What's good (and bad ) about Russia?

[willedoo]

As an edit to an above post, Navalny wasn't arrested for breaching bail conditions. It was for breaching parole conditions. He is on parole for a former suspended sentence.

 

As far as Putin is concerned, I don't make apologies for some of the nastier things he's done to individuals. onetrack is correct in that he is ruthless and revengeful. But I always try to look at the reality in that country. To hold that position, you have to be ruthless; if not, you wouldn't last long. Putin is maybe not the best of a bad bunch, but he's better than a lot of alternatives.

 

It comes back to that thing where we judge them by our standards and expect them to live by our standards. It doesn't work that way in Russia. We've had democracy for almost 120 years and America a lot longer, but Russia has only experimented with it for the last 30 years and it's still not a perfect fit there. Their system is entrenched in corruption and has been that way forever in every level of society from Imperial days through to the Soviet Union and modern day Russian Federation.

 

With Putin, it's a case of we should be careful what we wish for because there's a lot worse than him that would love to have the job. One case in point is the oligarchs mentioned by that London journalist in onetrack's link. I mentioned that it was missing context, so I might be able to provide some here.

 

Here's a quote from the article:

"As Bill Browder, an American businessman who also fell foul of Putin, told me, Putin’s message was simple. He was telling the oligarchs, the richest Russians, to keep out of politics. If they obeyed, he would let them keep most of their money. The alternative was that they could join Khodorkovsky in a cage. Browder and numerous investigators into Russia’s dark money economy say that Putin and his Kremlin cronies then began to take a cut from the businesses."

 

For a start, that's only the word of Bill Browder to a Western journalist looking for dirt. Browder is as dodgy as the rest of them but there's a certain amount of truth in what he said. This is the history of the oligarchs mentioned. When the Union collapsed, Russia had no experience with democratic government and no idea how to go about it. The country was bankrupt and the U.S. and some other major Western countries bailed them out financially. Part of the deal was that the U.S. would write up their new constitution and laws and steer them to so called democracy.

 

The problem started when the Americans wanted their spoils. They played a gullible and corrupt Yeltsin like a fish, and Yeltsin signed over Russia's resources under the product sharing agreements. The original oligarchs were created by Yeltsin and the Americans. The Americans identified those with political clout and gifted them major assets that were formally state owned under the Soviet system. The intention and result was that the Americans had the country's newly created rich and powerful in their pocket.

 

Then another problem for the country arose. The oligarchs weren't happy with just being rich; they wanted more. They gradually infiltrated politics until the parliaments were controlled by the oligarchs who held office. During the first decade of the Russian Federation under Yeltsin, the U.S. controllers and the corrupt oligarchs, life for the average Russian citizen was a nightmare of grinding poverty and starvation. Some estimates of the number of people who starved to death in that period range from 1 to 2 million.

 

In 2000, Putin was elected President. One of the major problems he identified was the stranglehold the oligarchs and the Americans had on the country and the amount of lost revenue as a result of money leaving the country. That's when the bit referred to by Bill Browder came into it. Putin did jail a few of the oligarchs and most likely would have cut the alleged deal as mentioned. A simple message: get out of parliament and tone it down a bit and abide by some rules. It wasn't as simple as a jail or wealth option. Putin knew that he couldn't break the oligarchs completely as that would just result in his assassination and the oligarchs resuming power to the detriment of the Russian people.

 

Even if it's true that he and his government cronies got a cut as part of the deal, it's a far better option than the oligarchs running the country as before. A win win situation. The other big reform Putin did was gradually getting out of the product sharing agreements and basically kicking the Yanks out. That's why they hate him to this day; he took their lollies away. It's no wonder that older Russians who remember those times support him.

 

In the first ten years of the Russian Federation, Russia got almost nothing for the resources being shipped out of the country. Post Putin, Russia gets it's fair share of royalties and revenue and people's incomes have risen many times over. They've also been able to rebuild their military into a half decent defence force on the back of oil and gas revenue. One man has been at the centre of that and if the country had been left to the Americans and their oligarchs as before, people would probably still be dying in the streets from starvation.

 

So that's some context to the oligarchs. In my opinion, given the entrenched culture of corruption in that country, Putin cutting a deal for the better seems reasonable. The end justifies the means.

.

 

 

Edited January 19, 2021 by willedoo

[Old Koreelah]

8 hours ago, willedoo said:

We did it. We made them our enemy. Without an enemy, Congress would have no motivation to pass huge defence spending bills.

There was a story about how at the end of WWII the US military asked for 172 nukes, because that was the number of cities and large nuclear targets in the USSR, which was still their ally. 

[willedoo]

1 hour ago, Old Koreelah said:

There was a story about how at the end of WWII the US military asked for 172 nukes, because that was the number of cities and large nuclear targets in the USSR, which was still their ally. 

It sounds like bordering on conspiracy theories, but I've seen a map overlay related to that. It was a comparison of the factories and industrial plants in Russia earmarked as targets by the U.S. in the event of total nuclear war. The other map was the factories and plants closed during those bad early years of the Russian Federation when Yeltsin and his U.S. minders were in charge. There wasn't much difference between the maps.

