Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh wait Ruth - so it's only America that's allowed to carry out the "subversive strategy" of setting the citizens of certain countries against its governments?
Because I remember very well "The Voice of America" ( and other "voices") during Soviet times, broadcasting whatever they were broadcasting.
What were they doing back then, if not "carrying out a subversive strategy?"
When it comes to Transdnistria, you are apparently not aware that Russians started flocking to that area supporting the *separatists* only after they saw the TRUCKS FULL OF MINGLED, DEAD BODIES WITH CLEAR SIGNS OF TORTURE. ( Until then, Russians were pretty much oblivious to the whole situation in Moldova, what was going on there.)
You are not aware apparently what the local nazi are capable of, be they of Ukrainian or Moldavian variety, and the glorious American media will never tell you about such things. As much as it never told about the bombing of the Eastern Ukraine, and over 3,000 dead civilians. These people simply don't matter, they are non-existent, since they were standing on the way of "freedom and democracy" brought in the area with the help of the US.
But if Russians kill anyone, anywhere ( as it was a case in Ossessia) - the howling will go up to heaven - "how dare."
So if Russians in Latvia want to listen to Russian channels, I'd say let them listen, because otherwise it IS a VIOLATION of the Freedom of speech, as it is a clear case in Ukraine, with the closing of those three "pro-Russian TV channels." As much as the latest attempts of Zelensky government to outlaw the party that owns these channels. And why? Because this particular "pro-Russian party" is gaining more popularity than Zelensky and his stooges.
So why not just outlaw your political opponents and call it a day, all while maintaining the "freedom and democracy" window sign?
My opinion is such, that when the government is doing the best to its knowledge for the people living in its country, it has NOTHING TO FEAR from any competition.
RT is not a threat for Germany or France for example, as much as Putin is coming up with "alternative outlook."
Likewise, Russian channels shouldn't be a problem in Ukraine or Moldavia, where happy Ukrainian/Moldavian citizens should say "*** all you want Mr. Putin, we know how much happier we are in our free and democratic states, not to mention that our standards of living are so much higher than in Russia."
But since it's clearly not a case, I'd say there is a reason why Russian broadcasting becomes dangerous for Ukraine/Latvia and such.
Sure.
But then, again, according to Western standards Russia is not a "democratic state," so the absence of the "freedom of speech" is expected there.
But Latvia/Ukraine ( according to the West) ARE the "free and democratic" countries.
So why would "free and democratic countries" employ the same tactics as the "dictatorial" ones, and still retain that "freedom and democracy" label?
Oh, I remember now - you've said "they have the right to protect themselves."
And "protection" means removing anything that's inconvenient for the sitting government.
Like, say, Navalny going to prison in Russia?
Isn't it the very protection that Russian government employs to "protect itself" from the "subversive strategy of the West?"
So how does it work exactly, who/what has the right to "protect itself" and who does not?
Inquiring minds want to know.
A violation of what freedom of speech? Does Latvia guarantee its citizens and foreign broadcasters freedom of speech? If it does, then perhaps Latvia is taking the wrong approach. A more effective strategy might be to turn their tax authorities on to the Russian broadcasting company, to see if any interesting facts might be found, speaking of giving Moscow a taste of its own medicine.
With the underlined, to whom are you referring? Moscow? The US? Latvia? Cuba? All of the above and more? It's not clear.
Don't drag me into the Ukraine issue. I didn't say anything about Ukraine, and you may have noticed my conspicuous absence from all the Ukraine threads here. I refuse to touch that mine field of a topic.
What does Navalny have to do with the West? Is everyone and anyone who disagrees with the Czar automatically an agent of the West? Sorry, I haven't followed Navalny, except to read an article or two recently. In fact, I was surprised there wasn't a thread about him here; I was hoping to learn a bit about him, but maybe I missed the discussion.
What happened in Ossetia? Which Ossetia? There seem to be two. Do you mean back when the one inside Georgia claimed independence? (Another good example of "someone" fomenting separatism, now that you bring it up.) Which one did the Russians kill people in? North? South? Both? I'm not following you. Sorry, I guess it was too long ago; I don't remember the details. I must be getting old.
Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 02-23-2021 at 01:12 PM..
Correct, part of Russia's "hybrid war" strategy is to abuse Western norms protecting speech and insert its propaganda into anywhere it can, while literally killing off any dissent inside Russia itself. Today a new video was released of torturing Russians in prisons there. Most Russians are okay with it, they like to see pain and suffering so they don't feel alone in their misery.
Correct, and that's why the "Western norms" become very questionable, what they identify as "freedom and democracy" in one case, and what becomes "crimes against humanity" or "dictatorship" in the other.
