# Forum About Russia Politics  Stephen Cohen. Distorting Russia. How the American media misrepresent Putin...

## Lampada

Distorting Russia | The Nation  *Stephen F. Cohen * Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus at New York University and Princeton University.   _February 11, 2014   |  _ _This article appeared in the March 3, 2014 edition of The Nation._   _"The degradation of mainstream American press coverage of Russia, a country still vital to US national security, has been under way for many years. If the recent tsunami of shamefully unprofessional and politically inflammatory articles in leading newspapers and magazines — particularly about the Sochi Olympics, Ukraine and, unfailingly, President Vladimir Putin — is an indication, this media malpractice is now pervasive and the new norm. 
There are notable exceptions, but a general pattern has developed. Even in the venerable New York Times and Washington Post, news reports, editorials and commentaries no longer adhere rigorously to traditional journalistic standards, often failing to provide essential facts and context; to make a clear distinction between reporting and analysis; to require at least two different political or “expert” views on major developments; or to publish opposing opinions on their op-ed pages. As a result, American media on Russia today are less objective, less balanced, more conformist and scarcely less ideological than when they covered Soviet Russia during the Cold War. 
The history of this degradation is also clear. It began in the early 1990s, following the end of the Soviet Union, when the US media adopted Washington’s narrative that almost everything President Boris Yeltsin did was a “transition from communism to democracy” and thus in America’s best interests. This included his economic “shock therapy” and oligarchic looting of essential state assets, which destroyed tens of millions of Russian lives; armed destruction of a popularly elected Parliament and imposition of a “presidential” Constitution, which dealt a crippling blow to democratization and now empowers Putin; brutal war in tiny Chechnya, which gave rise to terrorists in Russia’s North Caucasus; rigging of his own re-election in 1996; and leaving behind, in 1999, his approval ratings in single digits, a disintegrating country laden with weapons of mass destruction. Indeed, most American journalists still give the impression that Yeltsin was an ideal Russian leader. 
Since the early 2000s, the media have followed a different leader-centric narrative, also consistent with US policy, that devalues multifaceted analysis for a relentless demonization of Putin, with little regard for facts. (Was any Soviet Communist leader after Stalin ever so personally villainized?) If Russia under Yeltsin was presented as having legitimate politics and national interests, we are now made to believe that Putin’s Russia has none at all, at home or abroad — even on its own borders, as in Ukraine. 
Russia today has serious problems and many repugnant Kremlin policies. But anyone relying on mainstream American media will not find there any of their origins or influences in Yeltsin’s Russia or in provocative US policies since the 1990s — only in the “autocrat” Putin who, however authoritarian, in reality lacks such power. Nor is he credited with stabilizing a disintegrating nuclear-armed country, assisting US security pursuits from Afghanistan and Syria to Iran or even with granting amnesty, in December, to more than 1,000 jailed prisoners, including mothers of young children. 
Not surprisingly, in January The Wall Street Journal featured the widely discredited former president of Georgia, Mikheil Saakashvili, branding Putin’s government as one of “deceit, violence and cynicism,” with the Kremlin a “nerve center of the troubles that bedevil the West.” But wanton Putin-bashing is also the dominant narrative in centrist, liberal and progressive media, from the Post, Times and The New Republic to CNN, MSNBC and HBO’s Real Time With Bill Maher, where Howard Dean, not previously known for his Russia expertise, recently declared, to the panel’s approval, “Vladimir Putin is a thug.” 
The media therefore eagerly await Putin’s downfall — due to his “failing economy” (some of its indicators are better than US ones), the valor of street protesters and other right-minded oppositionists (whose policies are rarely examined), the defection of his electorate (his approval ratings remain around 65 percent) or some welcomed “cataclysm.” Evidently believing, as does the Times, for example, that democrats and a “much better future” will succeed Putin (not zealous ultranationalists growing in the streets and corridors of power), US commentators remain indifferent to what the hoped-for “destabilization of his regime” might mean in the world’s largest nuclear country. 
Certainly, The New Republic’s lead writer on Russia, Julia Ioffe, does not explore the question, or much else of real consequence, in her nearly 10,000-word February 17 cover story. Ioffe’s bannered theme is devoutly Putin-phobic: “He Crushed His Opposition and Has Nothing to Show for It But a Country That Is Falling Apart.” Neither sweeping assertion is spelled out or documented. A compilation of chats with Russian-born Ioffe’s disaffected (but seemingly not “crushed”) Moscow acquaintances and titillating personal gossip long circulating on the Internet, the article seems better suited (apart from some factual errors) for the Russian tabloids, as does Ioffe’s disdain for objectivity. Protest shouts of “Russia without Putin!” and “Putin is a thief!” were “one of the most exhilarating moments I’d ever experienced.” So was tweeting “Putin’s fucked, y’all.” Nor does she forget the hopeful mantra “cataclysm seems closer than ever now.” 
* * * 
For weeks, this toxic coverage has focused on the Sochi Olympics and the deepening crisis in Ukraine. Even before the Games began, the Times declared the newly built complex a “Soviet-style dystopia” and warned in a headline, Terrorism and Tension, Not Sports and Joy. On opening day, the paper found space for three anti-Putin articles and a lead editorial, a feat rivaled by thePost. Facts hardly mattered. Virtually every US report insisted that a record $51 billion “squandered” by Putin on the Sochi Games proved they were “corrupt.” But as Ben Aris ofBusiness New Europe pointed out, as much as $44 billion may have been spent “to develop the infrastructure of the entire region,” investment “the entire country needs.” 
Overall pre-Sochi coverage was even worse, exploiting the threat of terrorism so licentiously it seemed pornographic. The Post, long known among critical-minded Russia-watchers as Pravda on the Potomac, exemplified the media ethos. A sports columnist and an editorial page editor turned the Olympics into “a contest of wills” between the despised Putin’s “thugocracy” and terrorist “insurgents.” The “two warring parties” were so equated that readers might have wondered which to cheer for. If nothing else, American journalists gave terrorists an early victory, tainting “Putin’s Games” and frightening away many foreign spectators, including some relatives of the athletes. 
The Sochi Games will soon pass, triumphantly or tragically, but the potentially fateful Ukrainian crisis will not. A new Cold War divide between West and East may now be unfolding, not in Berlin but in the heart of Russia’s historical civilization. The result could be a permanent confrontation fraught with instability and the threat of a hot war far worse than the one in Georgia in 2008. These dangers have been all but ignored in highly selective, partisan and inflammatory US media accounts, which portray the European Union’s “Partnership” proposal benignly as Ukraine’s chance for democracy, prosperity and escape from Russia, thwarted only by a “bullying” Putin and his “cronies” in Kiev. 
Not long ago, committed readers could count on The New York Review of Books for factually trustworthy alternative perspectives on important historical and contemporary subjects. But when it comes to Russia and Ukraine, the NYRB has succumbed to the general media mania. In a January 21 blog post, Amy Knight, a regular contributor and inveterate Putin-basher, warned the US government against cooperating with the Kremlin on Sochi security, even suggesting that Putin’s secret services “might have had an interest in allowing or even facilitating such attacks” as killed or wounded dozens of Russians in Volgograd in December. 
Knight’s innuendo prefigured a purported report on Ukraine by Yale professor Timothy Snyder in the February 20 issue. Omissions of facts, by journalists or scholars, are no less an untruth than misstatements of fact. Snyder’s article was full of both, which are widespread in the popular media, but these are in the esteemed NYRB and by an acclaimed academic. Consider a few of Snyder’s assertions: 
§ ”On paper, Ukraine is now a dictatorship.” In fact, the “paper” legislation he’s referring to hardly constituted dictatorship, and in any event was soon repealed. Ukraine is in a state nearly the opposite of dictatorship — political chaos uncontrolled by President Viktor Yanukovych, the Parliament, the police or any other government institution. 
§ ”The [parliamentary] deputies…have all but voted themselves out of existence.” Again, Snyder is alluding to the nullified “paper.” Moreover, serious discussions have been under way in Kiev about reverting to provisions in the 2004 Constitution that would return substantial presidential powers to the legislature, hardly “the end of parliamentary checks on presidential power,” as Snyder claims. (Does he dislike the prospect of a compromise outcome?) 
§ ”Through remarkably large and peaceful public protests…Ukrainians have set a positive example for Europeans.” This astonishing statement may have been true in November, but it now raises questions about the “example” Snyder is advocating. The occupation of government buildings in Kiev and in Western Ukraine, the hurling of firebombs at police and other violent assaults on law enforcement officers and the proliferation of anti-Semitic slogans by a significant number of anti-Yanukovych protesters, all documented and even televised, are not an “example” most readers would recommend to Europeans or Americans. Nor are they tolerated, even if accompanied by episodes of police brutality, in any Western democracy. 
§ ”Representatives of a minor group of the Ukrainian extreme right have taken credit for the violence.” This obfuscation implies that apart perhaps from a “minor group,” the “Ukrainian extreme right” is part of the positive “example” being set. (Many of its representatives have expressed hatred for Europe’s “anti-traditional” values, such as gay rights.) Still more, Snyder continues, “something is fishy,” strongly implying that the mob violence is actually being “done by russo-phone provocateurs” on behalf of “Yanukovych (or Putin).” As evidence, Snyder alludes to “reports” that the instigators “spoke Russian.” But millions of Ukrainians on both sides of their incipient civil war speak Russian. 
§ Snyder reproduces yet another widespread media malpractice regarding Russia, the decline of editorial fact-checking. In a recent article in the International New York Times, he both inflates his assertions and tries to delete neofascist elements from his innocuous “Ukrainian extreme right.” Again without any verified evidence, he warns of a Putin-backed “armed intervention” in Ukraine after the Olympics and characterizes reliable reports of “Nazis and anti-Semites” among street protesters as “Russian propaganda.” 
§ Perhaps the largest untruth promoted by Snyder and most US media is the claim that “Ukraine’s future integration into Europe” is “yearned for throughout the country.” But every informed observer knows — from Ukraine’s history, geography, languages, religions, culture, recent politics and opinion surveys — that the country is deeply divided as to whether it should join Europe or remain close politically and economically to Russia. There is not one Ukraine or one “Ukrainian people” but at least two, generally situated in its Western and Eastern regions. 
Such factual distortions point to two flagrant omissions by Snyder and other US media accounts. The now exceedingly dangerous confrontation between the two Ukraines was not “ignited,” as the Times claims, by Yanukovych’s duplicitous negotiating — or by Putin — but by the EU’s reckless ultimatum, in November, that the democratically elected president of a profoundly divided country choose between Europe and Russia. Putin’s proposal for a tripartite arrangement, rarely if ever reported, was flatly rejected by US and EU officials. 
But the most crucial media omission is Moscow’s reasonable conviction that the struggle for Ukraine is yet another chapter in the West’s ongoing, US-led march toward post-Soviet Russia, which began in the 1990s with NATO’s eastward expansion and continued with US-funded NGO political activities inside Russia, a US-NATO military outpost in Georgia and missile-defense installations near Russia. Whether this longstanding Washington-Brussels policy is wise or reckless, it — not Putin’s December financial offer to save Ukraine’s collapsing economy — is deceitful. The EU’s “civilizational” proposal, for example, includes “security policy” provisions, almost never reported, that would apparently subordinate Ukraine to NATO. 
Any doubts about the Obama administration’s real intentions in Ukraine should have been dispelled by the recently revealed taped conversation between a top State Department official, Victoria Nuland, and the US ambassador in Kiev. The media predictably focused on the source of the “leak” and on Nuland’s verbal “gaffe” — “Fuck the EU.” But the essential revelation was that high-level US officials were plotting to “midwife” a new, anti-Russian Ukrainian government by ousting or neutralizing its democratically elected president — that is, a coup. 
Americans are left with a new edition of an old question. Has Washington’s twenty-year winner-take-all approach to post-Soviet Russia shaped this degraded news coverage, or is official policy shaped by the coverage? Did Senator John McCain stand in Kiev alongside the well-known leader of an extreme nationalist party because he was ill informed by the media, or have the media deleted this part of the story because of McCain’s folly? 
And what of Barack Obama’s decision to send only a low-level delegation, including retired gay athletes, to Sochi? In August, Putin virtually saved Obama’s presidency by persuading Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to eliminate his chemical weapons. Putin then helped to facilitate Obama’s heralded opening to Iran. Should not Obama himself have gone to Sochi — either out of gratitude to Putin, or to stand with Russia’s leader against international terrorists who have struck both of our countries? Did he not go because he was ensnared by his unwise Russia policies, or because the US media misrepresented the varying reasons cited: the granting of asylum to Edward Snowden, differences on the Middle East, infringements on gay rights in Russia, and now Ukraine? Whatever the explanation, as Russian intellectuals say when faced with two bad alternatives, “Both are worst.” "_   589 Comments

