be looking at a NATO base there as well. So now who looses?:biggrin:
Heh... georgian president mr Saakashvili is so big democrat... :biggrin:
He has win an election with 96,7% rating.
He and they executive administration draw salary from USA budget.
He arrests the oppositions.
And He have enrapture from Stalin and Beria.
...
:rolleyes:

SRB
04 Oct 06,, 21:02
Heh... georgian president mr Saakashvili is so big democrat... :biggrin:
He has win an election with 96,7% rating.
He and they executive administration draw salary from USA budget.
He arrests the oppositions.
And He have enrapture from Stalin and Beria.
...
:rolleyes:
Same thing with that Uzbekistan president he was US ally even they knew that he cook two oposition men.

canoe
04 Oct 06,, 22:26
So you are talking about some NATO-Russia war?

I dont see that Georgians live much better today than before revolution.
USA give large amount of money for weapons but not too much for people.
Also Georgian police arrest couple of oposition leaders couple of weeks before, is it democracy?
And year earlier major opponent to Gerogian president was found dead in his firend flat,very strange death.

To be fair the issues your describing are fairly common across the Russia and the formor Warsaw countries.

Virtually all democractic countries that exist today have had a period where they had to struggle and find a way to overcome corruption. The U.S has a huge issue with the Mafia back in the 40's.

That said a certain level of corruption is just a reality in most democractic societies its just a matter of keeping it to a minimum and under control. Most of that eventually comes with having free press, a transparent government and strong policing.

That way someone is always watching someone else, makes it tough to get away with anything.

Dreadnought
05 Oct 06,, 14:25
So you are talking about some NATO-Russia war?

I dont see that Georgians live much better today than before revolution.
USA give large amount of money for weapons but not too much for people.
Also Georgian police arrest couple of oposition leaders couple of weeks before, is it democracy?
And year earlier major opponent to Gerogian president was found dead in his firend flat,very strange death.

War? No not at all. We were speaking about how upset Putin is over Georgia wanting to join Nato. In addition to the sanctions they are facing from Russia for attempting to break away. If Georgia were to join NATO then who knows conditions may get much better given the fact of how many other nations belong to it this would help Georgia along its way to becoming better then what the past has been. In addition we discussed that if they do join NATO then Russia may be looking at a NATO base somewhere close by but nothing is for certain as of now and were positive Russia would be pissed to say the least if NATO turned up in their back yard.

Dreadnought
05 Oct 06,, 16:08
This is what we were discussing:

Russia objects to Nato expansion

Lavrov has linked the tension with Georgia to Nato influence
Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, has told Europe's democracy watchdog that there is no reason for Nato to expand further towards Russia.
At the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, Mr Lavrov said that Russia could not physically prevent Nato expanding.

He said Nato's steady enlargement perpetuated an old "bloc" approach to resolving international problems.

Nato has extended to the Russian border since it admitted Poland and the Baltic states in 2004.

Let's not erect new dividing lines

Sergey Lavrov
Russian foreign minister

"There are so many other ways to solve common security issues," Mr Lavrov said after addressing the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

"Let's not erect new dividing lines," he added.

Tensions

Georgia's stated aim of joining Nato in 2008 is a major cause for concern for Russia and part of the current tension between Russia and Georgia, correspondents say.

In July, US President George Bush voiced his support for Georgia's bid to become a Nato member, when he met Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili in Washington.

Mr Lavrov has implied there is a link between the US and Nato and Georgia's recent detention of four Russian army officers on accusations of spying.

Although the four have been released, Russia has imposed sanctions on Georgia.

"The root cause of the situation is the consistent connivance on the part of some countries, which makes it possible for Georgia to pursue an anti-Russian policy," he said in Strasbourg.

Russia is also unhappy that it is official Ukrainian policy to seek Nato membership.

However, Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich said in Brussels last month that there was no public support for making the issue a priority.

VovaLee
05 Oct 06,, 18:35
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2006/10/05/001.html
Putin Says Russia Won't Be Bullied
By Anastasia Lebedev and Anatoly Medetsky
Staff Writers
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/photos/large/2006_10/2006_10_05/market_2.jpg
President Vladimir Putin issued a stern warning to the world Wednesday not to interfere in Russia's increasingly heated conflict with Georgia or try to force Moscow to back down.

"I would not advise anyone to talk with Russia in the language of provocation and blackmail," Putin said in a meeting with State Duma leaders.

Underscoring the Kremlin's tough stance against Georgia, the president called for measures to curb illegal migration.

The president's comments came on the same day that Georgia reiterated its threat to block Russia's entry to the World Trade Organization.

Roman Gotsiridze, the president of Georgia's National Bank, said Georgia, a WTO member, would oppose Russian entry to the trade group until Russia lifted its economic sanctions on its neighbor to the south. Earlier this year, Russia banned Georgian wine and mineral water.

"These sanctions are the behavior of an uncivilized country, and it is hard to imagine that a country that imposes a blockade on its neighbor is a member of the Group of Eight," Gotsiridze said, Reuters reported.

He said Russia's recent moves to cut ties with Georgia would neither weaken the Georgian lari nor spur inflation.

