|
|
On March 19 2014 12:10 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 11:59 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 11:50 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 11:25 MoltkeWarding wrote:Are you referring to something like Stalin? I don't see what's happening today anything close to Stalin's administration, and I am confused how "backward means" lead to modernization and growth. I didn't mean anything in particular, actually. It was the kind of sweeping and useless explanation of a diverse and complex history designed to impress people who are only thinking about how to interpret the past. I think of Putin's era as a period of consolidation of different tangents of his nation's history. There has never been a period in Russia's history since Marquis de Custine where the Russian government has not been attacked by Western liberals. So recriminations against Putin are not so strange. What is strange is the disproportionate vehemence of these attacks against what Russia "is" today, in consideration of what Russia has always been throughout her history. Thanks, I understand what you mean now. But, don't you think the explanation for this strangeness comes from the fact that not too long ago, Russia was down and out (to the delight of the US and other nations) and is now recovering (to their disgust)? Apparently Russia was lauded in so many ways during the 1990s when it was in a completely terrible state of existence and when the US was expanding into Eastern Europe, and now the reverse seems to be happening: the praises have turned into attacks and the Russians aren't taking kicks while they're down any longer. This is why personally, I'm not surprised by what you say is a disproportionate vehemence of the attacks that exists today. Sorry but Russia being 'down and out' was not to the delight of many other nations. You make it sound like everyone in the West was laughing at Russia while the people were suffering after the fall of the Soviet Union. Also big parts of the European expansion into Eastern Europe happened during a time in which Russia was already discovering.(2000-) And please let's keep in mind that the European Union was proposing a trade agreement, Russia just annexed part of another country 48 hours ago, so please rethink your 'why is the west attacking Russia so hardcore'-logic a little bit. The NATO expansion is a litle bit more complicated, but essentially the West was already holding back, because that's what they said they would do after the German unification while especially the Baltic states basically begged to get into the NATO. Is it more like an annexation or more like a secession-accession?
Under the circumstances I think it's pretty clearly an annexation. I'm all for letting the Crimean people decide where they want to belong, but they could have done that in April anyway. The way it went down with foreign troops on their territory while no international observers where present, and not having the option to stay a part of the Ukraine is simply not a responsible way to handle something like that in the 21st century.
If Russia was so concerned about the well being of the population they could have simply come to the UN, that's what the UN is there for after all.
|
On March 19 2014 12:11 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:08 m4ini wrote:On March 19 2014 12:05 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 12:01 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 11:59 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 11:50 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 11:25 MoltkeWarding wrote:Are you referring to something like Stalin? I don't see what's happening today anything close to Stalin's administration, and I am confused how "backward means" lead to modernization and growth. I didn't mean anything in particular, actually. It was the kind of sweeping and useless explanation of a diverse and complex history designed to impress people who are only thinking about how to interpret the past. I think of Putin's era as a period of consolidation of different tangents of his nation's history. There has never been a period in Russia's history since Marquis de Custine where the Russian government has not been attacked by Western liberals. So recriminations against Putin are not so strange. What is strange is the disproportionate vehemence of these attacks against what Russia "is" today, in consideration of what Russia has always been throughout her history. Thanks, I understand what you mean now. But, don't you think the explanation for this strangeness comes from the fact that not too long ago, Russia was down and out (to the delight of the US and other nations) and is now recovering (to their disgust)? Apparently Russia was lauded in so many ways during the 1990s when it was in a completely terrible state of existence and when the US was expanding into Eastern Europe, and now the reverse seems to be happening: the praises have turned into attacks and the Russians aren't taking kicks while they're down any longer. This is why personally, I'm not surprised by what you say is a disproportionate vehemence of the attacks that exists today. Sorry but Russia being 'down and out' was not to the delight of many other nations. You make it sound like everyone in the West was laughing at Russia while the people were suffering after the fall of the Soviet Union. Also big parts of the European expansion into Eastern Europe happened during a time in which Russia was already discovering.(2000-) And please let's keep in mind that the European Union was proposing a trade agreement, Russia just annexed part of another country 48 hours ago, so please rethink your 'why is the west attacking Russia so hardcore'-logic a little bit. We have been slandering them long before the events of the past several weeks. Just saying. While things have intensified in the "past 48 hours" and the past several weeks, it wasn't like we had rosy relations with Russia before. Quite far way from that, in fact. What exactly did we do that justifies what Russia just did over the last several weeks? Bet he means the critical voices on the pussy riot trial etc. Which obviously is bullshit, being critical of stuff doesn't mean slandering. We have been slandering them long before the events of the past several weeks. Just saying. While things have intensified in the "past 48 hours" and the past several weeks, it wasn't like we had rosy relations with Russia before. Quite far way from that, in fact. Americans, that is. German-russian relationship weren't that bad, they were decent. They were actually good with Medvedev. Admittedly, my word choice is less than optimal. That is my mistake. My point is, relations with Russia from the US and some other countries didn't all of a sudden become bad a month ago. They were never good to start with. Germany-Russia is different, and my apologies for missing that.