----------


## Hanna

Nice article to quote, Lampada.  
As you know, I am very interested in how media reflects various things.  
Unless you are there yourself, or know somebody who is - you have to rely on media. 
And it has to be in a language that you can actually read in...  
So it means that if all mainstream English speaking media gives incorrect or angled information, that will be what native English speakers will believe. Since they don't have easy access to any other info.  
And we see so many example of people who are misinformed.  
I think that Russia was a bit naughty and did something that they wanted to do for a long time. Take Crimea back, essentially - although I guess we'll see how it pans out after the referendum. Independency, increased autonomy or revert to Russia.....  
And it's understandable that Russia wanted Crimea back, and we know what the majority there think about it.  
Plus, this "golden opportunity" / "perfect excuse" for Russia would not have happened if there hadn't been problems with Yanukovich' leadership, and EU/USA hadn't conspired to stir people up and bring about a revolution.

----------


## Ramil

How many people read such long articles these days? I may be wrong but in an average American's mind Russia stands somewhere between thermal death of the Universe and prognosis for crops in Zimbabwe this year. They've heard in some announce on TV in between a baseball translation that Putin is a monster. Period. No further explanations necessary. There is a Russian idiom 'метать бисер перед свиньями' (to cast pearl before pigs). That's what I think the author's doing in this article.

----------


## Crocodile

A collegue of mine of Chinese origin asked me a moment ago only one question: is there going to be a war between Russia and Ukraine. I said no, and he seemed to be content with the answer. I think if I said yes, he would be just as equally content.  ::

----------


## Ramil

He's a professor! He knows the difference between Russia and Ukraine.

----------


## Crocodile

> He's a professor! He knows the difference between Russia and Ukraine.

 I'm pretty sure he only knows that because of the potential of war between the two. Honestly, I could not tell a difference between Taiwan and the mainland China or any of its provinces..

----------


## Hanna

I dare to guess that most people in the USA could not find Ukraine on a map, and don't know anything about it. Lampada probably knows about that.  It doesn't help that Ukraine only became independant less than 20 years ago. _ 
I had the wrong view of Ukraine too and I was so certain I knew about it that I didn't even bother to read up properly before I went there. For example about the language. My incorrect view was that Ukrainians were just a different flavour of Russians_. _I did not know how passionate Ukrainians are about their language and unique culture. _ 
A lot of people in the UK know NOTHING about Ukraine either.  
I called my bank in the UK from Belarus, and person I spoke with had never heard of Belarus in her life and assumed it was a non-European country. 
BUT, they have all seen lots of films where Russians are bad guys, and played many games about wars with Russia or the USSR. It's practically a mantra.   *English speaking news don't have to say much at all. Just mumble a bit about  "aggressiveness",  lack of "human rights", dictatorship and Soviet union legacy.*  
And thanks to all the conditioning from films, TV and games the person will think "damned Russian", "F-ing commies" or "we should just nuke them and be done with it" or something like that.

----------


## Ramil

Yes, here's a pic from Mordor:  
(actually it's Moscow, but who cares?)

----------


## Valda

Yet так похожий на Мордор...

----------


## Hanna

What are those two black towers in the middle?  They look very sinister. 
I strongly recommend all Americans and other English speakers to watch the "Breaking the Set" program on RT with the host Abby Martin. 
It's good, impartial and informative. 
No hugging Russia or making excuses, but some tough questions and answers. 
Abby read  up us much as she could have and got a good professor from the University of Wisconsin on to lay out the situation as it is.  
I can't find any fault with what they were saying. They want to give everyone an honest chance and understand where they are coming from, and let people make their own minds up, based on unbiased info.  
I learnt one thing I didn't know: Ukraine was massively expanded in georgraphical scope by the USSR at various points. I knew some of it, but not all.  
Also: This show makes it clear that RT is no clearcut puppet of the Russian state (or Abby Martin will shortly get the sack!) She ends her comments by saying that she is super disappointed at Russia for using actual force, and that she's equally disgusted by real and undisputable Nazism breaking out in Ukraine.  
Highly recommended. Watch this.

----------


## Ramil

> What are those two black towers in the middle?  They look very sinister.

 That's where Sauron lives.