The showdown between Moscow and Tbilisi was sparked by Georgia's arrest last Thursday of four Russian military officers accused of spying. While Georgia released the officers Monday, that did not stop Russia from suspending all transportation and postal links with the country the following day.

As Russian authorities appeared to be mobilizing for a protracted standoff, the Duma voiced strong support Wednesday for the Kremlin.

In a resolution that passed 418-1, with one member abstaining, deputies declared that the measures taken by Russia so far were justified and that, if Georgia did anything to jeopardize regional stability, "other, more severe measures" would be acceptable.

The Duma statement went on to say that Georgia's actions did not serve the interests of the Georgian people.

The deputies, most of whom have backed bills expected to hurt opposition parties in next year's parliamentary elections in Russia, also lashed out at Georgian authorities for arresting opposition leaders in Georgia, calling the arrests "anti-democratic."

And they lambasted what was portrayed as Georgia's attempt to provoke Russian peacekeepers in the Georgian breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Putin thanked Duma leaders for backing the government's effort to protect "the rights, dignity and lives of our citizens abroad." In a sign of more legislative measures to come, Putin also called for amendments to laws granting immigrants the right to hold jobs or conduct business in Russia.

The Russian Navy, meanwhile, held exercises Wednesday in the Black Sea, prompting Georgia to protest the maneuvers.

And authorities in Moscow ratcheted up pressure on Georgian nationals and Georgian-owned businesses, evicting families from their homes, targeting illegal migrants, closing a major casino and arresting Georgians suspected of ties to organized crime.

The Golden Palace casino was owned by the same Georgian mafia bosses who ran the Kristall casino, which was raided Tuesday, the Interior Ministry's Economic Security Department said, Interfax reported.

The Interior Ministry also reported Wednesday clamping down on a gang of 20 Georgians and Abkhazians suspected of contract murders, blackmail and real estate scams. And the ministry said a gang of Georgian car thieves had been apprehended in the Oryol region.

Filipp Zolotnitsky, a spokesman for the Moscow police department's economic crimes division, said two Georgian restaurants were being investigated for possible wrongdoing.

Suggesting that the investigations had nothing to do with the ongoing conflict, Zolotnitsky said other Georgian restaurants had been checked before; so, too, he said, had Japanese restaurants. But he refused to say directly whether the inquiries were tied to the showdown.

Georgians working at marketplaces and construction sites have been subjected to increased harassment by police in the past few days, national newspapers reported.

Those reports were backed up by a Georgian florist near Belorussky Station. The florist, who would only give her first name, Nino, said she had heard from friends and relatives who work at open-air markets of police harassment. She added that she expected police to raid vendors' stalls near Belorussky in the near future.

And two Georgian women selling tea and coffee at Timiryazevsky market said they had heard of other raids and detentions of Georgians working at the Cherkizovsky and Lianozovsky markets. The women, who would only give their first names, Marina and Yekaterina, for fear of being deported, added that they had not been harassed themselves.

Also on Wednesday, the Georgian professional arm wrestler Georgy Kvichiani was killed by skinheads in Moscow, Georgian media reported. The reports remain unconfirmed.

"The state is legitimizing xenophobia and discrimination," said Galina Kozhevnikova, deputy head of the Sova Center, which monitors hate crimes.

Kozhevnikova predicted an eruption in the number of assaults on natives of the Caucasus.

Dreadnought
05 Oct 06,, 19:14
My friend its pretty bad when you have to use scare tactics against your own people because they wish to have something better out of life for themselves. Russia just proved its own ignorance to human rights pure and simple.:rolleyes:

Dreadnought
05 Oct 06,, 19:35
With the way that Russia blocks UN sanctions against Iran and North Korea because of their own interests I think there going to find it diffacult for the rest of the world to turn a blind eye to them terrorizing their own people.;) We shall see.

VovaLee
05 Oct 06,, 19:48
With the way that Russia blocks UN sanctions against Iran and North Korea because of their own interests I think there going to find it diffacult for the rest of the world to turn a blind eye to them terrorizing their own people.;) We shall see.
But Iran and NK don't wanna joint to NATO.

Dreadnought
05 Oct 06,, 20:07
But Iran and NK don't wanna joint to NATO.

Yes and both threaten their neighbors with destruction and nuclear arms. As well as withold the very basic rights every single human is born with. Kim cant live forever. And Amje is only a puppet to the religious immams with a big mouth for taunting his own destruction nothing more nothing less.

I think you will find that come the bottom line the nuclear dispute with both countries will be resolved one way or another with or without the UN. No matter what Russia has to say about it.;)

VovaLee
05 Oct 06,, 20:22
Yes and both threaten their neighbors with destruction and nuclear arms. As well as withold the very basic rights every single human is born with. Kim cant live forever. And Amje is only a puppet to the religious immams with a big mouth for taunting his own destruction nothing more nothing less.

I think you will find that come the bottom line the nuclear dispute with both countries will be resolved one way or another with or without the UN. No matter what Russia has to say about it.;)
After wars in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Irak any country which have some problems with US wanna have nuclear arms.
They belive that nuclear arms can provide safety.