Don't get me wrong, we're "critical" about communists, for a simple reason. Germans still pay something called "Soli", or "Solidaritaetszuschlag". A tax only to rebuild what soviets did to the east. Since taxes are bad, especially if they only apply for one part of the country, well.. People are vocal about that. But not russia per se. As i said, there were tensions every now and then when germany critizised russia for (in our eyes) bad stuff as the show-process, human rights things etc - but in total, it was quite calm to actually good with Medvedev.
edit: i don't even know what taxes i pay, shame me
|
On March 19 2014 12:04 zlefin wrote:
Which slander? Citations please.
A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia".
|
On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia".
The law amended On Protecting Children from Information Harmful to Their Health and Development, adding a provision banning the distribution of "propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships" among minors, defined as information "[aimed] at causing minors to form non-traditional sexual predispositions, notions of attractiveness of non-traditional sexual relationships, distorted ideas about the equal social value of traditional and non-traditional sexual relationships, or imposing information about non-traditional sexual relationships which raises interest in such relationships insofar as these acts do not amount to a criminal offence." Unlike some of the aforementioned regional laws, which specifically used the term "homosexual propaganda", the federal law uses the term "non-traditional sexual relationships", an euphemism implied to refer to any type of non-heterosexual sexual orientation.
That pretty much covers my "knowledge" of that law. Right or wrong?
edit: putting a law in effect to "protect children from propaganda of ""non traditional sexual relationships"" or ""distorted ideas about the equal social value of traditional and nontraditional sexual relationships"" seems pretty anti-gay to me.
If that isn't what was voted on, well, i fell for "propaganda". Feel free to correct me though, if i'm wrong.
edit2:
Not to mention that criticising (kritisieren) is far away from slandering (beleidigen).
|
On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia".
That isn't slandering. Actually the situation for gay people in Russia is really terrible. There are a lot of homophobic hate crimes happening in Russia, and also the law you're talking about has been signed.
