Forum menu
"Are you talking about Russia or the west here because I can’t see any real difference."
I can still see the difference because currently there still is a difference. Some of us think that Trump, Johnson and their acolytes are looking at what Putin has done with Russia and would like to do similar to Western democracy.
that and benevolent ‘wealth creators’ aren’t actually physically ‘disappearing’ their enemies and people who object to their activities.
Apart from the western oil and mining companies who not only kill their opponents in places like Africa and Indonesia but also kill thousands more with their shocking safety record and barely disguised corruption. And then there's the wars that are fought by our honourable governments on their behalf which kill millions. Apart from that they're fluffy teddy bears.
There's very little difference between what happens in Russia and what happens in the west. The Russians are just more open and brazen about it.
No it isn't
You are absolutely correct.
The average hourly wage in Russia is $8.09, the minimum hourly rate is far lower. The minimum in the UK is dependent on age, ranging from £4.62 to £8.91.
So the minimum rate in the UK is £4.62. But for the majority is £8.91, which is what is stated by the government whenever its quoted, much like the Russian hourly rate which is also quoted at its highest.
Seriously mate… have a word with yourself
I'm not sure such a charge is warranted towards anyone here.
Yeah, but you're splitting hairs and apparently not acknowledging that in the UK, seemingly one of the richest countries in the world. thousands of kids are still going to bed cold and hungry.
Clearly, Russia aside, the hourly rate and overall wage in the UK is completely inadequate.
And who is it sets these rates 😕
With the greatest of respect to dyna-ti, can we please step away from the whataboutery in this thread too? We could be here all day with the fallout from US interventions overseas (Iran, Chile, etc) not to mention our own shameful behaviour in the past. We know, we really do. Can we keep this on topic please?
And with the greatest of respect returned to my learned fellow member, these are the important points that drive policy towards Russia and other countries. So in terms of relevancy, what is happening in the Ukraine is a mirror to what has happened elsewhere in the world, which makes it very much on topic. we cannot deny our own behaviors and motives, then claim this crisis has nothing to do with it, especially when other think tanks are saying the exact same thing. We may disagree with one or other of them, or claim they're in some way bias as to their opinion, but we shouldn't deny them their say, we should always take all points on board, and not readily dismiss it.
The Putin apologists are busy. Hope you’re not doing it for free.
The rest of us know our governments in the West are not without blame and their own disgraces, some of us go on about little else (sorry). Stop using that to excuse Putin, the way he runs the RF, and that he is acting to expand it via force. The false equivalence stuff is embarrassing.
The rest of us know our governments in the West are not without blame
Well doesnt that really take the biscuit.
On one breath you call anyone who disagrees with you a Putin apologist, then on the other show yourself to be a western apologist.
Im sorry Kelvin, but this entire thread you've followed the same path of demonizing Russia, and therefore claiming the Ukrainian crisis is nothing to do with those western powers you now claim to be equally dastardly.
You have to accept the Ukrainian crisis has come about because of the imperial nature of those in NATO, namely the US and UK and their quest to be the only players in the game of who runs the world.
Accept that and we can move forward, dont and its around we go again.
the same path of demonizing Russia
Demonising Putin, not Russia, if you don’t mind. He paints that picture with his own words and actions, including military actions. Ignore him if you want.
So ....the average wage in Russia (in dollars) is less than minimum wage in the UK (in sterling) so therefore Russia is betterer?
That's maffs right there folks
@The stabilizer.
I think you're being deliberately offensive. Nobody has stated that other than yourself.
If you cannot follow the narrative and need to resort to posting nasty messages, please find another thread. Maybe one with cartoons or a colouring in section.
You are absolutely correct.
The average hourly wage in Russia is $8.09, the minimum hourly rate is far lower. The minimum in the UK is dependent on age, ranging from £4.62 to £8.91.
So the minimum rate in the UK is £4.62. But for the majority is £8.91, which is what is stated by the government whenever its quoted, much like the Russian hourly rate which is also quoted at its highest.
How do you manage to come up with this horseshit?
Russian min wage 3.22 USD
UK min wage 11.14 USD
Looked at two different sites. Simple mistake to make.
Though none of that is that important other than to take digs is it. Doesnt change the fact about Russia, Ukraine or NATO.
Distraction, derailment, take your pick.
@Sharmer75
I've admitted i was wrong. Wish others who throughout the course of this thread have insisted that my point that I understand that Russia has security concerns are also wrong in their consistent attacks that i and others sharing this stance are some sort of apologist.