----------


## it-ogo

> I learnt one thing I didn't know: Ukraine was massively expanded in georgraphical scope by the USSR at various points. I knew some of it, but not all.  
> Also: This show makes it clear that RT is no clearcut puppet of the Russian state (or Abby Martin will shortly get the sack!) She ends her comments by saying that she is super disappointed at Russia for using actual force, and that she's equally disgusted by real and undisputable Nazism breaking out in Ukraine.  
> Highly recommended. Watch this.

 Yes, Ukraine is a card house. So let us pull off some cards and enjoy the show of destruction while it is not solid yet! Right? Are you really ready to support such kind of logic?  
This show makes it clear that RT screenwriters are smart. "I am super disappointed that Mr. X cut off some fingers and one eye from Mr. Y, and I am really disgusted by real and undisputable being f%%%ng bastard and scum of Mr. Y." What exactly is "Nazism"? Who knows? It is an abusive word with a sense lost in time. Yes, the chaos is dangerous for Jews (as well as for others). Let us invade Crimea to protect them. Nothing can be better protection for the Jews in Kiev than Russian forces in Crimea. And Russian tourists storming local Ukrainian administrations while Russian Militaries are ready to protect them. 
P.S. In his blog that Moscow guy writes that he is not really a Nazy, he just roleplayed Nazy in historical play. I believe him - he is not a Nazy. He is just a patriotic Russian guy who enjoys storming Ukrainian administrative buildings and putting Russian flags over them. Maybe even for free - for transport only. Nice vacations. Russian army is strong and nobody dares to stop him. He is proud of what he did and is not going to deny anything.

----------


## Hanna

> That's where Sauron lives.

 OMG!! Moscow looks like New York, Dubai or Hong Kong..... Yeah those buildings look rather evil. 
I saw that on TV actually and forgot it. I don't like that kind of architecture and the less we see of it in Europe the better, as far as I am concerned. 
It's a kind of symbolism for aggressive capitalism and multinational corporations, isn't it it.
I guess it shows that Moscow has really "arrived" as a financial capital.

----------


## Suobig

> OMG!! Moscow looks like New York, Dubai or Hong Kong..... Yeah those buildings look rather evil. 
> I saw that on TV actually and forgot it. I don't like that kind of architecture and the less we see of it in Europe the better, as far as I am concerned. 
> It's a kind of symbolism for aggressive capitalism and multinational corporations, isn't it it.
> I guess it shows that Moscow has really "arrived" as a financial capital.

 Agree. I like these ones much more:

----------


## Ramil

It was difficult at first, but after some time I actually liked the look of the 'city' at night.

----------


## Hanna

> Yes, Ukraine is a card house. So let us pull off some cards and enjoy the show of destruction while it is not solid yet! Right? Are you really ready to support such kind of logic?  
> This show makes it clear that RT screenwriters are smart. "I am super disappointed that Mr. X cut off some fingers and one eye from Mr. Y, and I am really disgusted by real and undisputable being f%%%ng bastard and scum of Mr. Y." What exactly is "Nazism"? Who knows? It is an abusive word with a sense lost in time. Yes, the chaos is dangerous for Jews (as well as for others). Let us invade Crimea to protect them. Nothing can be better protection for the Jews in Kiev than Russian forces in Crimea. And Russian tourists storming local Ukrainian administrations while Russian Militaries are ready to protect them. 
> P.S. In his blog that Moscow guy writes that he is not really a Nazy, he just roleplayed Nazy in historical play. I believe him - he is not a Nazy. He is just a patriotic Russian guy who enjoys storming Ukrainian administrative buildings and putting Russian flags over them. Maybe even for free - for transport only. Nice vacations. Russian army is strong and nobody dares to stop him. He is proud of what he did and is not going to deny anything.

 
Actually I wasn't making an exact quote, just tried to sum it up in a sentence. She didn't mention the word Nazism, just hinted at it. 
 And she definitely writes her own script - that's quite a radical person and would not let herself be used as a puppet. She spoke up even more strongly in the past, on human rights stuff in Russia. RT obviously would lose any credibility if it turned out that it never allowed criticism of Russia. But it does. 
But i DO SEE your point, I know that RT is not innocent of whitewashing Russia and pointing the finger at everyone else. 
And I realise you are not in the mood for anything resembling Russian propaganda right now. 
But you already know everything they said there, so it's not aimed at ppl like you.  
I also agree whole heartedly with everything you said about how Nazism is used to blackpaint,.  
The problem is that anyone reading the English speaking press get 100% pure anti-Russia propaganda at an enormous scale, this is front page news everywhere. And since nobody knows anything about Ukraine, they can say whatever they want, and pick the historical facts that support their points.   *So, to find a program in English, geared towards Americans, mainly, but actually presenting the facts accurately is unique.*  
I also don't like it when Russia does a big show of various people being Nazis, like I said earlier. 
Baltic people and that. Then in Ukraine. 
I thought - who cares? They probably aren't real Nazis and even if they are, what does it matter? 
 Or the old communist habit of calling everyone who doesn't agree a fascist. Yeah, it's a perfect word to throw around to blackpaint others.   
However, if they are involved in a revolution, then it's a different thing, right? Then, if they are nazis or something like that, you want to know.  
But you saw the pictures right? Maybe you saw them face to face..... I wouldn't be fooled by anyone dressed up in a nazi uniform as a show. But I know skinheads very well, and these guys were genuine.  
The the hooligans from the pictures in Kiev looked like 1990s skinheads (extreme nationalists) at their very worst, and had swastika looking emblems on their improvised "uniforms". Ultranationalists living out their dream scenario. If it had happened in Western Europe, they would have kicked in the heads of some black people while they were at it.  
Swedish papers said that 50 known neo nazis went to Kiev to fight. I read a speech that one person made on the Maidan. Even if Sweden supports the revolution, the guy lost his job in the army - because of the nature of his statements. Actually some of it made sense, BUT the point is, the guy is a member of a national socialist party. I.e. he's a Nazi.  
I am not saying they can't scrub up and lead Ukraine. I don't care who runs Ukraine as long as the people there are happy and things get better. But I was genuinely shocked at picture proof that these people were for real.

----------


## Hanna

> It was difficult at first, but after some time I actually liked the look of the 'city' at night.

 Yeah and in such buildings they always seem to leave the lights on all night and generally waste energy and resources. 
And I don't think Russia needs to imitate the USA.... You have your own style, don't you? *What was there before? Where those buildings are? If it was anything half decent, you will regret it in 20 years when those buildings don't look cool or modern anymore!* At least the Stalin scyscraper is timeless, and the style is definitely unique... Russia has so much cool architecture, really old imperial, Soviet era and what not. I hope they will renovate as much as possible instead of building new, cheap and ugly - generic buildings that you could find anywhere.

----------


## Suobig

I think, architecture is a materialized vision of the future. We don't have any vision right now, that's why we're just copying western architecture.

----------


## Ramil

> *What was there before? Where those buildings are? If it was anything half decent, you will regret it in 20 years when those buildings don't look cool or modern anymore!*

 There was nothing worth mentioning, some old residential houses from Hrushev's era of no architectural value. Nothing I will ever regret of.  ::

----------


## 14Russian

Putin is a hero for Russians.   There is no dispute.   RT tries to tell people.... The Kremlin needs to funnel more money to RT until people start to come around.   Maybe 55 billion dollars might do it.   Those horrible roads in Russia can wait another 10 - 20 years.   Also, the more migrants the better.   Russia can forget about helping their people a bit longer.    There is always time for manipulating oil prices so oligarchs can maintain profits and buy another yacht.   Thanks to those Americans who set the record straight.   Maybe they can wine and dine over vodka and shooters.

----------


## SergeMak

> There is a Russian idiom 'метать бисер перед свиньями' (to cast pearl before pigs).

 Actually it is a quotation from the Bible. It's Matthew 7:6 in Jesus's Sermon on the Mount to be exact.
"Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces."
 «Не давайте святыни псам и не бросайте жемчуга вашего перед свиньями, чтобы они не попрали его ногами своими и, обратившись, не растерзали вас».
Alas, he was crucified by the people he was preaching, healing, feeding and quenching and his main disciple renounced him three times.
So he himself contradicted this wisdom, for if there is one reasonable person ready to understand the value of the pearls in a throng of swines, maybe it's worth casting?      

> And Russian tourists storming local Ukrainian administrations while Russian Militaries are ready to protect them.