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130630/181970032.html
|
On March 19 2014 12:18 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:11 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 12:08 m4ini wrote:On March 19 2014 12:05 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 12:01 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 11:59 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 11:50 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 11:25 MoltkeWarding wrote:Are you referring to something like Stalin? I don't see what's happening today anything close to Stalin's administration, and I am confused how "backward means" lead to modernization and growth. I didn't mean anything in particular, actually. It was the kind of sweeping and useless explanation of a diverse and complex history designed to impress people who are only thinking about how to interpret the past. I think of Putin's era as a period of consolidation of different tangents of his nation's history. There has never been a period in Russia's history since Marquis de Custine where the Russian government has not been attacked by Western liberals. So recriminations against Putin are not so strange. What is strange is the disproportionate vehemence of these attacks against what Russia "is" today, in consideration of what Russia has always been throughout her history. Thanks, I understand what you mean now. But, don't you think the explanation for this strangeness comes from the fact that not too long ago, Russia was down and out (to the delight of the US and other nations) and is now recovering (to their disgust)? Apparently Russia was lauded in so many ways during the 1990s when it was in a completely terrible state of existence and when the US was expanding into Eastern Europe, and now the reverse seems to be happening: the praises have turned into attacks and the Russians aren't taking kicks while they're down any longer. This is why personally, I'm not surprised by what you say is a disproportionate vehemence of the attacks that exists today. Sorry but Russia being 'down and out' was not to the delight of many other nations. You make it sound like everyone in the West was laughing at Russia while the people were suffering after the fall of the Soviet Union. Also big parts of the European expansion into Eastern Europe happened during a time in which Russia was already discovering.(2000-) And please let's keep in mind that the European Union was proposing a trade agreement, Russia just annexed part of another country 48 hours ago, so please rethink your 'why is the west attacking Russia so hardcore'-logic a little bit. We have been slandering them long before the events of the past several weeks. Just saying. While things have intensified in the "past 48 hours" and the past several weeks, it wasn't like we had rosy relations with Russia before. Quite far way from that, in fact. What exactly did we do that justifies what Russia just did over the last several weeks? Bet he means the critical voices on the pussy riot trial etc. Which obviously is bullshit, being critical of stuff doesn't mean slandering. We have been slandering them long before the events of the past several weeks. Just saying. While things have intensified in the "past 48 hours" and the past several weeks, it wasn't like we had rosy relations with Russia before. Quite far way from that, in fact. Americans, that is. German-russian relationship weren't that bad, they were decent. They were actually good with Medvedev. Admittedly, my word choice is less than optimal. That is my mistake. My point is, relations with Russia from the US and some other countries didn't all of a sudden become bad a month ago. They were never good to start with. Germany-Russia is different, and my apologies for missing that. Don't get me wrong, we're "critical" about communists, for a simple reason. Germans still pay something called "Soli", or "Solidaritaetszuschlag". A tax only to rebuild what soviets did to the east. Since taxes are bad, especially if they only apply for one part of the country, well.. People are vocal about that. But not russia per se. As i said, there were tensions every now and then when germany critizised russia for (in our eyes) bad stuff as the show-process, human rights things etc - but in total, it was quite calm to actually good with Medvedev. edit: i don't even know what taxes i pay, shame me Isnt this tax more about not wanting all the Eastern Germans instantly leaving to go to the West, leaving the ex-German Democratic Republic basically a giant empty space + Berlin?
|
On March 19 2014 12:35 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:18 m4ini wrote:On March 19 2014 12:11 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 12:08 m4ini wrote:On March 19 2014 12:05 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 12:01 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 11:59 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 11:50 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 11:25 MoltkeWarding wrote:Are you referring to something like Stalin? I don't see what's happening today anything close to Stalin's administration, and I am confused how "backward means" lead to modernization and growth. I didn't mean anything in particular, actually. It was the kind of sweeping and useless explanation of a diverse and complex history designed to impress people who are only thinking about how to interpret the past. I think