Alex_Ivanov
05 Oct 06,, 23:02
the nuclear dispute with both countries will be resolved one way or another with or without the UN. No matter what Russia has to say about it.;)

We block sanctions, but other ways are open. I'd say more. I've got an impression that Russia blocks sanctions just to provoke "another" actions. I'm sure Russia in case of war won't even try to say something. In fact such resolving, for example, of Iran nuclear crisis, without UN, match our interests.
1. Iran losts possibility to build a-bomb. Nobody in right mind can say Iran with a-bomb isn't a headache for us. Good thing #1.
2. Iran ater war mines and sells less oil/gas. When one more major player on oil market is out of game, Russia is one step closer to monopoly, oil price is up and we get additional time to develop and diversify our economy. Good thing #2.
3. US has one more region to care about, so their possibility to interfere in other areas is further limited. Good thing #3.

And why should we protest? Come on, guys, bomb immams into stone age! :)

Ironduke
07 Oct 06,, 00:26
Well, Russia did pay off its formerly enormous foreign debt on August 21.

VovaLee
07 Oct 06,, 10:19
Well, Russia did pay off its formerly enormous foreign debt on August 21.
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook
USA
Public debt:
64.7% of GDP (2005 est.)

RUSSIA
Public debt:
12.9% of GDP (2005 est.)

But you have GDP $12,36 trillion, we have GDP $1.589 trillion only.

Ironduke
04 Dec 06,, 23:52
One thing to keep in mind is that deficit spending is not altogether a bad thing.

For example, if an economy is in recession, and because of reduced revenues the government cuts spending to avoid debt, the economy will slide further into recession, and the cycle can be quite disastrous if continued.

gunnut
05 Dec 06,, 20:28
America sucks, blah blah blah, Bush is evil, blah blah blah...

Did I sum up what the guy was saying? It was way too long and I just didn't want to spent more time on the same drivel from the left that I already know.

dalem
05 Dec 06,, 22:42
America sucks, blah blah blah, Bush is evil, blah blah blah...

Did I sum up what the guy was saying? It was way too long and I just didn't want to spent more time on the same drivel from the left that I already know.

Yeah, a friend of mine recently sent me some Alternet thingie about Bush. I got about 1 sentence into it before I stopped. Same garbage, same ignorant and pointless vitriol. When I told her I wasn't going to read it I think I surprised her a little. I mean, what - have I been under a rock for the last 6 years and somehow missed how Bushitler & Co. are evil and stupid and clever and tricky and dumb and all the rest, according to the Lefty nutbags? Sheesh.

-dale

glyn
06 Dec 06,, 10:15
Flag waving from either side impresses me not one jot.

YellowFever
11 Dec 06,, 06:39
Flag waving from either side impresses me not one jot.

The alternative is losing your national identity, which europe seems to want so much.
C'mon glyn, flaging waving can be a good thing...umm if one does not get carried away with it.


Or are you really suggesting that america has "Putin-envy"? :)

glyn
11 Dec 06,, 19:06
The alternative is losing your national identity, which europe seems to want so much.


Citizens of Europe can keep their national identity whilst still being part of Europe - in much the same way as a Texan (for example) can feel American.

C'mon glyn, flaging waving can be a good thing...umm if one does not get carried away with it.

True, a gentle flutter will suffice for me. I was actually referring to some of the posts that were strong on flag waving, but weaker on debating skills.


Or are you really suggesting that america has "Putin-envy"? :)

Ha ha! :biggrin:

Ruskiy
11 Dec 06,, 20:45
True, The US has given billions to nations for the very same reason. Russia doesnt loose anything by sanctions. But in the big picture it looses part of its own back yard to Democracy and if it joins NATO then you may be looking at a NATO base there as well. So now who looses?:biggrin:

Russia is not loosing anyting, its even benefits: if war is going on they don't have to go far to destroy NATO units.

Dreadnought
19 Dec 06,, 18:30
Russia is not loosing anyting, its even benefits: if war is going on they don't have to go far to destroy NATO units.

Thats alot easier said then done my friend.;)

Fortudinae
19 Dec 06,, 21:34
Peter the Great said Russia's future laid with the West.

Sufficient while Sweden was the The Nazi of the Age. However no strategy is good forever.
Russia has all it needs in Siberia, but it isn't much use without WARM WATER PORTS.
Russia also has all China needs in Siberia.
Of course the Bear is looking at the Indian Ocean (and has for quite some time) so India-Pakistan -Afghanistan-Iran figure greatly in the recipe.
Then all of a sudden China has moon-eyes for the Burmese. What slick rascals.
The major player in that league is India, so don't count on any long-term winning streak, Russia and China.
Of course there is the oil - trying to corner the world market requires control of the Indian Ocean.
Of course no strategy is good forever, and especially here.
The US has a 1000 year supply of coal; when some greedy player runs the price of oil up to where coal gasification becomes cost effective, then the Indian Ocean gambit (and all who have invested their future in it) is in the toilet.
As for the author of the said article, brevity isn't just the soul of wit.