It is interesting to note how they have set about jumping to one minor meaningless point to another before finally stating that they agree that the west is not as white and cuddly as they first stated and that the conflict such as it is could well have been avoided but for the imperial nature of NATO under US/UK leadership.
@Sharmer75
What you are now engaging in is trolling.
You arent stating anything we have covered, nor are providing a stance but feel posting abusive massages and playing for laughs is how you conduct yourself on this thread is ok.
There is a name for that, and yourself, and i guess it reaches as far back as your example. but only has 4 letters.
I'm sorry if you're offended by my post, I could have merely stated the inacurracy and left it at that and am happy to acknowledge your retraction
I think presenting the Russian perspective is important and there's no debate that the executive view their neighbors joining NATO and the EU as a threat, there also a significant proportion of the Russian people that share that view. Whether you believe that assessment or not there's only one country adopting a stance on the border of another having already compromised that border and territory for the last eight years. NATO and the EU have no claim or intent to occupy orannex the donbas and Crimea
I’m sorry if you’re offended by my post, I could have merely stated the inaccuracy and left it at that and am happy to acknowledge your retraction
Nope, no problems here and no need to retract anything. Just a bit touchy from all the trolling on nothing points people make rather than debating the point of how this conflict came about.
I snapped at you and tbh that wasnt fair on you, so as such its me who should be offering an apology.
When you take into account US history, how they've acted over the last 70 years, and thats not just the middle east but also South America, CIA trained deaths quads, arms used to mass murder of children and babies linked directly back to US arms factories, its understandable that my distrust of the US i feel is justified,and that colours my opinion of them through this crisis.
I fully knowledge that if Russia under Putin is a bad lot, compared to the United states, who are not only equally as bad but far far worse. Anything they do is tainted by their recent and past history, which we know includes genocide.
My country is in bed with this country.
Think it'll all blow over now, Ukraine and it's people have stood up well and not panicked, unfortunately some western countries have panicked more for them!
Reality is that for Russia to invade, it would require a lot more infrastructure and support, they tried a bit of destabilisation, same as in the Crimea conflict, but this time there was no internal conflict to allow Russia to invite themselves in.
Ukraine are in a tough position though, a lot of thinking and action will be required after this eases off to work out how to stop it escalating in future, on all sides.
No, I acknowledge YOUR retraction. You raised minimum wage and was wrong.
Re the rest: AK47
Well actually Thols raised the point on minimum wage. I felt that was yet another misdirection taking us away from the main point of the thread, so looked at a couple of sites for comparison. I admit i got the numbers wrong.
The premise of US compared to UK still stands, and the US wage is much lower than the UK. Russia as has been pointed out, is significantly lower than that of western Europe, but the point initially being made was oligarchs are a Russian invention, and nothing we in the west would go in for. Stemming from the earlier point that we cant really tell the difference between Russian, UK, or US when the entire truth of the matter and the point that the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer and those in bed with big business are the ones saying the people should tighten their belts while coining it in for themselves.
People were trying to hit out against Putin using this concept, but ignoring the concept is universal, and while we should stand against such notions, playing the game as demonizing one but not the other isnt helping anyone.
But even if we ignore minimum wages, the basic still is that i feel Russia taking an action they feel is justified. That was the point of my stance, only instead of disagreeing and showing the working of how that is wrong, people prefer to ignore the actual truth and engage in petty sniping. or trolling or whatever you want to label it as.
" I could have merely stated the inaccuracy and left it at that "
Well perhaps you should have. Then I most likely wouldn't have snapped at you.
Ive no idea what you mean by re: AK47.
i feel Russia taking an action they feel is justified.
Russia invaded annexed Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine years ago, leaving thousands of Ukrainians dead, and you think Russia is the victim in this?
Yes yes thols, you keep trotting out the same crap this entire thread.Had a fight with Ukraine, leaving 5000+ dead, Russia annexed Crimea due to the government according to the voters being illegitimate brought about by a coup d'etat, killed 2 Ukrainian soldiers and promptly pinched it from from Ukraine.
We invaded a country based upon a web of lies, left the country in ruins. Total dead approximate 650,000.
Then syria - Total dead about 1/2 million.
Then Afghanistan Total dead about 200,000
Oh woe the Ukraine.