of Putin's era as a period of consolidation of different tangents of his nation's history. There has never been a period in Russia's history since Marquis de Custine where the Russian government has not been attacked by Western liberals. So recriminations against Putin are not so strange. What is strange is the disproportionate vehemence of these attacks against what Russia "is" today, in consideration of what Russia has always been throughout her history. Thanks, I understand what you mean now. But, don't you think the explanation for this strangeness comes from the fact that not too long ago, Russia was down and out (to the delight of the US and other nations) and is now recovering (to their disgust)? Apparently Russia was lauded in so many ways during the 1990s when it was in a completely terrible state of existence and when the US was expanding into Eastern Europe, and now the reverse seems to be happening: the praises have turned into attacks and the Russians aren't taking kicks while they're down any longer. This is why personally, I'm not surprised by what you say is a disproportionate vehemence of the attacks that exists today. Sorry but Russia being 'down and out' was not to the delight of many other nations. You make it sound like everyone in the West was laughing at Russia while the people were suffering after the fall of the Soviet Union. Also big parts of the European expansion into Eastern Europe happened during a time in which Russia was already discovering.(2000-) And please let's keep in mind that the European Union was proposing a trade agreement, Russia just annexed part of another country 48 hours ago, so please rethink your 'why is the west attacking Russia so hardcore'-logic a little bit. We have been slandering them long before the events of the past several weeks. Just saying. While things have intensified in the "past 48 hours" and the past several weeks, it wasn't like we had rosy relations with Russia before. Quite far way from that, in fact. What exactly did we do that justifies what Russia just did over the last several weeks? Bet he means the critical voices on the pussy riot trial etc. Which obviously is bullshit, being critical of stuff doesn't mean slandering. We have been slandering them long before the events of the past several weeks. Just saying. While things have intensified in the "past 48 hours" and the past several weeks, it wasn't like we had rosy relations with Russia before. Quite far way from that, in fact. Americans, that is. German-russian relationship weren't that bad, they were decent. They were actually good with Medvedev. Admittedly, my word choice is less than optimal. That is my mistake. My point is, relations with Russia from the US and some other countries didn't all of a sudden become bad a month ago. They were never good to start with. Germany-Russia is different, and my apologies for missing that. Don't get me wrong, we're "critical" about communists, for a simple reason. Germans still pay something called "Soli", or "Solidaritaetszuschlag". A tax only to rebuild what soviets did to the east. Since taxes are bad, especially if they only apply for one part of the country, well.. People are vocal about that. But not russia per se. As i said, there were tensions every now and then when germany critizised russia for (in our eyes) bad stuff as the show-process, human rights things etc - but in total, it was quite calm to actually good with Medvedev. edit: i don't even know what taxes i pay, shame me Isnt this tax more about not wanting all the Eastern Germans instantly leaving to go to the West, leaving the ex-German Democratic Republic basically a giant empty space + Berlin?
that's the weirdest thing I have ever heard :D No ,actually everybody pays the Soli and although it's original use was to restore East Germany today it's just an additional income tax that is basically used for everything.
Edit: i didn't see the 'not'
|
On March 19 2014 12:35 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:18 m4ini wrote:On March 19 2014 12:11 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 12:08 m4ini wrote:On March 19 2014 12:05 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 12:01 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 11:59 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 11:50 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On March 19 2014 11:25 MoltkeWarding wrote:Are you referring to something like Stalin? I don't see what's happening today anything close to Stalin's administration, and I am confused how "backward means" lead to modernization and growth. I didn't mean anything in particular, actually. It was the kind of sweeping and useless explanation of a diverse and complex history designed to impress people who are only thinking about how to interpret the past. I think of Putin's era as a period of consolidation of different tangents of his nation's history. There has never been a period in Russia's history since Marquis de Custine where the Russian government has not been attacked by Western liberals. So recriminations against Putin are not so strange. What is strange is the disproportionate vehemence of these attacks against what Russia "is" today, in consideration of what Russia has always been throughout her history. Thanks, I understand what you mean now. But, don't you think the explanation for this strangeness comes from the fact that not too long ago, Russia was down and out (to the delight of the US and other