 There are on-line web-cameras on the border crossing points, for example, this one monitors the main border crossing point Nekhoteevka-Goptovka which is the biggest such a point in Belgorod region and is situated on the road leading from Moscow to Kharkov: Граница Online Нехотеевка
As you can see it's empty right now. In order to bring a 10-thousand crowd for making "disorders" in Kharkov Russians must have been used at least a hundred buses provided each bus contained a hundred persons. I've been periodically watching this camera for a few days - I've noticed no perceptible activity on this boarder-crossing point. 
I also tried to find a single volunteers enlisting point in my native city which is right half-way between Moscow and Kharkov - no luck. Such things simply don't exist. Recent days people were busy with their jobs and buying presents for their women for the celebration of the Women's day, they don't have any reason to go invading Kharkov.
Also think about accommodations where all this "tourists" have to stay. Is there any tents, field-kitchens, as in Kiev's Maidan? There's nothing - nor in Kharkov nor in Donetsk nor in Lugansk which can be explained by the only reasonable presumption that most of those demonstrators are local inhabitants.
Of course nobody can prevent individual persons to cross the border on the legal basis and take part in whatever activities they like, but it's their own personal responsibility - no state or civic institute can be blamed for this.
By the way, I couldn't find such on-line cameras on the Ukrainian side of the border. Why?

----------


## UhOhXplode

I said in another unrelated thread that the US had done something I consider unforgivable. The last 2 paragraphs in the OP explain it better than I can. When people are constantly lied to and given obvious misinformation, it's impossible to find anything to believe in.
My family is not anti-Russian but so many people in the US are. And maybe I coulda been fooled but they made one huge mistake - In real-life, nobody's pure good and nobody's pure-evil. I've seen words like "thug" and "cronie" in the news before but never as much as now. The OP is totally dead on. The western media's more like pep talks and cheerleaders at a football game cause there's very little news about what's really happening. 
But what's the answer? When I try to explain what I know about Ukraine and Russia, most Americans just label me "commie". Somebody even asked me which I supported, the US or Putin - I told them I only supported the truth. Sometimes I don't think they wanna learn anything, they just want the US to win everything. Imo, that's the wrong kind of thinking cause no country should have everything.
Well, maybe I'm just lucky cause I can speed-read and my family is always finding new info about what's happening in Russia and Ukraine.
I do know this - Friendship isn't based on hate and fear and the US will never have friendly relations with Russia or Ukraine till it learns what friendship means. 
About the International Business district in Moscow. I know exactly where that is and those buildings are awesome! I really like the color schemes too! Some other stuff I like in Moscow are Novy Arbat and the GUM department store. Sometimes I like old architecture (if it looks really wicked) and I like castles too. But mostly I'm all over the new stuff.

----------


## Ramil

I think I should explain what exactly media is for any politician, especially the American one. You only need media for one and only one thing - to justify the budget expences before the tax-payers and keep your approval rating high. Period. The simpler are the ways to achieve that - the better. Wanting anything else from the media - especially if you ARE NOT a politician is ridiculous.

----------


## Hanna

The Ukraine situation is turning me into almost as big a cynic as Ramil.  
It just shows you can sell _anything_ you want to Europeans and Americans. Even things that are happening on our own continent, an hours flight from Berlin or Geneva. 
Some very strong forces wants to control what happens in Ukraine at almost ANY price.  
And while Russian TV is more truthful they are ignoring some very important questions, such as what exactly Russia will actually do, when Crimea votes "Yes" and some issues about who is allowed to protest or demonstrate about things, and when. 
Many insane people in Western Europe seems to get a kick out of hating Russia, some kind of bizarre Cold War fake nostalgia or attempt at feeling superior. They actually WANT to believe propaganda and don't want to hear the other side of the story,. 
People too young to remember the Cold War and the incredibly eerie vibes from that era.  
Another thing is that the tactics today are much creepier and more sophisticated than back then. Psy-ops, black ops, internet surveillance and manipulation of online opinion with some very underhand mehtods. 
PS - If anyone is brave enough to watch PressTV, they have a very revealing expose about how Europeans were manipulated about Ukraine beyond anything we ever experienced before.

----------


## Ramil

> It just shows you can sell _anything_ you want to Europeans and Americans.

 Not just Europeans and Americans - all people. This is universal.  

> And while Russian TV is more truthful

 Actually, they are not.

----------


## Hanna

> Actually it is a quotation from the Bible. It's Matthew 7:6 in Jesus's Sermon on the Mount to be exact.
> "Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces."
>  «Не давайте святыни псам и не бросайте жемчуга вашего перед свиньями, чтобы они не попрали его ногами своими и, обратившись, не растерзали вас».
> Alas, he was crucified by the people he was preaching, healing, feeding and quenching and his main disciple renounced him three times.
> So he himself contradicted this wisdom, for if there is one reasonable person ready to understand the value of the pearls in a throng of swines, maybe it's worth casting?     
> There are on-line web-cameras on the border crossing points, for example, this one monitors the main border crossing point Nekhoteevka-Goptovka which is the biggest such a point in Belgorod region and is situated on the road leading from Moscow to Kharkov: Граница Online Нехотеевка
> As you can see it's empty right now. In order to bring a 10-thousand crowd for making "disorders" in Kharkov Russians must have been used at least a hundred buses provided each bus contained a hundred persons. I've been periodically watching this camera for a few days - I've noticed no perceptible activity on this boarder-crossing point. 
> I also tried to find a single volunteers enlisting point in my native city which is right half-way between Moscow and Kharkov - no luck. Such things simply don't exist. Recent days people were busy with their jobs and buying presents for their women for the celebration of the Women's day, they don't have any reason to go invading Kharkov.
> Also think about accommodations where all this "tourists" have to stay. Is there any tents, field-kitchens, as in Kiev's Maidan? There's nothing - nor in Kharkov nor in Donetsk nor in Lugansk which can be explained by the only reasonable presumption that most of those demonstrators are local inhabitants.
> ...

 Nice and interesting post, Serge! 
They won't let you into Ukraine though. I watched Rossiya 24 and they said that Ukraine denies entry to any Russian who looks like they might plan to participate in the protests. Probably just as well.  
I think it's a bit sad that Russia takes so much interest in Crimea, but pays less attention to the less glamorous cities in Eastern Ukraine. These people have been railroaded for sure. Apparently that region is what keeps the Ukrainian economy afloat.... at the very least they deserve democratic representation in Kiev. And all people anywhere, deserve the right to speak their native language in the area where they were born.

----------


## SergeMak

> They won't let you into Ukraine though. I watched Rossiya 24 and they said that Ukraine denies entry to any Russian who looks like they might plan to participate in the protests. Probably just as well.

 I don't think it's true. I've heard they check more thoroughly the documents and luggage but I don't think they prevent anybody to cross the border unless there are some serious reasons (you are a criminal of some kind and they found your name in their list). By the way, I agree with Ramil that the Russian media are also involved in brain-washing. A few days ago they said there are hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees crossing the border, but I didn't notice them either.  

> I think it's a bit sad that Russia takes so much interest in Crimea, but pays less attention to the less glamorous cities in Eastern Ukraine.

 They say Kharkov is a very beautiful city with a great opera theater and it has the biggest square in Europe. My father (ethnic Ukrainian by the way) studied in Kharkov polytechnic university. He is very fond of these memories. 
What a shame I missed the opportunity to see the biggest square of Europe free of charge (joke).

----------


## Hanna

> I agree with Ramil that the Russian media are also involved in brain-washing. A few days ago they said there are hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees crossing the border, but I didn't notice them either.

 Yes, Russia Today wrote about it. The figures they gave was 650,000 "refugees".
But you know, "there are lies, damned lies and statistics"
Maybe they counted everybody who crossed the border from Ukraine to Russia since the troubles started, or something like that.  
I don't think Russian media deliberately lies. I think they ignore some news, and play with statistics. 
As for Western media, it's really no better, and with some stories, it's worse. Just different angles.  
From watching Vesti TV, I get the impression that every town in Russia, practically, had a support rally for Ukraine and Crimea, with people chanting slogans. Is that right?  Also, Moscow seems to have held a big concert.  
The difference between Russian coverage of this, and Ukrainian coverage, is that *for* *Russia, it is their relatives, their family, old friends, history and culture at stake. * That's why I trust Russia more in this, having nobler purposes. 
For Western media it's nothing but the old Russophobia, a desire to control Ukraine and the possibility of a NATO base in Crimea. It's all coming from Washington - who in Western Europe even cares about Ukraine or Crimea?! Almost nobody. And all as for controlling it, all major countries already had a go at that, and eventually failed.... As we know!  
The Black Sea is not a traditional sphere of influence for any of the big European countries. It's about Washington's agenda with Russia, and *the Ukrainians are the pawns and victims.* The Western Ukrainians have been duped. The EU can't, won't and doesn't even want to deliver half of what it's promising. 
The EU is a useful idiot for America in this.