And lets not forget the main power in NATO the US. Operation Condor- Estimated dead in South America- 60,000, mostly civilians brutally tortured to death.
.
But yeah, clearly Russia is a bad dude 🙄
Yes Russia has its faults, its as brutal a country as we are. But so much easier to ignore everything we do. Maybe that allows up to sleep better at night.
Then syria – Total dead about 1/2 million
The Russians have been involved more than any western country
Had a fight with Ukraine, leaving 5000+ dead, Russia annexed Crimea due to the government according to the voters being illegitimate brought about by a coup d’etat, killed 2 Ukrainian soldiers and promptly pinched it from from Ukraine.
After years of being setup as a client state of Russia by a pro Russian elite. The war in the Donbas saw IT professionals from Kiev joining the Ukrainian frontline as ideological volunteers. The Ukrainian state was essentially taken off life support and a "not Russia" identity forged in the fighting with regular Russian troops. The relative lack of casualties is arguably the one bit of good news
Also Julian Assange is a journalist, how are we treating him?
Why Yes they were big and daft, they certainly were. But you acknowledge so were we. And we the bastions of Truth, Justice and Democracy.
We aint like those murderous Ruskies eh ?
But isnt it strange that the war in Syria went on and on and on until Russia stepped in and ended it.
thols2
Free Member
The U.S. is basically trolling Russia. Normally they are very reluctant to release any classified info but in this case they are.
Do you honestly believe this? Did you believe the Iraq WMD bullshit aswell?
We aint like those murderous Ruskies eh ?
But isnt it strange that the war in Syria went on and on and on until Russia stepped in and ended it.
I think you'll find those two points are linked. Fighting whilst one arm is tied behind your back to at least attempt to minimise civilian casualties is slow at best and never ending at worst.
Putin has a lower bar. They are also allied to a guy that thinks nothing of dropping barrel bombs on his own population which is handy.
I suppose if you wish to go all "total war" anything is achievable.
But isnt it strange that the war in Syria went on and on and on until Russia stepped in and ended it.
It's still going
Also Julian Assange is a journalist, how are we treating him?
A lot better than plenty of countries would.
Three meals a day, medical care, legal representation, no torture
Fighting whilst one arm is tied behind your back to at least attempt to minimise civilian casualties is slow at best and never ending at worst.
I hope you're not suggesting we somehow managed to accidentally kill thousands of civilians by mistake. Indiscriminate bombing is the key to a successful US led operation. The Yanks are shoot first ask questions later(if at all)
A lot better than plenty of countries would.
Three meals a day, medical care, legal representation, no torture
Oh well thqt makes it all ok then.
A bit of hounding, the threat of a whole life sentence hanging over you. If thats not physiological torture, then i dont know what is.
And all because he ran a site where data pertaining to US war crimes was collected and published.
But yet again, we're not talking about 'other' countries, we're talking about the land of the free, home of the brave, and the UK, latched onto their coat tails.
It’s still going
What i should have said is that Russia managed to retake much of the country that the terrorists were slowly taking over I feel had Russia not stepped in those elements would have taken over completely. The US remember funded the likes of ISIL they were nhelping to destroy Syria.
Ever seen Syria in before and after pictures. The change is horrific.
Look for yourself.
https://petapixel.com/2016/08/02/26-photos-show-war-changed-syria/
Three meals a day, medical care, legal representation, no torture
Guantanamo Bay?
But isnt it strange that the war in Syria went on and on and on until Russia stepped in and ended it
You best let Syria know that the conflict is all over and they’re now living in a utopia delivered by Putin.
They mustn’t have got the memo
I've expanded on that Binners. Russia won the war against the gradual destruction of Syria are the behest of US funded terrorist groups. Without Russian intervention Syria would be the wasteland the US wanted.
in a few short years Russia took back what was lost.
It may be continuing, but nothing like before and Syria has a chance to recover and finally win.
Posted a link up containing the before and after pics of Syria . Once a cultural heritage site of significant importance to humanity. Now a bombed out wasteland, the vast majority of that ordnance coming directly from US and UK facilities.
This thread has just gone the same way as the Starmer thread now, hasn’t it? As have so many others
Same tedious, pious, sanctimonious, self-righteous gobshites posters. Same result.
Solidarity brothers
Never mind Binners. Here's something to cheer you up.