nations) and is now recovering (to their disgust)? Apparently Russia was lauded in so many ways during the 1990s when it was in a completely terrible state of existence and when the US was expanding into Eastern Europe, and now the reverse seems to be happening: the praises have turned into attacks and the Russians aren't taking kicks while they're down any longer. This is why personally, I'm not surprised by what you say is a disproportionate vehemence of the attacks that exists today. Sorry but Russia being 'down and out' was not to the delight of many other nations. You make it sound like everyone in the West was laughing at Russia while the people were suffering after the fall of the Soviet Union. Also big parts of the European expansion into Eastern Europe happened during a time in which Russia was already discovering.(2000-) And please let's keep in mind that the European Union was proposing a trade agreement, Russia just annexed part of another country 48 hours ago, so please rethink your 'why is the west attacking Russia so hardcore'-logic a little bit. We have been slandering them long before the events of the past several weeks. Just saying. While things have intensified in the "past 48 hours" and the past several weeks, it wasn't like we had rosy relations with Russia before. Quite far way from that, in fact. What exactly did we do that justifies what Russia just did over the last several weeks? Bet he means the critical voices on the pussy riot trial etc. Which obviously is bullshit, being critical of stuff doesn't mean slandering. We have been slandering them long before the events of the past several weeks. Just saying. While things have intensified in the "past 48 hours" and the past several weeks, it wasn't like we had rosy relations with Russia before. Quite far way from that, in fact. Americans, that is. German-russian relationship weren't that bad, they were decent. They were actually good with Medvedev. Admittedly, my word choice is less than optimal. That is my mistake. My point is, relations with Russia from the US and some other countries didn't all of a sudden become bad a month ago. They were never good to start with. Germany-Russia is different, and my apologies for missing that. Don't get me wrong, we're "critical" about communists, for a simple reason. Germans still pay something called "Soli", or "Solidaritaetszuschlag". A tax only to rebuild what soviets did to the east. Since taxes are bad, especially if they only apply for one part of the country, well.. People are vocal about that. But not russia per se. As i said, there were tensions every now and then when germany critizised russia for (in our eyes) bad stuff as the show-process, human rights things etc - but in total, it was quite calm to actually good with Medvedev. edit: i don't even know what taxes i pay, shame me Isnt this tax more about not wanting all the Eastern Germans instantly leaving to go to the West, leaving the ex-German Democratic Republic basically a giant empty space + Berlin?
Which equals the same, pretty much. And there is the "Aufbau Ost" ("The economic reconstruction of eastern Germany").
No ,actually everybody pays the Soli and although it's original use was to restore East Germany today it's just an additional income tax that is basically used for everything.
That's not the entire picture. While you're right that it is "just another tax" right now, the "neue Bundeslaender" still gets a big piece of the cake with the Solidar-Pakt II. 160b until 2019.
edit, bedtime
|
On March 19 2014 12:26 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:04 zlefin wrote:
Which slander? Citations please. A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia". That isn't slandering. Actually the situation for gay people in Russia is really terrible. There are a lot of homophobic hate crimes happening in Russia, and also the law you're talking about has been signed. http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130630/181970032.html
Said law isn't about a crackdown on gays in any shape or form. Here is a 70 page article by an American Journalist pulling that whole thing apart better than any source I've seen so far. In the 7+ years that variations of this law have been in effect in various regional versions no single person was convicted. In the 6 month the federal law has been in effect so far there have been 3 convictions. 2 of which were civil cases trying to challenge the law and with exactly one "real" conviction since 2006: A 120$ fee against a protestor, not because of his protest but because of an image of his protest going viral half a year later and a teen filing a complaint against it (admittedly under pressure by his father but there you go).
The article explains the details a lot better than I can in a couple of sentences but the gist of it is that Russia has actually more liberal laws on LGBT issues compared to 10+ US states and the law aims to hurt one specific thing more than anything else: Multinational broadcasting corporations.
The text of the law bans adults from initiating contact with minors/children who do not self identify as LGBT for the express purpose of encouraging the minor/child to explore non-traditional sexual relationships when there had not been interest previously.
Basically what the law makes illegal is walking up to a minor that doesn't identify as LGBT and be like "Yo, what do you think about having sex with a man/woman? I think it's something you should try sometime!"