----------


## SergeMak

> Maybe they counted everybody who crossed the border from Ukraine to Russia since the troubles started, or something like that.

 Yes they say it's the number of people who abandoned Ukraine during 2 last months.
Actually you were probably right about Ukrainian border-guards denying some Russians to cross the border. Rusnovosti.ru said that 342 Russian citizens were denied the right of entry into Ukraine for the last 24 hours. 342 гражданина . I just wonder what a criterion they use to decide whether a certain citizen can be a provocateur or not? I don't think it's a legitimate procedure.

----------


## Hanna

The thing I love about the Crimea situation is that their own manipulation backfired at them! 
It's a cynical way to look at things, but it's not very personal to me. I don't know anybody in Crimea or Eastern Ukraine. It just pisses me off that they dared to get involved in the internal business of a sovereign European nation. 
SO
Ukrainian leader backed from the EUs poor offer, and turned to Russia. 
They decided to take Yanukovich down, using his own shortages as a leader, the extreme and easily manipulated parts of the Ukrainian population and every dirty trick in the propaganda handbook....  
Serves them b.....y well right, if all they will end up with is the poor under-developed rural Western Ukraine which is exactly the type of country that the EU does NOT want, and the USA doesn't give a damn about since it doesn't border Russia or the Black Sea. 
While the bits that they DO want (Crimea and Eastern Ukraine) declare independence or go to Russia.  _All this listening to Russian TV has inspired me to start studying Russian again.  I want to go hiking on Crimea. Same as Lampada did. Saw some pictures of it, it's absolutely gorgeous._

----------


## UhOhXplode

> Not just Europeans and Americans - all people. This is universal. 
> Actually, they are not.

 ^ True. But if you read 6 stories about a dog and they all say the dog was brown, then the dog was probably brown. If only 2 stories said the dog bites then you still don't really know if it bites... but you can be sure it was brown. That's how I read news.
In 2011, the US refused to cooperate with Russia in a proposed "Defense Shield" project. Instead, they continued the European Missile Defense project by installing land and sea missile bases in NATO countries.  NATO missile defence system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 
When the US proposed setting up long-range missile defense interceptors and equipment in Poland and the Czech Republic, Russia responded by proposing to install Iskander surface to surface missiles in Kaliningrad. President Obama backed down.
President Putin offered Ukraine a third alternative - the chance to retain ties with Russia and also seek economic agreements in the west. That proposal was very logical but it was rejected. If Ukraine retained ties to Russia, it would block possible NATO membership.
The conditions of the IMF loan ore very pro-NATO and Crimea has a vital Russian Naval base. That base could come under NATO control if Crimea remains a part of Ukraine. 
The conflict in Ukraine isn't about the people, history, or culture. It's a deadly game of Military strategy. If Russia can keep Crimea, it will be an important strategic victory for Russia. Keeping parts of eastern Ukraine would be helpful too.
The NATO defense bases in Europe are damaging Russia's ability to defend itself. It's at a critical point now and the Ukrainian crisis is making it worse. Russia will be forced to respond. In a recent news article, the Russian Minister of Defense threatened to halt International Arms Inspections in Russia if the US imposed sanctions. That would be one solution to the problem since it would allow Russia to improve it's defense capabilities. Another article suggested that Russia could be forced to make pre-emptive strikes on NATO defense bases. Imo, the 1st alternative is more likely.
What's obvious is that NATO has become a real threat to Russian security and wants to increase that threat in Ukraine. To support a US/EU friendly government in Ukraine, the governments need to get support from the people in their own countries. In the US, the government is getting that approval using the media. That alone proves to me that the American media is nothing but a mouthpiece for Washington DC.
All the facts I've found (in eastern and western sources) prove that the Ukraine crisis is a NATO aggression and it's goal is to tighten it's grip on Russia. Those facts are undeniable and obvious. If Russia wants to survive, it will have to respond.
Btw, the one thing I admire most about Russia is it's refusal to sell out to the west - Just another reason I respect and support President Putin. 
The NATO defense bases are the kind of fear that creates the anti-Russian propaganda in the US media. The west is obviously opposed to friendly relations with Russia so it shouldn't expect any friendly responses from Moscow. 
It's more than sad that the Ukrainian people have to suffer and die because of this fear but it's very likely that the situation will only get worse.

----------


## 14Russian

"If Russia can keep Crimea, it will be an important strategic victory for Russia. Keeping parts of eastern Ukraine would be helpful too.'
Why stop there?  Go for the whole kit and kaboodle.   Ukraine SSR was part of the Soviet Union so Putin can just say I'm taking it back?   Why not?   Many morons say that Russia was not occupying Crimea yet they had troops there.   Oh, they were there all along as they have navy ships and ports there.   Right.   That's why when any Ukrainian personnel show up, Russian troops fire warning shots?   Also, they started replacing governors with Kremlin friendly (Russia-controlled) individuals and unplugging all the Ukrainian channels and instead, airing Russian State (Kremlin-fed) tv channels like Russia 1, NTV etc. etc.     http://lenta.ru/news/2014/03/09/stop...dMgE8zn9jFkKIQ 
Ukraine is occupied either way.   By the U.S./Israeli-led organizations and their lackeys in Ukraine, especially.   Most Ukrainians just haven't realized it yet.

----------


## UhOhXplode

> "If Russia can keep Crimea, it will be an important strategic victory for Russia. Keeping parts of eastern Ukraine would be helpful too.'
> Why stop there?  Go for the whole kit and kaboodle.   Ukraine SSR was part of the Soviet Union so Putin can just say I'm taking it back?   Why not?   Many morons say that Russia was not occupying Crimea yet they had troops there.   Oh, they were there all along as they have navy ships and ports there.   Right.   That's why when any Ukrainian personnel show up, Russian troops fire warning shots?   Also, they started replacing governors with Kremlin friendly (Russia-controlled) individuals and unplugging all the Ukrainian channels and instead, airing Russian State (Kremlin-fed) tv channels like Russia 1, NTV etc. etc.     http://lenta.ru/news/2014/03/09/stop...dMgE8zn9jFkKIQ 
> Ukraine is occupied either way.   By the U.S./Israeli-led organizations and their lackeys in Ukraine, especially.   Most Ukrainians just haven't realized it yet.

 Exactly. Crimea's 58% Russian so it wasn't difficult for President Putin to get that referendum. The only question that remains is what other parts of Ukraine Russia will claim before NATO claims the rest. Ukraine could easily be one of the most expensive bankrupt countries on the market. 
But the worst part is the possibility of a new arms race. That would mean proliferation of nuclear weapons in every country which would make the world even more dangerous and seriously damage every economy. How much more fear can the planet afford?

----------


## 14Russian

> Exactly. Crimea's 58% Russian so it wasn't difficult for President Putin to get that referendum. The only question that remains is what other parts of Ukraine Russia will claim before NATO claims the rest. Ukraine could easily be one of the most expensive bankrupt countries on the market. 
> But the worst part is the possibility of a new arms race. That would mean proliferation of nuclear weapons in every country which would make the world even more dangerous and seriously damage every economy. How much more fear can the planet afford?

 But, how are they doing the referendum?   TEN DAYS to decide whether you are changing the entire country?!?   The troops have guns and controlling who goes where or what people do.  The Crimean authorties are airing Russian TV channels and scrutinizing whatever Ukrainian ones they allow.   This is fair, right?!?   Also, they have that stupid billboard of propaganda, choosing a 'Nazi' side or Russia.   The entire thing is a sham. 
There's no nazis.   The 'far Right' in Ukraine has been bought by the American and Israeli Zionists.   They were probably given money and promises of key Government positions with nice cozy incentives.   These traitors don't give a **** about Ukraine or their fellow citizens.   But, the lying Russian government portray them as Nazis so they can pick up their own slice before the pro-US/EU Elites set up shop there.  
If a foreigner like myself can figure it out, how come Ukrainians can't?   What is wrong with them?   I would rather not be controlled but be poor and in charge of my own independence than sell out.   And the BS in the other thread is just disgraceful.   I've never seen this forum have so many liars and BS one after the other.   I knew there were a lot of Putinoids here but it's ridiculous now.    Their brains don't work right.   Just because you criticize the Russian strategy, it doesn't mean you're 'pro-West.'   But, their brains don't function properly.