I hope you’re not suggesting we somehow managed to accidentally kill thousands of civilians by mistake. Indiscriminate bombing is the key to a successful US led operation. The Yanks are shoot first ask questions later(if at all)
Ok I'm curious here and no telling porkies dyna-ti, we'll know!
Hypothetical for sure but indulge me. Suppose you were a belligerent in a war in the near future, it's been bitterly fought by all sides but the tide is going against you and your compatriots and your country. Heck, you could even be a civilian, it doesn't really matter in this scenario.
It happens that your country is fighting against an alliance comprised of the Americans and Russians. That is most definitely not as hypothetical as it sounds for obvious reasons.
You and your loved ones have to choose which of the two nations above to surrender to. The current war you are embroiled in has seen atrocities on all sides as is almost always the case in war. You also know the histories of both countries during past, real conflicts and the peacetime that follows.
This is in the near future remember, current domestic and foreign policies, even leaders if you wish, are the same.
Genuinely, which countries armed forces and government would you rather find yourself and your country at the mercy of?
Honestly, probably the Americans.
But in this scenario, i would have to have the same language, as I couldn't picture it from any other point of view.
I suppose this even has already been played out to some degree in the 2nd world war, many Germans would be happier surrendering to the allies(US/UK) than to the Russians, but in that instance the Germans had been butchering Russian civilians, and with that in mind you would honestly want to surrender to anyone but the Russians. So it would have to be such a scenario where i hadn't spent time murdering US civilians.
So to the US it is, but knowing how things go in war, its still a case of pot luck as to whether you'd get shot before actually being placed into custody.
.
The problem with the scenario as i see it, is the language is the same, so there is an affinity there. Education levels are similar, so there is an affinity there too. It would be easier for either group to bump off those who they see as radically different to themselves. Cant speak Russian, the Russians might afford you less civilities than the Americans, because you share similarities with them and can speak the same language. It might even come down to shared religious beliefs.
This is something we saw even amongst the allies in WW2. The British soldier had less trust of the French soldier, even though they fought side by side in many instances. Probably down to language differences. Like for like would be the rational that would probably go a long way towards keeping you and your loved ones alive post conflict.
.
That said. You treatment would be determined by other factors not already mentioned, but probably just as important, possibly even more so. Have they the numbers spare to watch you, have they the medical facilities you might possibly need, have they the food available to feed you. Any off those aspects are missing would determine whether they keep or kill.
Along with what has been the experience of the unit you've initially come into contact with. It they've had a hard time, they might well give you a hard time in what is best described as revenge. If you are in contact with a unit, fresh off the boat with little combat experience, your treatment would likely be better.
But all that aside. I would probably look to surrender to the US, but for the reasons I've given, the shared culture.
.
However. Were you to ask the same question to a member that is of Eastern European background and culture, you might find they would look towards surrendering to the Russians in the hope that their shared heritage keeps them safe. So in this scenario my opinion is biased.
That a fair assessment ?. If you feel its not fully please say so.
I will say that thus far this is the best and most honest question any of the belligerents on this thread has asked me.
Too many here appear to have clouded judgement. Too emotional a thread subject.
Russia won the war against the gradual destruction of Syria are the behest of US funded terrorist groups. Without Russian intervention Syria would be the wasteland the US wanted.
Syria has been ruled by murderous tyrants for decades. Their government was supported by Russia. Opposition parties attempted to overthrow the government, leading to a civil war. The Syrian government deliberately bombed civilians, including using chemical weapons, in order to subdue the opposition. Russia provided support for this.
Arguing that Bashar al-Assad is to be admired is a very difficult position to defend. It's perfectly possible to disagree with many aspects of U.S. foreign policy and still see the U.S. as far preferable to a dictator who uses chemical weapons to eliminate any political opposition to his murderous regime. Are you seriously endorsing chemical weapon attacks on civilians as something to be admired?
in a few short years Russia took back what was lost.
It may be continuing, but nothing like before and Syria has a chance to recover and finally win
So you fully support the brutal tyranny of the Assad regime? You make it sound like Russia stepped in and saved the day allowing a peaceful democracy to flourish. How much Russian propaganda do you swallow in your FB feed?...
Granted there's an argument a tyrannical dictator is no worse (or perhaps even better) than a lawless state without a functioning government - but that largely depends if you're one of the oppressed, someone within the regime or someone thousands of miles away sitting at a computer.