Cliff notes from the article:
+ Show Spoiler +1. The law never mentions or uses the word gay, lesbian, homosexual or any other LGBT identifier. [Chapter 2 & Appendix]
2. The law focuses on children, it’s title is “On Protections of Minors from Propaganda of Non-Traditional Sexual Relations”. The messaging and strategy to bring the ban on propaganda from the law of several regions to national laws is part of a larger family values push and is based on the successful anti-same sex marriage push in the United States. [Chapter 2]
3. Russia is actually expanding protections of members of the LGBT community: On September 20, 2013 the official delegation of the Russia Federation announced their willingness to take all required measures to prevent homophobic hate crimes and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation at the 24th UN Human Rights Council. [Chapter 2]
4. There have been regional (much harsher) versions of the propaganda ban in effect for 7 years and there were only 2 convictions for violations of the regional laws and both were overturned. [Chapter 3]
5. In 6 months of the Federal Law there have been 3 convictions: 2 were acts of civil disobedience to challenge the legality of the law, the other is a story which you must read. [Chapter 3]
6.Statistically you are far more likely to be the victim of an anti-LGBT Hate Crime in the United States than in Russia. [Chapter 4]
7. In Russia you cannot be fired from your job for being an LGBT individual, in the United States you can. [Chapter 4]
8. Since 1993 gay sex was made legal in Russia, in 12 US States gay sex is a crime.[Chapter 4]
9. While President Obama says “I have no patience for countries that try to treat gays or lesbians or transgender persons in ways that intimidate them or are harmful to them.” his policies demonstrate he has nothing but patience. [Chapter 5]
10. The group impacted most if found to be in violation of the law: Multinational corporations. [Chapter 6]
e: p. 35 ff. is where American and Russian laws get compared directly. I gotta admit I wasn't aware of some of those myself before finding this piece. I for example didn't know that gays were allowed to openly serve in the Russian military since 2003 or that there are blood donation bans on gays in the US.
|
On March 19 2014 12:50 r.Evo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:26 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:04 zlefin wrote:
Which slander? Citations please. A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia". That isn't slandering. Actually the situation for gay people in Russia is really terrible. There are a lot of homophobic hate crimes happening in Russia, and also the law you're talking about has been signed. http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130630/181970032.html Said law isn't about a crackdown on gays in any shape or form. Here is a 70 page article by an American Journalist pulling that whole thing apart better than any source I've seen so far. In the 7+ years that variations of this law have been in effect in various regional versions no single person was convicted. In the 6 month the federal law has been in effect so far there have been 3 convictions. 2 of which were civil cases trying to challenge the law and with exactly one "real" conviction since 2006: A 120$ fee against a protestor, not because of his protest but because of an image of his protest going viral half a year later and a teen filing a complaint against it (admittedly under pressure by his father but there you go). The article explains the details a lot better than I can in a couple of sentences but the gist of it is that Russia has actually more liberal laws on LGBT issues compared to 10+ US states and the law aims to hurt one specific thing more than anything else: Multinational broadcasting corporations. Show nested quote +The text of the law bans adults from initiating contact with minors/children who do not self identify as LGBT for the express purpose of encouraging the minor/child to explore non-traditional sexual relationships when there had not been interest previously. Basically what the law makes illegal is walking up to a minor that doesn't identify as LGBT and be like "Yo, what do you think about having sex with a man/woman? I think it's something you should try sometime!" Cliff notes from the article: + Show Spoiler +1. The law never mentions or uses the word gay, lesbian, homosexual or any other LGBT identifier. [Chapter 2 & Appendix]
2. The law focuses on children, it’s title is “On Protections of Minors from Propaganda of Non-Traditional Sexual Relations”. The messaging and strategy to bring the ban on propaganda from the law of several regions to national laws is part of a larger family values push and is based on the successful anti-same sex marriage push in the United States. [Chapter 2]
3. Russia is actually expanding protections of members of the LGBT community: On September 20, 2013 the official delegation of the Russia Federation announced their willingness to take all required measures to prevent homophobic hate crimes and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation at the 24th UN Human Rights Council. [Chapter 2]
4. There have been regional (much harsher) versions of the propaganda ban in effect for 7 years and there were only 2 convictions for violations of the regional laws and both were overturned. [Chapter 3]
5. In 6 months of the Federal Law there have been 3 convictions: 2 were acts of civil disobedience to challenge the legality of the law, the other is a story which you must read. [Chapter 3]
6.Statistically you are far more likely to be the victim of an anti-LGBT Hate Crime in the United States than in Russia. [Chapter 4]
7. In Russia you cannot be fired from your job for being an LGBT individual, in the United States you can. [Chapter 4]
8. Since 1993 gay sex was made legal in Russia, in 12 US States gay sex is a crime.[Chapter 4]
9. While President Obama says “I have no patience for countries that try to treat gays or lesbians or transgender persons in ways that intimidate them or are harmful to them.” his policies demonstrate he has nothing but patience. [Chapter 5]
10. The group impacted most if found to be in violation of the law: Multinational corporations. [Chapter 6] e: p. 35 ff. is where American and Russian laws get compared directly. I gotta admit I wasn't aware of some of those myself before finding this piece. I for example didn't know that gays were allowed to openly serve in the Russian military since 2003 or that there are blood donation bans on gays in the US.