----------


## Lampada

> But, how are they doing the referendum?   TEN DAYS to decide whether you are changing the entire country?!?   The troops have guns and controlling who goes where or what people do.  The Crimean authorties are airing Russian TV channels and scrutinizing whatever Ukrainian ones they allow.   This is fair, right?!?   Also, they have that stupid billboard of propaganda, choosing a 'Nazi' side or Russia.   The entire thing is a sham. 
> There's no nazis.   The 'far Right' in Ukraine has been bought by the American and Israeli Zionists.   They were probably given money and promises of key Government positions with nice cozy incentives.   These traitors don't give a **** about Ukraine or their fellow citizens.   But, the lying Russian government portray them as Nazis so they can pick up their own slice before the pro-US/EU Elites set up shop there.  
> If a foreigner like myself can figure it out, how come Ukrainians can't?   What is wrong with them?   I would rather not be controlled but be poor and in charge of my own independence than sell out.   And the BS in the other thread is just disgraceful.   I've never seen this forum have so many liars and BS one after the other.   I knew there were a lot of Putinoids here but it's ridiculous now.    Their brains don't work right.   Just because you criticize the Russian strategy, it doesn't mean you're 'pro-West.'   But, their brains don't function properly.

 You have to stop being judgmental here because you sound offensive and it's forbidden on this forum.  Consider it as a warning.

----------


## 14Russian

> You have to stop being judgmental here because you sound offensive and it's forbidden on this forum.  Consider it as a warning.

 I am asking how they reach their opinion.   It seems irrational to me. 
Edit:  no problem.  It won't matter anyway - there are no other opinions on here.

----------


## Hanna

14Russian - I don't think most people here are *"Putinoids"*, least of all our Russian friends who have to live in a country governed by Putin and have their own eyes to see with... 
The man has many faults. However in this situation *I think the people in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are prepared to live with Putin and his faults, rather than continue with the Ukrainian circus of revolutions, corruption, extremists, poverty and language discrimination.* Russia offers them some hope and a better chance in most of these respects. You have to be quite dumb to put any trust in the EU as a saviour right now, look at Greece and Romania... How countries end up after the US meddles is visible for all to see in Libya, Syria and Iraq just for starters. 
The problems in Russia is a different story, but* you can't deny that the quality of life in Russia has improved dramatically under Putin, there hasn't been any major instability, Russians have stopped hating their country* and emigrating en masse.   *I don't think I would vote for Putin if I was Russian,* and I am not sure if it even matters very much what people vote for in Russia.... (based on some allegations here on MR) *But even if Putin is a dictator, you can do A LOT worse* than somebody who improves living standards, keeps order without being completely tyrannical and leaves people alone do do and say what they like. He's got a lot of work to do on corruption, infrastructure and poverty, but I don't think he is denying that.  
And *Russia is not the only country where the same party wins every election.* It happens in other so called democratic countries too, for example Japan. They too have problems with corruption and criminality. 
I also believe that if he REALLY messed up, it's not beyond the Russians to get rid of him. 
So let's leave it to them to worry about him.

----------


## Hanna

So I will sum up 14Russians points in a non-offensive way...
I gave some answers as I understand them. Please correct me if I am wrong!   *"Why does the referendum have to take place so soon? "* _The longer they wait, the longer other forces have to plan their response in case of a Yes vote. The presidential election is in May, they need to do it long before that. Plus, things tend to happen pretty fast in this part of the world, don't they? It's just a general trend. It's also more democratic, since you don't leave too much time for an orchestrated PR campaign and expensivew manipulation of the public opinion. Compare with the Scotland referendum where everybody knows what the outcome will be, and what will happen if opinion swings in the time leading up to the referendum._   *"Are alternative viewpoints currently being censored in Crimea? Why did Ukrainian TV get banned and Russian channels appeared in their place?* " _I think this is a bit suspicious. This will be used to discredit the referendum. Seems like a Soviet mindset. I am sure they have an explanation, but not too sure the answer would cut the muster.  However, the people in Crimea have the internet and radio so they can still access alternative viewpoints. I believe it's a mistake by the Crimean parliament to do this though._   *"Isn't it extremely simplified and quite brutal agitation to claim that staying with Ukraine equals Nazism? * " _I too think that banner is ridiculous and this line of reasoning overly simplistic and possibly false.  However it seems that this is considered fair game by people in that part of the world. Who knows what the other side will say! Maybe that's what you need to do, to get your message across in this culture. It might be what people are expecting. But I think it's a bit hard to stomach too._ * 
 "The 'far Right' in Ukraine has been bought by the  American and Israeli Zionists.   They were probably given money and  promises..."* _No, they have a tradition of radical nationalism there, as a reaction against Communism and Russia. And actual Nazism during the war.  Also, bear in mind that people in Eastern Europe have not been through the same Politically Correct brainwashing as you and I for instance. So radical nationalism is not quite as shocking to the average person there, as it is to us. It's visible in places like Hungary, East Germany and Poland, not just Ukraine. Something tells me you don't care much for the PC agenda yourself.... Why would Zionists care about Ukraine? Bankers, Corporations and NATO/USA, yes. But Zionists? Seriously? As for Russia - sure. Ukraine is their little defense buffer against Europe and it's too bad for the Ukrainians that this is the case. Russia lost almost all its other buffers, so of course they care about one of the few ones remaining...  Personally I still think Moscow cares a lot more about Ukraine and its population than Brussels does. Just for starters, half of Russia seems to have family there, or go there on holiday.  Greece shows us that the EU is quite happy to let even long-standing members really suffer. So why would they care about UA any more? _ *
"I would rather not be controlled but be  poor and in charge of my own independence than sell out. How come the Ukrainians don't feel this way?* " _How poor have you actually been in your life? I think people in Ukraine know more about poverty and its effects than you do._

----------


## 14Russian

> So I will sum up 14Russians points in a non-offensive way...
> I gave some answers as I understand them. Please correct me if I am wrong!

 You're always wrong.   Why do you reply to my posts.   I think you should mind your own business or reply to the other posts like you do showing your ignorance and lack of knowledge.

----------


## Lampada

> You're always wrong.   Why do you reply to my posts.   I think you should mind your own business or reply to the other posts like you do showing your ignorance and lack of knowledge.

 You are one hopeless meany.

----------


## Hanna

> You're always wrong.   Why do you reply to my posts.   I think you should mind your own business or reply to the other posts like you do showing your ignorance and lack of knowledge.

 Please can you point out _exactly_ what was ignorant or showed a lack of knowledge in what I wrote? 
It is not at all impossible that I got something wrong - that's why I started with "correct me if I am wrong". I thought that some of your points were interesting and valid, that's why I wrote about it. 
If you do not give an example, I will assume that your comment was simply intended as a personal insult.

----------


## UhOhXplode

> But, how are they doing the referendum?   TEN DAYS to decide whether you are changing the entire country?!?   The troops have guns and controlling who goes where or what people do.  The Crimean authorties are airing Russian TV channels and scrutinizing whatever Ukrainian ones they allow.   This is fair, right?!?   Also, they have that stupid billboard of propaganda, choosing a 'Nazi' side or Russia.   The entire thing is a sham. 
> There's no nazis.   The 'far Right' in Ukraine has been bought by the American and Israeli Zionists.   They were probably given money and promises of key Government positions with nice cozy incentives.   These traitors don't give a **** about Ukraine or their fellow citizens.   But, the lying Russian government portray them as Nazis so they can pick up their own slice before the pro-US/EU Elites set up shop there.  
> If a foreigner like myself can figure it out, how come Ukrainians can't?   What is wrong with them?   I would rather not be controlled but be poor and in charge of my own independence than sell out.   And the BS in the other thread is just disgraceful.   I've never seen this forum have so many liars and BS one after the other.   I knew there were a lot of Putinoids here but it's ridiculous now.    Their brains don't work right.   Just because you criticize the Russian strategy, it doesn't mean you're 'pro-West.'   But, their brains don't function properly.

