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.
They are too busy over there, shutting down TV channels that dare to criticize the government and Telegram channels.
And then they scream about "Putin's authoritarianism," apparently being afraid to be infected by it via Russian vaccine. (All while increasingly relying on Nazi "stronghold." )
Wrong thread but the plan is to start a week from Monday. There is a chart showing the schedule here. Bottom line, its going to be a long year for them. It would not surprise me if corrupt officials or oligarchs get in the way (the EU already suggests that may be the case).
Wrong thread but the plan is to start a week from Monday. There is a chart showing the schedule here. Bottom line, its going to be a long year for them. It would not surprise me if corrupt officials or oligarchs get in the way (the EU already suggests that may be the case).
"Corrupt officials?" "Oligarchs?"
Pray-tell me, where did they come from in "free and democratic Ukraine" post Maidan, post 2014, when American democracy turned it into anti-Russian colony and set all kinds of "anti-corruption bureaus" there?
Whence they came then, these very "corrupt officials" and "oligarchs"?
The answer is obvious.
They didn't go anywhere, they were just reshuffled by the US government, that appointed the "convenient overseers" in those "anti-corruption" entities that have nothing to do with "anti corruption measures," and everything - with who better serves the interests of American government, or better say - Democrats.
And that's why Trump was sucked into this serpentarium with no way out.
OK, so now, after that explicit interview to Spanish radio by Sharij, and shutdown of the opposition TV channels in Ukraine, the *concerns* of the newly-appointed Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken for "absence of democracy in Russia" is amusing to say the least.
Of course we are "deeply disturbed" by "what happened to Navalny," but what about Sharijs fearing for their lives in Spain?
Or what about the shut down of Ukrainian TV channels daring to challenge the government's propaganda?
You're really trying to compare a Russian propagandist with Alexei Navalny? Or the closure of Russian propaganda networks the same as what Russia's government is doing to prevent democracy? LOL
You're really trying to compare a Russian propagandist with Alexei Navalny? Or the closure of Russian propaganda networks the same as what Russia's government is doing to prevent democracy? LOL
You mean Anatoly Sharij?
He promotes MY beliefs first of all, the kind I share, which I consider to be true European values.
Why do you keep on labeling him as "Russian propagandist" - I have no idea.
I can label you as Nazi propagandist as well, ( labels are easy,) and let's see how you can prove that you are not, lol.
In their blind demonization of Putin, and consequent sanctification of Navalny, Western commentators seem to be implicitly assuming that should Navalny win power (which he almost certainly will not), Russia’s foreign policy would change radically in a pro-Western direction. This is nonsense. Navalny’s supporters are backing him out of (entirely justified) fury at Russian state corruption, lawlessness, and economic failure, not to change foreign policy. Every independent opinion poll has suggested that Putin’s foreign and security policies have enjoyed overwhelming public support; and above all, there is very little in Navalny’s own record to suggest that he would change them.
As a 2013 essay by Robert Coalson in The Atlantic documented, Navalny supported the Russian war with Georgia in 2008. He has expressed strongly ethno-nationalist attitudes towards the Caucasian minorities in Russia, and previously made opposition to illegal immigration a key part of his platform. In October 2014 he suggested to a reporter that if he became president he would not return Crimea, which was annexed by Russia earlier that year, to Ukraine (though he also said in that same interview that, “It’s not in the interests of Russians to seize neighboring republics, it’s in their interests to fight corruption, alcoholism and so on — to solve internal problems.”
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.
(All while increasingly relying on Nazi "stronghold." 
)