my comment on the article. + Show Spoiler +I didnt read through the whole thing but one statement in the summary is factually wrong without any research -- gay sex is not a crime in any US state. And two seem to be purposely worded to create a misconception -- Russian police do not record most anti-gay hate crimes as anti-gay hate crimes and the decriminalization of gay sex occurred during hte much more liberal period in Russia. Seems to me -- based on the tone of the article and the constant reference to America as the contrast -- the article is more concerned with bashing America's approach to gay rights than Russia's.
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/03/the-view-from-kiev-coping-with-ukraines-unfinished-revolution/284458/
Tsyhanenko, who has coordinated the efforts of 500 volunteer psychological counselors for Maidan protesters, adds that many demonstrators have turned to alcohol or drugs rather than seeking help for their problems. "A person who has come face to face with death has undergone a big experience for the psyche," she says. "Living in proximity to death really has a big impact on the mind of a person, and it's very important to relive what has happened and accept it. Here many people cannot do that, because they have no experience of this."
Tsyhanenko's organization, which has been in operation since December 2, has a mobile group that sets up tents on the square, as well as psychologists stationed in several nearby buildings. Despite the apparent victory of late February—when Maidan activists forced Yanukovych's ouster and the creation of a new, opposition-led government—Tsyhanenko says many demonstrators are still reeling from the monumental uncertainties that lie ahead for Ukraine.
"There is no victory," she says. "It remains only a potential victory. There are a lot of questions. It's not straightforward when there is a certain way of making [government] decisions and then suddenly there is a new way. Not every politician in power will be interested in real change. This worries people, because they don't know if these politicians are going to fight for the interests of protesters, instead of their own interests."
There is going to be a lot of PTSD cases, not just for the protesters but for the soldiers in Crimea too.
|
On March 19 2014 13:11 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:50 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:26 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:04 zlefin wrote:
Which slander? Citations please. A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia". That isn't slandering. Actually the situation for gay people in Russia is really terrible. There are a lot of homophobic hate crimes happening in Russia, and also the law you're talking about has been signed. http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130630/181970032.html Said law isn't about a crackdown on gays in any shape or form. Here is a 70 page article by an American Journalist pulling that whole thing apart better than any source I've seen so far. In the 7+ years that variations of this law have been in effect in various regional versions no single person was convicted. In the 6 month the federal law has been in effect so far there have been 3 convictions. 2 of which were civil cases trying to challenge the law and with exactly one "real" conviction since 2006: A 120$ fee against a protestor, not because of his protest but because of an image of his protest going viral half a year later and a teen filing a complaint against it (admittedly under pressure by his father but there you go). The article explains the details a lot better than I can in a couple of sentences but the gist of it is that Russia has actually more liberal laws on LGBT issues compared to 10+ US states and the law aims to hurt one specific thing more than anything else: Multinational broadcasting corporations. The text of the law bans adults from initiating contact with minors/children who do not self identify as LGBT for the express purpose of encouraging the minor/child to explore non-traditional sexual relationships when there had not been interest previously. Basically what the law makes illegal is walking up to a minor that doesn't identify as LGBT and be like "Yo, what do you think about having sex with a man/woman? I think it's something you should try sometime!" Cliff notes from the article: + Show Spoiler +1. The law never mentions or uses the word gay, lesbian, homosexual or any other LGBT identifier. [Chapter 2 & Appendix]
2. The law focuses on children, it’s title is “On Protections of Minors from Propaganda of Non-Traditional Sexual Relations”. The messaging and strategy to bring the ban on propaganda from the law of several regions to national laws is part of a larger family values push and is based on the successful anti-same sex marriage push in the United States. [Chapter 2]