 I agree with Hanna's response to your post, in post #38. This is a logical discussion of the situation in Ukraine - Why all the drama? 
About your 1st paragraph: Everything that's been happening in Ukraine has been fast. The "peaceful" demonstrators in Kiev didn't waste any time taking Independence Square. They even sent a lot of police to the hospitals - how fair was that? Then they staged a violent coup and took over the government. So now I have to ask: How would the US government respond if that happened in Washington DC? Here's a clue: Woman slain after car chase from White House to Capitol 
No. Angry, unarmed protestors don't get a warm reception in Washington DC. And now, the US media:
We have to use a satellite dish to pick up RT and the rest of the media is very anti-Russian. So, why wouldn't Crimea use the same tactics? - It's the American way. Btw, media control is also used heavily during US elections. I rarely see anything but Democrat or Republican ads. Oh, and don't forget, Democrats are Libtards and Republicans are Conservitards or Nazis. I've even seen people bashing campaign signs in other peoples yards.
So no, I don't see anything unusual about the non-Russian side being called Nazis. Again, it's the American way. 
Imo, the troops in Crimea are using their guns to prevent lawlessness. I don't believe that has anything to do with the referendum. I mean, if I went to Crimea, I'd bring a gun to protect myself. People aren't very safe right now in Ukraine. 
About your 2nd paragraph: I think it's obvious that NATO is trying to expand into Ukraine. And don't forget, the leaders in the interim government are all very wealthy - 2 are billionaires.
Politicians are almost always wealthy - especially in the US. Anyway, I don't understand the financial side of this. I only know that dad was working with a Hungarian broker when the USSR dissolved so he probably knows more about that issue. 
About your 3rd paragraph: How can you figure it out? I think we can make educated guesses but there's too much people don't know. Since the interim Ukrainian leaders were already wealthy then they wouldn't be poor - unless they made bad investments.
Sorry, but I don't understand anything you posted after the first 3 sentences so I can't comment on the rest of the paragraph. 
But I do know that America and the EU wouldn't suffer if all of Ukraine was annexed to Russia. I also know that President Putin and the Russian Parliament have very strong ties and interests in Ukraine. And I know that there is a strong cultural split in Ukraine.
Imo, Ukraine can only have peace when it becomes 2 countries - East and West Ukraine.
There's more I want to discuss but it's late and Current Events isn't the only thing I have to study tonight - I wish it was.

----------


## Hanna

I feel sorry for the people of Eastern Ukraine. It seems they just ended up on the wrong side of the border, because of some administrative decision in the 1920s (?) I understand it as if they are ethnic Russians or people who speak Russian as their first language.  
Apparently Putin said that Russia will only get involved "as a last resort". I am wondering how many activists in Eastern Ukraine have decided to do their best to provoke a "last resort" situation.  
It must also be very frustrating for them to see how people on the other side of the border are getting better finances and don't have to worry about language issues. Whereas for them, the situation is volatile and they are not getting richer.  
If Ukraine splits, then the only decent thing to do, after all the meddling, would be for the EU to to take Western Ukraine.  However it seems clear to me, that the parts of Ukraine that the USA is interested in, is Crimea in the East. Exacty the areas where Russia will probably not allow any foreign influence, and where the people support Russia. I wonder if the EU and USA didn't know about people's loyalties in Ukraine, and the language / culture situation.

----------


## it-ogo

> I feel sorry for the people of Eastern Ukraine. It seems they just ended up on the wrong side of the border, because of some administrative decision in the 1920s (?) I understand it as if they are ethnic Russians or people who speak Russian as their first language.  
> Apparently Putin said that Russia will only get involved "as a last resort". I am wondering how many activists in Eastern Ukraine have decided to do their best to provoke a "last resort" situation.  
> It must also be very frustrating for them to see how people on the other side of the border are getting better finances and don't have to worry about language issues. Whereas for them, the situation is volatile and they are not getting richer.  
> If Ukraine splits, then the only decent thing to do, after all the meddling, would be for the EU to to take Western Ukraine.  However it seems clear to me, that the parts of Ukraine that the USA is interested in, is Crimea in the East. Exacty the areas where Russia will probably not allow any foreign influence, and where the people support Russia. I wonder if the EU and USA didn't know about people's loyalties in Ukraine, and the language / culture situation.

 What makes you think you can judge about people's loyalties in Ukraine? I am the only person you know here at forum from Eastern Ukraine, being Russian speaking and even ethnic Russian and I made my position clear. But you prefer to ignore the only direct evidence you have. I say: one should not be an intellectual giant to understand that the only purpose of invasion and most actions of Mr. Poo in Ukraine is to worsen our lives to ensure the loyality of Russian population to the Mr. Poo personally thus to preserve his power. And we don't need to listen to any "propaganda" for that - enough to have your everyday morning portion of chauvinism from conversations to Russian ctizens about Ukraine here at forum.

----------


## Lampada

> ... to ensure the loyality of Russian population to the Mr. Poo personally thus to preserve his power. ...

 Я в шоке от некоторых фамилий:   Официальный сайт Министерства культуры 
Список открытый, можно прослеживать, кто ещё подпишется. Сейчас 103 человека.
Людей жалко:  это ж под каким давлением нужно жить.   ::  
PS. Уже 104.  Михалковых никого нет, Пугачёвой, Жванецкого, Дмитрия Быкова, Ефремова.

----------


## Ramil

> PS. Уже 104.  Михалковых никого нет

 За Михалкова не переживай!  ::  Этот.... режиссёр, как и его папа покойный, всегда колебался исключительно вместе с колебаниями генеральной линии партии.

----------


## Hanna

> What makes you think you can judge about people's loyalties in Ukraine? I am the only person you know here at forum from Eastern Ukraine, being Russian speaking and even ethnic Russian and I made my position clear. But you prefer to ignore the only direct evidence you have. I say: one should not be an intellectual giant to understand that the only purpose of invasion and most actions of Mr. Poo in Ukraine is to worsen our lives to ensure the loyality of Russian population to the Mr. Poo personally thus to preserve his power. And we don't need to listen to any "propaganda" for that - enough to have your everyday morning portion of chauvinism from conversations to Russian ctizens about Ukraine here at forum.

 Ok, I understand. I didn't know that you were from Eastern Ukraine. You never mentioned where you live, that I can recall. I don't read all the posts in Russian, it takes me too long. I thought you didn't want to say where you lived, and/or that you lived in some other part of Ukraine.  
I totally respect your view, and in light of what you said, it seems that Russian TV is_ not_ reflecting the view of people in Eastern Ukraine in a balanced way.   
They make out that practically everyone hates the new government in Kiev and are pro Russia. All you see is people with Russian flags and supporting Gubarev. While European media pretends that Eastern Ukraine doesn't exist. If you have flicked through Russian channels recently, you know what I mean.  
My views were based completely on what I saw on Russian TV,  can't understand everything they say, and *it seems that I let myself be mislead!* 
Maybe Russian TV only covers the pro-Russian rallies and there are other rallies they ignore.  
You know I respect your views, so this will make me re-think. 
If you have the time, would you mind explaining:  
1) In your town/city what do most people think. Same as you, or something different? 
2) What would you like to see happening right now? In Kiev, in Moscow, in your own city and in Crimea?

----------


## it-ogo

> 1) In your town/city what do most people think. Same as you, or something different? 
> 2) What would you like to see happening right now? In Kiev, in Moscow, in your own city and in Crimea?

 Before Crimean invasion most people (like I am) were passively unhappy to both Yanukovich and protesters. After the runaway of Yanukovich people were happy that he is lost but quite sceptical about the protesters and the temporary government. But nobody was really afraid or angry like it was in 2004 - the situation is not exactly something new. Most common position is "all of them are bastards". Russian invasion changed much. For me it was unexpected: for some reason I was sure that we are safe form that side like you feel sure now that Sweden is safe from foreign invasion. Now most people afraid of the possible war and disorders - that is the most common emotion. We have some active supporters of the Kiev protesters but they are not the majority. What we have not is an imaginary loyalty to Russia. Most people understand well that Putin is merely a bastard resolving his own problems on our account.  Most people are not ready to burn Russian tanks but we don't expect anything good from the East and we don't need a foreign military supports against the rest of Ukraine whatever our disagreements are. That is an internal business. 
I don't want to discuss what I'd like to see happening somewhere else... Maybe my emotions are too strong or I am too evil, and anyway I don't want to be accused in extremism. Let us say I don't wish anything good to Russia now.