[Jerry_Atrick]

I can't work out if this is good - or bad... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9169565/Tsar-Putins-1billion-palace-pleasure-monstrous-monument-Russian-leaders-vanity.html

 

I mean, I like the idea of a private lap dancing room for the PM to let him blow off steam, etc... I think it should be enshrined in the constitution (they can select the sex of the lapdancers to suit their tastes).. and as a (once Aussie) taxpayer, I would probably support it as once their head clears we may get some good government...

 

(of course, I jest)..

 

But, we sit here and complain how Trumpski has used his position to enrich himself.. Seems, again, he is not up to the world stage... and beaten by Putin....

 

OK.. OK.. I get this is the Daily Wail... But, it was the first link I clicked on to post to this site - I picked it up from I think it was The Times)..

[nomadpete]

I feel cheated. The circus has left town!

 

Never mind bleating about a stolen election, (every election has somebody feeling undeservedly unappreciated.

 

But now I've had my morning entertainment stolen.

[onetrack]

Don't worry, Trump won't stay out of the limelight for long. He can't help himself. He'll have his face on the news networks again soon, ripping strips off everyone who was pissweak and didn't help him get re-elected again. And he'll probably be ripping strips off the players in the new administration, too - denigrating anything they do, that tears down anything he put in place.

[pmccarthy]

I think he will just stay at home and sulk. 

 

[octave]

He may be busy  defending himself in court.   He also owes a few dollars to some banks who are losing patience. 

[willedoo]

8 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

I can't work out if this is good - or bad... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9169565/Tsar-Putins-1billion-palace-pleasure-monstrous-monument-Russian-leaders-vanity.html

Who knows? The Kremlin says the place has nothing to do with Putin. But a Pommie hack journalist believes anything the messiah Navalny puts up on his Yotube channel, so it must be true. Perish the thought that Navalny would ever tell a fib.

Edited January 22, 2021 by willedoo

[willedoo]

8 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

I can't work out if this is good - or bad

Jerry, there's a third option; it's called bullsh*t.

[Jerry_Atrick]

With due respect, and you know more abou Russia than I will ever know, neither Putin nor the Kremlin are beacons of transparency and integrity. It seems the politics is as poisoned there as it is elsewhere. So while Navalny may harbour his aspirations and may be a reprobate, he seems surrounded by many of the same ilk...

 

However, this is not the first time this has surfaced.. Infact, a BBC report back in 2012 had already started reporting it... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17730959

 

I did a quick search of the internet - yes Google, Ecosia and the ilk, and while they will no doubt not go out of their way to favour Vlad, I would tink they would find things that may be fact based denials...

 

My post was in jest - I hadn't even read the article (nor the original one I found) as it really doesn't concern me... But remember - many a "hack" journo has uncovered many a controversy, because after all, that is what they go looking for...

[willedoo]

16 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

With due respect, and you know more abou Russia than I will ever know, neither Putin nor the Kremlin are beacons of transparency and integrity. It seems the politics is as poisoned there as it is elsewhere. So while Navalny may harbour his aspirations and may be a reprobate, he seems surrounded by many of the same ilk...

 

However, this is not the first time this has surfaced.. Infact, a BBC report back in 2012 had already started reporting it... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17730959

 

I did a quick search of the internet - yes Google, Ecosia and the ilk, and while they will no doubt not go out of their way to favour Vlad, I would tink they would find things that may be fact based denials...

 

My post was in jest - I hadn't even read the article (nor the original one I found) as it really doesn't concern me... But remember - many a "hack" journo has uncovered many a controversy, because after all, that is what they go looking for...

It's certainly a flash looking place. Navalny's images of the interior are 3D portrayals of how he thinks it would look inside. He claims to have a copy of the blueprints. Only time will tell what the true story is behind it. I'd assume the paper and money trail is far from transparent, so all the Kremlin would have to do is keep denying it if they are involved. In the meantime it's all speculation and the word of some disgruntled people. A genuine, well intentioned investigative journalist would be hard pressed to find any solid evidence among the murky bureaucracy there.

 

With that sort of money spent, you would think it would also have a secure underground bunker built underneath. It's right up high on Idokopas Point by the sea; an easy target for an air strike. It's easy to find on Google Earth; it stands out like a sore thumb. It even has a jetty and artificial harbour built out into the Black Sea. Whoever is behind it has pumped a lot of cash into it.

[willedoo]

Whatever happened to the good old days of Sean Connery and the Hunt for Red October. This crew on the Yuriy Dolgorukiy look more like hospital catering staff. Maybe they forgot to take their pyjamas off. At least the Bulava missiles look the part.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

One of Bob Dyer's prizes on Pick A Box was a Bulova watch, I don’t know the spelling.

[nomadpete]

Careful Peter, we aren't allowed to 'pick a box' in public nowadays

Edited January 23, 2021 by nomadpete

[pmccarthy]

Or grab them.

[nomadpete]

Unless you happen to own a lot of golf courses.

[willedoo]

On 22/01/2021 at 8:18 PM, Jerry_Atrick said:

So while Navalny may harbour his aspirations and may be a reprobate, he seems surrounded by many of the same ilk...