Some of the groups fighting in Syria that the US funded were certainly questionable and some did indeed end up aligning with ISIS but many others were fighting Assad and/or ISIS. Let's face it the West intervening in anyway in Syria was going to go badly but doing nothing would also have virtually guaranteed Assad's regime would continue (with them given a free pass to wipe-out any internal resistance). It just so happens Russia has done that now anyway (and not in a nice clean 'good guy' way you seem to be implying).
Three meals a day, medical care, legal representation, no torture
Guantanamo Bay?
Are you ignoring the "no torture" bit to make that connection? The two really don't compare. But we digress.
Just because "the West" has done appalling things that I'm outraged and ashamed by doesn't make it OK for the Russians to do the same.
Even hypocrites can do the right thing occasionally.
Russian propaganda outlets reporting fighting in eastern Ukraine. This is a classic false-flag operation to serve as a pretext for a Russian invasion.
https://twitter.com/ScottMStedman/status/1494218277056253952
Also Julian Assange is a journalist, how are we treating him?
Well, for a kick-off even he doesn't call himself a journalist. Given that he's blamed all the ills of the world at various times on feminists and Jewish writers who's eviction from the Ecuadorian Embassy was (by agreement) filmed by a wholly owned subsidiary of RT, that there's evidence that wiki-leaks has links with two Russia hackers, and that his ties with Russian intelligence services are beyond dispute, I think that by any comparison with what would've happened to him if he'd have got on the wrong side of Putin can be easily seen by looking at what happened in Salisbury.
More seriously, He's successfully used legal means to prevent extradition to the US thus far, and even a US circuit court judge has indicated that they think any extradition would be "oppressive" given concerns over Mr Assange's mental health and risk of suicide" I think overall, he's getting the treatment that he could've easily predicted he would've given that he leaked Russain Intelligence provided to him for that very purpose as part of Putin's attempt to disrupt the 2016 US elections.
Edit: the formatting glitches are a feature, right?
This is a classic false-flag operation to serve as a pretext for a Russian invasion.
And very excited you seem to be about it. Honestly do you ever question what you read in newspapers and social media? Why are you even interested?
If I may, a quick comment on tone:
And very excited you seem to be about it.
...contributes what? And actually:
Russian propaganda outlets reporting fighting in eastern Ukraine. This is a classic false-flag operation to serve as a pretext for a Russian invasion.
...doesn't show evidence of excitement.
Honestly do you ever question what you read in newspapers and social media?
Looks rhetorical but I'm not sure. It could be dazh does think most of us take media stories entirely at face value.
Why are you even interested?
Because a possible war in Europe between Russia and NATO is a potentially attention grabbing thing? Would be one answer. Less polite ones are also available but what's the point in being rude? Is my actual question.
Russia can report it as much as they want, but this is basically the same as the Crimean conflict, they're trying to get a way in, but i'm not seeing the Ukrainians divided about where the lines are drawn this time around.
For all the posturing, and Putin using this to his advantage, even he knows it would be a nightmare to even attempt an invasion of Ukraine, i'm struggling to see the positives of this type of conflict for Russia.
i’m struggling to see the positives of this type of conflict for Russia.
Vanity project for an aging dictator?
Russian propaganda outlets reporting fighting in eastern Ukraine. This is a classic false-flag operation to serve as a pretext for a Russian invasion.
Yep, he will say that he's protecting the "ethnically Russian" people living in the Ukraine whether they want it or not.
This wa his reasoning behind annexing Crimea - but the population there was about 60% ethnically Russian..... it's much less in most of the Ukraine.
The way in appears to be in the process of being laid out: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-rebels-accuse-govt-forces-mortar-shelling-report-2022-02-17/
The pattern, as I see it right now, is that:
1) Russia has likely initiated a large-scale cyber attack against key military and civilian infrastructure (which will be very hard to attribute to them, hence my use of the word "likely").
2) Russia has claimed to be reducing troop numbers at the borders, but has either not done this, or increased numbers, depending on who you believe.
3) Russia and/or Russian-backed separatists has claimed that Ukrainian troops fired on them, with the same claims being made (with possible evidence) by Ukraine of shelling from the Russian-backed separatists of a kindergarten ( https://www.osce.org/special-monitoring-mission-to-ukraine/512326)
The last on that short list could give Russia all the excuse needed to move across the border, ostensibly to protect the pro-Russian separatists.
And, before anyone comes in and accuses me of being excited for this, you could not be more wrong. I have seen first hand the results of war and this prospect fills me with terrible dread.