It looks ( increasingly so,) that whatever serves specifically American geopolitical interests ( not even the whole entire "West"), determines what definition is going to be given in every specific case.
For example, how should we identify the order given by American embassy in Kiev, forbidding the usage of Russian vaccine in Ukraine? (A pretty successful vaccine at that, that even some American diplomats in Moscow requested for themselves.)
And that's during the times, when Ukrainians are not able to receive any "Western-made" vaccine.
Is it
A violation of what freedom of speech? Does Latvia guarantee its citizens and foreign broadcasters freedom of speech? If it does, then perhaps Latvia is taking the wrong approach. A more effective strategy might be to turn their tax authorities on to the Russian broadcasting company, to see if any interesting facts might be found, speaking of giving Moscow a taste of its own medicine.
So why didn't they do it?
Quote:
With the underlined, to whom are you referring? Moscow? The US? Latvia? Cuba? All of the above and more? It's not clear.
Latvia in this case.
Quote:
Don't drag me into the Ukraine issue.I didn't say anything about Ukraine, and you may have noticed my conspicuous absence from all the Ukraine threads here. I refuse to touch that mine field of a topic.
And why not?
Ukraine is the epitome of it all, the ultimate place where the "undercurrents" that are not as visible in other places ( Moldova, Latvia,) popped on a surface.
Quote:
What does Navalny have to do with the West?
Anything and everything.
He is the only "opposition" that "the West" recognizes. ( How many articles have you seen on Grudinin who run against Putin in presidential elections? Or on Udaltzov ( in and out of jail) or Platoshkin ( currently in jail?) Or on Furgal after all?
None.
But Navalny happened to be the one and only person doing his studies in the US ( and so is his daughter.)
Quote:
Is everyone and anyone who disagrees with the Czar automatically an agent of the West?
Well everyone who disagrees with the czar Zelensky is automatically a "Russian operative" - these tactics works over there, in Ukraine, and applauded in the US.
While in Russia "everyone who disagrees with the Czar" actually belong to two different categories; they are either "the agents of the West" ( since they serve Western interests,) OR they come from the "left" and they don't serve Western interests.
Quote:
Sorry, I haven't followed Navalny, except to read an article or two recently. In fact, I was surprised there wasn't a thread about him here; I was hoping to learn a bit about him, but maybe I missed the discussion.
Oh I'm sure there is a thread about him somewhere here.
Quote:
What happened in Ossetia? Which Ossetia? There seem to be two. Do you mean back when the one inside Georgia claimed independence? (Another good example of "someone" fomenting separatism, now that you bring it up.)
Yes that one.
And why wouldn't Russians encourage separatism, when Americans took over Georgia and threatened Russian gas/oil pipes that were going through those territories?
Of course when given the chance, they encouraged the Ossetians to demand independence, because this protected Russian national interests as well. With other words, it was mutually beneficial arrangement for both, so why would Russians not go for it?
Quote:
Which one did the Russians kill people in? North? South? Both? I'm not following you. Sorry, I guess it was too long ago; I don't remember the details. I must be getting old.
Oh they were accused of attacking Georgians first, when in reality it was the other way around - the Georgians attacked the Ossetians and Russian peacekeepers had to step in.
BY NOW the truth came out and it has been acknowledged that it was not Russia that started the war, but Georgia actually. ( In UN or EU - don't remember now, where the official acknowledgement came from, but someone here has the link I'm sure - it was posted before.)
But back then, in 2008 "Russia's aggression" was all the rage.
American media didn't want to look at the fine print of what REALLY happened; it wouldn't have any of it.
Since you're all so concerned about Ukraine's vaccines you might want to understand they did receive their first AZ vaccines today.
Can you be more specific DKM - how many exactly?
How many are more to come, when, from where and so on?
What happened to those money sent for Chinese vaccine?
And where is the Indian one ( while we are at that) ?
No I am not particularly concerned about the "Ukrainian vaccine" - it's a just an example, a long list of grievances of people that ended up in the situation that they ended up in, not because they asked for it, but because someone somewhere made a decision to turn Ukraine into anti-Russian project.
It is sort of like me ending up ( as millions of faceless, nameless Russians) in the midst of the post-Soviet Russia with crooks in charge, that shook hands with "American advisers," promoting "liberal economy."
Not because I asked for it, but because someone somewhere made a decision that that's what should happen, and I'd be on the receiving end of it, taking all the brunt.
And god forbids I'd be there alone with a child at that point, relying on my average soviet salary and regular soviet security net - daycares, schools with extended hours and so on.
Because all of it was gone in a day, with nothing to replace it, in order to soften the blow.