The Americans like to tout Navalny as the darling of the West with all their opposition leader BS. However, here's the real Alexei Navalny, the racist right wing nut job. From his Youtube channel. In the video, he's talking about Muslim Russians in the southern Russian regions of Chechnya and Dagestan, comparing them to cockroaches and saying they should be exterminated. This is the man the West blindly supports using the 'Our enemy's enemy is our friend' principle.

 

Point is, apart from all the oligarchs, politicians and wealthy businessmen that he's upset, there's plenty of others in the country that would have an interest in seeing his demise. It doesn't fit with the West's 'It's all about Putin narrative' and despite being an uncomfortable truth, it happens to be the reality. Clowns like Navalny are why I posted the comment previously about anti-Putinism at all costs, ie: 'Be careful what you wish for'. Putin is not a particularly nice character, but there's a lot worse waiting in the wings.

 

 

Edited January 30, 2021 by willedoo

[spacesailor]

Poor Russia, 

Standing between the mighty West, and that Nasty East !.

spacesailor

[onetrack]

I was under the impression that Putin and his henchmen regard Russian Muslims as cockroaches as well, and have exterminated them accordingly?

You don't hear much about Chechen suicide bombers, or other Mad Muzzie attacks, such as the Beslan School attack there nowadays. 

I reckon Putin must have instructed the Russian Army to liquidate Chechens on sight. 

[Old Koreelah]

18 hours ago, willedoo said:

...’Be careful what you wish for'. Putin is not a particularly nice character, but there's a lot worse waiting in the wings.

Libya and Iraq where beacons of good government, social progress and stability until the West destroyed all that, in the guise of deposing dictators.

 

[onetrack]

Old K - I don't think you could call Saddam and Gaddafi benevolent leaders by any stretch of the imagination.

They were simply the most ruthless of all the tribal leaders in each country, and they ruled with an iron fist, and murderous revenge against anyone who bucked them.

 

If that's "stability", well, yes, it is sort of. But it's like screwing the lid down on a pressure cooker and pretending there's no pressure behind the lid.

 

The Middle Eastern countries have been hotbeds of murderous intent, tribal rivalries, a murderous religion that is also a form of total Government, and sects of that religion, that will start civil war at the slightest offence, or repression of their particular sect, at a moments notice.

Thus it has been, for close on a couple of thousand years, and I can never see "democracy" as we understand it, coming to any country in that region, in the next 500 years.

[willedoo]

3 hours ago, onetrack said:

I was under the impression that Putin and his henchmen regard Russian Muslims as cockroaches as well, and have exterminated them accordingly?

You don't hear much about Chechen suicide bombers, or other Mad Muzzie attacks, such as the Beslan School attack there nowadays. 

I reckon Putin must have instructed the Russian Army to liquidate Chechens on sight. 

That's not correct. The Federal Government gets on quite well with the Chechen Government. The problems only arise with Islamic hardliners wanting to break away and form an independent Islamic state. The Chechen (Muslim) Government is quite happy to stay as part of the Russian Federation and keep Al Qaeda and their mates out of the place.

 

The Russian Federal Government also has a good relationship with all Muslims in Russia. They have to as Muslims make up 10% of the population, or close to 15 million people. The majority of Russian Muslims are very moderate and there would only be a tiny percentage of bad eggs.

 

A good example is the Federal Republic of Tatarstan. It's on the Volga, east of Moscow, near the Ural Mountains (close to where they make the MiG's and AK's). Tatarstan is good example to the rest of the world of how Muslims and non Muslims can get along. The population is well over 50% Muslim, with 30% Russian Orthodox. The top Mufti and the top Orthodox priest often get together and perform joint public ceremonies, and get on well. How it should be. Similar in neighbouring Bashkortostan, about 60% Muslim, less than 20% Orthodox Christian, but it all works.

Edited January 31, 2021 by willedoo

[willedoo]

Moscow also has the largest Muslim population of any city in Europe and Russian Muslims far outnumber the total in the whole EU. Very few of them are migrants; they've been there forever. This photo of the Eid prayer ceremony at the Grand Mosque in Moscow doesn't give the crowd numbers justice. They spill over in the adjoining streets with the 100,000 average they get at big gatherings like this.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

10 hours ago, onetrack said:

Old K - I don't think you could call Saddam and Gaddafi benevolent leaders by any stretch of the imagination.

I sure didn’t, 1T. 

10 hours ago, onetrack said:

They were simply the most ruthless of all the tribal leaders in each country, and they ruled with an iron fist, and murderous revenge against anyone who bucked them.

I totally agree.

10 hours ago, onetrack said:

If that's "stability", well, yes, it is sort of. But it's like screwing the lid down on a pressure cooker and pretending there's no pressure behind the lid.

Also agreed. When the West removed that lid, the pressure cooker exploded, taking once stable, progressive societies back to medieval chaos.

 

10 hours ago, onetrack said:

...I can never see "democracy" as we understand it, coming to any country in that region, in the next 500 years.

Sad but perhaps true.