Thread: What's it like in Gagra today?

Originally Posted by Basil77

The answer is easy: if USA wouldn't organized violent coup d'état then Crimea would still be Ukrainian. This was a sudden response move, not a long planned operatioin.

You have to stop your filthy rotten propaganda machine here. (Trolling, flaming)
Second warning.

I think there is a lot of truth to what Basil77 is saying even if he is a bit to blunt with saying it. There are definitely two sides to what happened there, and he is a strong supporter of the nationalistic Russian viewpoint - that's all!

I mean - we all heard those leaked phone calls from Washington, about who they wanted in charge and who was rejected. (and f*ck the EU!)

We know Basil77 - he's been a member for ages and is not some propaganda troll. This is his heartfelt opinion. Just like Eric C has a heartfelt dislike for Putin, Russian politics and anything relating to socialism.

And it's open to anyone to contradict him, or prove him wrong. I think he should be allowed freedom of speech as long as he isn't rude or offensive.

English speaking visitors are not likely to hear this anywhere else, so I think his voice is important. And after all - this forum is partly about understanding Russia. Basil77 expresses the viewpoint of millions in Russia.

Clearly this is personal for lots of people here and I think Basil77 has mentioned that he has in-laws in Ukraine, so it's understandable that he is passionate - particularly if his wife is affected.

That said, I also think Basil77 should be a bit more sensitive.

It's partly my fault as well, for asking about this.

Originally Posted by Lampada

You have to stop your filthy rotten propaganda machine here. (Trolling, flaming)
Second warning.

It's not propaganda, it's a simple truth. "Filthy rotten propaganda" is what you hear every day on CNN, BBC, Euronews, etc.

Thank you for your support, Hanna. You are right, my in-laws indeed encountered some personal problems now after all this happenings, I even think now about buying a house for them here in Russia becasue it's became litereally impossible to live in hellhole that junta in Kiev turned Ukraine into.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

You would be surprised to learn that a lot of Russian/CIS areas, and specifically lots of those you traveled to in 2011 have that poverty issue - median salaries of $100-200 a month, it's safe to say that Moldova and Belarus are going through that for sure

Yes I am aware if this, and several people told me their personal situation; it's between 500-1000 for regular people in Belarus, but you need to bear in mind that they have regulated economy with artificially reduced prices for basic products.

Tragically in Ukraine, it's below USD 100 for some people, and simply no jobs for many healthy and well educated adults. Apparently over a million have are working in Poland in addition to millions already in Russia. It's too tragic for words. Well educated people picking fruit and cleaning in Poland while their kids are with grandparents.

(Deleted. L.)

Originally Posted by Basil77

You are right, my in-laws indeed encountered some personal problems now after all this happenings, I even think now about buying a house for them here in Russia.

That would be amazing, if you are in a position to do that.
It's so, so tragic and to think that Ukrainians should have to go through hell again, when they already experienced it in the 1990s.
I wonder about the forum member it-ogo and whether he has left his hometown or whether he's still around there. If he left, where he went to.
He was a very credible representative for the pro-Kiev viewpoint, despite living in Donbass. I think he had a good life there and I fear things could be really awful for him at the moment.

Originally Posted by Hanna

I wonder about the forum member it-ogo and whether he has left his hometown or whether he's still around there. If he left, where he went to.
He was a very credible representative for the pro-Kiev viewpoint, despite living in Donbass. I think he had a good life there and I fear things could be really awful for him at the moment.

He lived in Kramatorsk which is controlled by Kiev for now.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Yes I am aware if this, and several people told me their personal situation; it's between 500-1000 for regular people in Belarus, but you need to bear in mind that they have regulated economy with artificially reduced prices for basic products.

Tragically in Ukraine, it's below USD 100 for some people, and simply no jobs for many healthy and well educated adults. Apparently over a million have are working in Poland in addition to millions already in Russia. It's too tragic for words. Well educated people picking fruit and cleaning in Poland while their kids are with grandparents.

I think what makes Ukraine different from those other poor areas there is, it's only temporary in Ukraine, and caused by unforeseeable factors (violent war, terrorism, and annexation of their territories). Just as they deal with the situation in the east (which is the most crucial of all they still have pending), they'll start getting back to normal. They might even (at last) join the EU & NATO. While those other areas seem to have made their miserable existence their lifestyle.