The new "liberal economy" most likely wouldn't have any use for me, like probably for that mother that hung herself in front of her four year old son, because she didn't have heart to place him in the orphanage most likely. ( That's the kind of stories American families heard from their newly adopted children from Russia.)
But by some strange twist of fate, I found myself on the other side of the border, in the different part of the world with a different set of rules, from which I still could observe what was happening over THERE, behind that border line.
I didn't forget for a moment though, what it feels like to be one of those "faceless, nameless Russians," ( or Ukrainians for this matter,) that didn't ask for all the misery they've been put through, yet now at the same time I could see where all the decisions have been made ( and how) to affect them.
Russia's government is so clearly failing its people its just sad for them to get on here and act like its the greatest thing in the world. Poverty, death, abusing prisoners, using chemical weapons on political opponents, fomenting violence in former colonies, etc.... sad messed up place. Can't blame it all on Putin. I know some very smart people who recently came here from Moscow to flee corrupt thugs trying to steal their business. Russia should not be chasing out the smart people like that.
What's the point of this one? This doesn't look like a "transformed" city; this looks like the same old Soviet-era urban landscape, with the exception that this one has a Hilton hotel. Big deal. Putting some kind of techno-jazz music to it isn't going to fool anyone.
I just put it up because of its significance and it's a subject I am currently studying in depth. I'm quite sure you know it used to be called Stalingrad. It's because at this place the course of European history was changed and it was changed by the Russians.
The more I study things like this and all the new information that comes out tells me a lot. We have been lied too. There is so much distortion in western writings you will find it hard to get an accurate picture of what really happened.
Example. This scene from the movie Enemy At The Gates is a lie.
Now take a look at this. It's an extensive documentary about the battle of Stalingrad. This covers the D-Day experience they had on the Volga. He also goes into what is wrong with that scene and how it was deliberately distorted.
Men were NOT sent into battle without weapons in Stalingrad. They sometimes lacked certain equipment but they were not expected to fight with nothing. To do so was utterly pointless. Soldiers whom lost their weapons in the water because their barges were sunk and had to swim were given rifles or sidearms and/or grenades before they went up the bank to the city.
Anthony Beevor also tells a lie about this battle. 13,000 Soviet soldiers were killed for cowardice, retreating without orders. Bull****. In a battle where the Russians were outnumbered sometimes 1.5 to 2 or even 3 to one they needed every man they could get. In September the Germans had as many as 70,000 combat troops in or close to that city. The Russians had 30,000 in city's ruins.
When a Russian soldier ran he was collected up and recycled if he was fit to fight. There's sources that say there were executions but they range from a mere 300 total to around 1200 according to documents. Unverified as of today. There were instances of officers shooting individuals and vice versa too.
I put that video also because Volgograd has changed in the last 10 years. And since it's even one of the poorest cities in Russia that says a lot. It's in for some real big changes too.
By reading your posts Ruth it seems that you're behind on what has been going on.
It sounds like "somebody" in Moscow isn't happy getting a taste of his own medicine. Latvia has the right to protect itself.
Then, I think, Russia should prohibit broadcasting on its territory to such TV channels as BBC, CNN, DW... They also have an anti-Russian orientation. Russia has the right to protect itself. Isn't it?
Men were NOT sent into battle without weapons in Stalingrad. They sometimes lacked certain equipment but they were not expected to fight with nothing. To do so was utterly pointless. Soldiers whom lost their weapons in the water because their barges were sunk and had to swim were given rifles or sidearms and/or grenades before they went up the bank to the city.
Oh I see..
This is taken straight from the different era; namely - from the WWI.
That's when the Russian soldiers were often sent in the battle without any ammunition, empty-handed, with an order "to get a rifle from the enemies."
But this didn't take place during "horrid Soviet times" - oh no,- but during "free and democratic Tzarist times."
And this might explain (at least partially,) why Russian soldiers were leaving "Western front" in droves, willing to join the Soviet Socialist Revolution, even if they've got their rifles after all, and were successful during that "Brusilov offensive."
So correct fact, wrong year.
May be that's why I catch myself on using the word "concoction" more and more often, when it comes to American propaganda.
On another hand, when I am watching Russian news ( 60 minutes including,) when they discuss, say, the current situation in Texas, they never emphasize the fact that such anomaly as this weather happens only once in a great while in Texas. ( Some kind soul mentioned it, probably in a very spontaneous, unplanned way.)
But other than that.. - ...
I guess Putin and Co have good teachers by now in this respect, because Soviet propaganda was way too primitive, way too crude.
The real thing takes more finesse and more *heart-warming,* virtue-signalling kind of a bottom line.
"Algebra is racist!»
This is already complete insanity
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