----------


## Hanna

> Before Crimean invasion most people (like I am) were passively unhappy to both Yanukovich and protesters. After the runaway of Yanukovich people were happy that he is lost but quite sceptical about the protesters and the temporary government. But nobody was really afraid or angry like it was in 2004 - the situation is not exactly something new. Most common position is "all of them are bastards". Russian invasion changed much. For me it was unexpected: for some reason I was sure that we are safe form that side like you feel sure now that Sweden is safe from foreign invasion. Now most people afraid of the possible war and disorders - that is the most common emotion. We have some active supporters of the Kiev protesters but they are not the majority. What we have not is an imaginary loyalty to Russia. Most people understand well that Putin is merely a bastard resolving his own problems on our account.  Most people are not ready to burn Russian tanks but we don't expect anything good from the East and we don't need a foreign military supports against the rest of Ukraine whatever our disagreements are. That is an internal business. 
> I don't want to discuss what I'd like to see happening somewhere else... Maybe my emotions are too strong or I am too evil, and anyway I don't want to be accused in extremism. Let us say I don't wish anything good to Russia now.

 Thanks, that was really interesting. 
I know you don't visit the forum to discuss politics, mainly, so it's nice that you made an exception when your area is in the focus of current events.  
And I don't think anybody has the right to accuse you of extremism in regards to events in your own country!  
When you say "invasion", do you mean those guys with "unmarked" uniforms, in Crimea? Or something else?  
I was so annoyed with the way Western media reports this, that I turned to Russian TV. I guess I was too busy trying to understand what they were saying, to be critical... I really thought their pictures of Eastern Ukrainians waving Russian flags more or less showed the full picture. Your post made me see that I was taken in by a misleading presentation.   *Who is Gubarev and what happened with him? What is your view of him and why do some people like him - he's an oligarch!? 
If your choice is between customs union with Russia and the "Eurasian Union" that Putin wants.....  or EUs promises about closer co-operation and possible membership --- which do you prefer, and why?   *

----------


## it-ogo

> *Who is Gubarev and what happened with him? What is your view of him and why do some people like him - he's an oligarch!? 
> If your choice is between customs union with Russia and the "Eurasian Union" that Putin wants.....  or EUs promises about closer co-operation and possible membership --- which do you prefer, and why?   *

 Gubarev is a kind of clown who used temporary disability of authorities to make a performance. Some people can say that he is a kind of traitor who support foring military invasion, but I believe he is just an insane freak. I don't know who loves him. Maybe some guys enjoying disorders and revolutions? Well, they say, if Kiev enjoys revolution why can't we? Let's play! Don't afraid, nobody will go against us as they afraid of Russian militaries on the border! 
Well, as for "Eurasian Union" I understood well the actions of Yanukovich. Ukraine needed money immediately to save from being bankrupt and Yanukovich took money from Putin while Europe proposed no immediate income and questionable long-term effects. But now I believe we should avoid any kind of cooperation with Russia as it is proved to be really dangerous. We are not rich enough to support such kind of cooperation.

----------


## Lampada

_"Подписанты"!_  Ой, как смешно!           Николай Бурляев (справа):

----------


## it-ogo

> _"Подписанты"!_  Ой, как смешно!

 Табаков, Баталов, Боярский... Ну ладно Говорухин - он по жизни с тяжелыми тараканами при всем моем к нему уважении и восхищении... Прочие же... нет, я могу понять, если кто-то пересмотрел ящика на старости лет и начал заявлять всякое... Но когда вот так вот тупо не свое мнение, откуда бы оно не проистекало, а "поддерживаю действия"... Действительно, мне трудно объяснить это чем-то, кроме желания не подставлять свой театр/подчиненных/фонд/родственников... Иногда ведь расписываться не нужно - достаточно просто промолчать, не заявить "это без меня расписались, не спрашивая". Были прецеденты, но я не думал, что все настолько серьезно.

----------


## Ramil

> Были прецеденты, но я не думал, что все настолько серьезно.

 Чего вы хотите? У нас прикормленная элита. Они давно уже поняли, что наличие активной гражданской позиции (tm) негативно отражается на творческих перспективах. Вернее, не само наличие, а наличие неправильной гражданской позиции. Вопрос "с кем вы, мастера культуры" уже давно решён и снят с повестки дня.
Кроме того, я вообще не сильно понимаю смысла вот таких вот подписных листов. Ну, разве что - декларация о благонадёжности. А так - пусть сеют разумное, доброе вечное.  ::

----------


## Paul G.

> Ой, как смешно!

 И что тут смешного? Может объясните, вместе посмеемся.

----------


## Lampada

> И что тут смешного? Может объясните, вместе посмеемся.

 Да, не так уж и смешно.  Я передумала, не будем вместе смеяться.

----------


## UhOhXplode

@ it-ogo:
Thanks for the input. I knew you lived in Ukraine but I didn't know where and I didn't know you were ethnic Russian. I'm not surprised by your comments in posts #48 and #50. I have a friend that lives in Ecuador and they have uprisings there too. He was moving from Quito when the last uprising happened but fortunately the opposition wasn't that hostile. Now he lives in Ambato with all the ash from the Tungurahua eruptions. Fun... not. 
It's probably a common misconception that all ethnic Russians that live in Ukraine are loyal Russians. That's like saying that all British people that live in America are loyal Brits. I can't imagine what it's like living in Ukraine but your posts really help.

----------


## Paul G.

> Я передумала, не будем вместе смеяться.

 И то верно. Над собой смеяться не очень весело. Особенно когда выставляешь фотографии актеров в нацисткой форме, которые играют советских разведчиков.

----------


## Lampada

> И то верно. Над собой смеяться не очень весело. Особенно когда выставляешь фотографии актеров в нацисткой форме, которые играют советских разведчиков.

 Весело! И над собой посмеяться весело, и над другими.

----------


## BappaBa

> И что тут смешного? Может объясните, вместе посмеемся.

 Она забыла, что ее любимому Басилашвили всегда удавалось прекрасно играть сволочей.

----------


## it-ogo

> It's probably a common misconception that all ethnic Russians that live in Ukraine are loyal Russians. That's like saying that all British people that live in America are loyal Brits. I can't imagine what it's like living in Ukraine but your posts really help.

 Basically "ethnic Russian" like myself here in Donbass is rather uncommon phenomenon. According to the statistics here we have somewhere about 40% Russians and 60% Ukrainians but in fact it means that a randoomly taken person has 40% of Russian ancestors and 60% of Ukrainian ones. You see, people here have several generations of marriages without giving a fax to anyone's ethnic background. And all the Ukrainian disorders were about building the state, not about anyone's ethnicity. They are Russian authorities who try to promote savage ethnic chauvinistic dimension to the problem.

----------


## Lampada

Если вернуться к теме...   http://www.newsweek.com/*american-who-dared-make-putins-case*-231388

----------


## 14Russian

> Basically "ethnic Russian" like myself here in Donbass is rather uncommon phenomenon. According to the statistics here we have somewhere about 40% Russians and 60% Ukrainians but in fact it means that a randoomly taken person has 40% of Russian ancestors and 60% of Ukrainian ones. You see, people here have several generations of marriages without giving a fax to anyone's ethnic background. And all the Ukrainian disorders were about building the state, not about anyone's ethnicity. They are Russian authorities who try to promote savage ethnic chauvinistic dimension to the problem.

 Imho, Putin and the US (including those in that mix) are the problems here.   I'm not sure what the point is posting CNN BS and other mainstream articles.   You will just get a mix-mash of crap and this is how you control countries.   You accuse both sides of A and B and meanwhile, two similar groups are fighting each other.   Who gains?   Besides, the two sides are opportunists who don't care about the people in their countries and since you speak of ethnic Russians and ethnic Ukrainians, that's what we are talking about here.    Putin doesn't give a **** about either.    The Elites who took over in Ukraine don't either.   Faux 'nazis' and all.   Whatever.   All BS.

----------


## UhOhXplode

> Basically "ethnic Russian" like myself here in Donbass is rather uncommon phenomenon. According to the statistics here we have somewhere about 40% Russians and 60% Ukrainians but in fact it means that a randoomly taken person has 40% of Russian ancestors and 60% of Ukrainian ones. You see, people here have several generations of marriages without giving a fax to anyone's ethnic background. And all the Ukrainian disorders were about building the state, not about anyone's ethnicity. They are Russian authorities who try to promote savage ethnic chauvinistic dimension to the problem.

 I'm not married yet so I didn't consider that. But if I was in love then I know I wouldn't care if the girl was Scottish, Norwegian, Russian, Lithuanian, or whatever. So that makes sense. After a long time it would be very difficult to know who had what ethnicity. 
So the only real split in Ukraine is between those who support the opposition and those who don't. I think I understand this better now. Thanks.

----------


## dic

> So the only real split in Ukraine is between those who support the opposition and those who don't. I think I understand this better now.

----------


## dic



----------


## Sibiriak

Кто перешел красную линию?   *Стивен Коэн: Обама вместо благодарности Путину ставит ему подножку*

----------