Originally Posted by Hanna

(Deleted. L.)

Would you please stop putting my name in quotes from now on? Because that can very well be treated as a personal insult (and it will be), and this resource, AFAIK, has a zero tolerance policy for that.

Originally Posted by Basil77

It's not propaganda, it's a simple truth. "Filthy rotten propaganda" is what you hear every day on CNN, BBC, Euronews, etc.

Thank you for your support, Hanna. You are right, my in-laws indeed encountered some personal problems now after all this happenings, I even think now about buying a house for them here in Russia becasue it's became litereally impossible to live in hellhole that junta in Kiev turned Ukraine into.

Flaming and trolling.
Третье и последнее предупреждение перед баном на семь дней.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Would you please stop putting my name in quotes from now on? Because that can very well be treated as a personal insult (and it will be), and this resource, AFAIK, has a zero tolerance policy for that.

Sure. I'll explain why I did it though. I do not think it's your name. That spelling is used in the English and French speaking countries. You are not a native English speaker and I do not believe you are from the francophonie either; or you would have been open about your background.

If my assumption is incorrect; feel free to explain the real circumstances!
In the meantime, I pay no respect to comments from somebody who is set to be a "ghost" while everyone else is debating with open cards.

My conclusion is that your nickname is not based on your real name — hence the quotation marks.

It would not bother me if somebody put quotes around my nickname; why should it?

-------------------------------------------------------
There was nothing rude about the above mark: It is an honest and politely phrased response to a comment directed at me, from a member who consistently joins every thread I start, or participate in. He expresses strong sentiments and views without ever explaining his own interest, or the source of his statement.

I find this situation frustrating.

If my response is removed, I will be offended.

Originally Posted by Lampada

Flaming and trolling.
Третье и последнее предупреждение перед баном на семь дней.

Truth hurts?

Originally Posted by Basil77

Truth hurts?

Trolling. Честно заработанный бan - 7 days

Originally Posted by Hanna

Sure. I'll explain why I did it though. I do not think it's your name. That spelling is used in the English and French speaking countries. You are not a native English speaker and I do not believe you are from the francophonie either; or you would have been open about your background.

If my assumption is incorrect; feel free to explain the real circumstances!
In the meantime, I pay no respect to comments from somebody who is set to be a "ghost" while everyone else is debating with open cards.

My conclusion is that your nickname is not based on your real name — hence the quotation marks.

It would not bother me if somebody put quotes around my nickname; why should it?

-------------------------------------------------------
There was nothing rude about the above mark: It is an honest and politely phrased response to a comment directed at me, from a member who consistently joins every thread I start, or participate in. He expresses strong sentiments and views without ever explaining his own interest, or the source of his statement.

I find this situation frustrating.

If my response is removed, I will be offended.

I don't ask anybody here to "open their cards". If they do so, it's their deliberate choice and I just respect it. Just the same way, I expect my choice on that matter (not to reveal my personal information) to be respected too. I don't see how it could be a problem for anyone, except those planning to use that information to do malicious stuff. And honestly, nobody besides you on this forum has ever requested this information in a way that would make me worry.

Now, if I say it's my name, would I be expecting anyone saying s/he doesn't believe it's my name? Obviously, not! Making assumptions (faulty, mostly) about someone and doubting any fact about him like you do is at the very least impolite. I would expect that kind of behavior from someone who is 10-12 y.o., but from what you said about yourself, you're 3 times as old. So, please stop that primitive trolling - there are plenty of ways to smash your opponent's arguments in a debate, other than reducing to mocking their name.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

If Russia wanted Crimea so badly, why wouldn't it consider solving all those technical issues prior to doing the annexation, so the peninsula wouldn't be dependent on "its former state" ?

I think you are missing the point. It's Crimeans that wanted to go back to Russia for a long-long time. Russia just seized the opportunity and made it happen, before the war.
Crimea has lots of problems but what is certain - Crimians do not want to go back to Ukraine. And Kiev just wants to punish regular people for that, applying master-slave mentality here: closing borders, cutting water, trying to cut electricity and all this with European and American leaders turning a blind eye.

Originally Posted by hddscan

I think you are missing the point. It's Crimeans that wanted to go back to Russia for a long-long time. Russia just seized the opportunity and made it happen, before the war.
Crimea has lots of problems but what is certain - Crimians do not want to go back to Ukraine. And Kiev just wants to punish regular people for that, applying master-slave mentality here: closing borders, cutting water, trying to cut electricity and all this with European and American leaders turning a blind eye.

I can understand the explanation of the event (of annexation) being spontaneous, but then, their new mainland will have to build all the infrastructure necessary, anyway. It would be extremely stupid to rely on their former mainland helping them in what they're doing, especially given the circumstances of the mainland change.

I would be careful with statements like "It's Crimeans that wanted to go back to Russia", and "Crimians do not want to go back to Ukraine", maybe some of them don't, but those sound like "all of them don't". Some polls during that referendum of 2014 reported the will of 146% (or so, if I'm not mistaken) voters to change their country. =))

Originally Posted by Eric C.

I would be careful with statements like "It's Crimeans that wanted to go back to Russia"...

I think there will be long-lasting disinformation about Crimea in western media. It is perfect example of such thing.
Try to read wiki and try to answer some questions:
Which population is biggest in Crimea?
Which language is biggest as "native language" in Crimea?
Why did Crimea want to separate from Ukraine immidiately after USSR breakup?
Why did Crimea become "autonomous republic" among other regions of Ukraine?

And this is not the whole picture.

Alex80, yes, that is what any Western European would discover, who tried to investigate on his own.

(Deleted. L.)

For anyone else:
If Crimeans were unhappy about the situation, every single Western media outlet would be there interviewing the people with complaints!
It would be on the news and in the papers.

The problem is, they can't find anyone credible with legitimate complaints about Russia. And really, that's not surprising, given that everyone has doubled or tripled their income since the area became Russian. Also given that it's clear that the area is going to be revitalised and receive huge investments from Moscow. Who in their right mind would be unhappy with such a situation - most of them are ethnic Russians anyway! This is such a no-brainer.

I saw some news coverage shortly after the referendum and the reporter from a Western media outlet actually said"We've been trying to find somebody who is not happy with the result, but so far, we haven't been able to find anyone".

So from the Western perspective, there is no story worth telling, on the ground. No people who are really unhappy about the situation, hence they do not do on-the-ground reports from Crimea!

If Russia messed up and upset people on Crimea, so they turned against Moscow for some reason; Then Western media would immediately seize on it and start reporting about miserable, oppressed and tearful people. But it seems like Crimea is the darling of all of Russia at the moment. They are not likely to complain, given what the alternative is.

Same as Russian media regularly reports about people in Kiev who are unhappy about the current regime, and there seems to be plenty.
If you are against something, you only report about it if you can find people who criticize it. Propaganda 101.

Western media is instead writing pieces about how Russia obtained Crimea illegally, a position that at least has some amount of factual basis. It can legitimately be said that the annexation was not quite per UN principles (whatever they may be...)

Additionally: When writing about it, they are trying to make it look like Crimea was some completely random piece of foreign territory that Russia just wanted.... The implied suggestion is: If they could invade Crimea, they could invade anywhere! Tallinn or Helsinki could be next! Anyone could be next!

This argument is used in Sweden Finland at the moment, to try to steer public opinion towards supporting NATO membership.

A lot of younger people, uneducated people etc just take it at face value and are now genuinely scared of Russia.

Same as Russian media regularly reports about people in Kiev who are unhappy about the current regime, and there seems to be plenty.
If you are against something, you only report about it if you can find people who criticize it. Propaganda 101.

If to be honest, I can't recall that the Russian media reported that all people in Kiev are unhappy about the current regime. Russian propaganda machine works with our emotions, plays on our stereotypes, tries to inspire us, but it doesn't misrepresent facts.

The implied suggestion is: If they could invade Crimea, they could invade anywhere! Tallinn or Helsinki could be next! Anyone could be next! This argument is used in Sweden Finland at the moment, to try to steer public opinion towards supporting NATO membership. A lot of younger people, uneducated people etc just take it at face value and are now genuinely scared of Russia.

It's so strange to hear. Where is logic, at the hollydays? What did russians "forgot" in Tallinn or Helsinki?

There is one clip in the Internet about russian view of information war. I don't like work of the autors, but this clip is cool. It has two versions:
* for russians: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLes...ion_1457752363
* for english speakers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHfB...ion_2452199241.
Versions are same, only their endings are different.