3. Russia is actually expanding protections of members of the LGBT community: On September 20, 2013 the official delegation of the Russia Federation announced their willingness to take all required measures to prevent homophobic hate crimes and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation at the 24th UN Human Rights Council. [Chapter 2]
4. There have been regional (much harsher) versions of the propaganda ban in effect for 7 years and there were only 2 convictions for violations of the regional laws and both were overturned. [Chapter 3]
5. In 6 months of the Federal Law there have been 3 convictions: 2 were acts of civil disobedience to challenge the legality of the law, the other is a story which you must read. [Chapter 3]
6.Statistically you are far more likely to be the victim of an anti-LGBT Hate Crime in the United States than in Russia. [Chapter 4]
7. In Russia you cannot be fired from your job for being an LGBT individual, in the United States you can. [Chapter 4]
8. Since 1993 gay sex was made legal in Russia, in 12 US States gay sex is a crime.[Chapter 4]
9. While President Obama says “I have no patience for countries that try to treat gays or lesbians or transgender persons in ways that intimidate them or are harmful to them.” his policies demonstrate he has nothing but patience. [Chapter 5]
10. The group impacted most if found to be in violation of the law: Multinational corporations. [Chapter 6] e: p. 35 ff. is where American and Russian laws get compared directly. I gotta admit I wasn't aware of some of those myself before finding this piece. I for example didn't know that gays were allowed to openly serve in the Russian military since 2003 or that there are blood donation bans on gays in the US. my comment on the article. + Show Spoiler +I didnt read through the whole thing but one statement in the summary is factually wrong without any research -- gay sex is not a crime in any US state. And two seem to be purposely worded to create a misconception -- Russian police do not record most anti-gay hate crimes as anti-gay hate crimes and the decriminalization of gay sex occurred during hte much more liberal period in Russia. Seems to me -- based on the tone of the article and the constant reference to America as the contrast -- the article is more concerned with bashing America's approach to gay rights than Russia's.
It is more about Americas approach towards the Russian "anti-gay law" for which you need to actually look at a comparison to America. When it comes to hate crimes, the author of the paper I linked actually spent multiple pages trying to explain whether the Russian numbers are too low because of bias or because they actually are that low. For reference, SOVA (the organization behind those numbers) is endorsed by, among others, the UN, the Council of Europe, Amnesty International USA, the US Department of State and Human Rights Watch. (p. 47 ff.)
Carlos Maza, writing at Equality Matters, also argues that "the presence of sodomy laws can cause gays and lesbians to be dragged into humiliating, costly, and discriminatory legal disputes." He points to a 2008 case in North Carolina in which two men were arrested by the Raleigh Police Department for having consensual sex, and even though the charges were later dropped, one of the men said the "awful" ordeal "humiliated" him.
http://theweek.com/article/index/242412/why-do-so-many-states-still-have-anti-sodomy-laws
|
On March 19 2014 12:50 r.Evo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:26 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:04 zlefin wrote:
Which slander? Citations please. A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia". That isn't slandering. Actually the situation for gay people in Russia is really terrible. There are a lot of homophobic hate crimes happening in Russia, and also the law you're talking about has been signed. http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130630/181970032.html Said law isn't about a crackdown on gays in any shape or form. Here is a 70 page article by an American Journalist pulling that whole thing apart better than any source I've seen so far. In the 7+ years that variations of this law have been in effect in various regional versions no single person was convicted. In the 6 month the federal law has been in effect so far there have been 3 convictions. 2 of which were civil cases trying to challenge the law and with exactly one "real" conviction since 2006: A 120$ fee against a protestor, not because of his protest but because of an image of his protest going viral half a year later and a teen filing a complaint against it (admittedly under pressure by his father but there you go). The article explains the details a lot better than I can in a couple of sentences but the gist of it is that Russia has actually more liberal laws on LGBT issues compared to 10+ US states and the law aims to hurt one specific thing more than anything else: Multinational broadcasting corporations. Show nested quote +The text of the law bans adults from initiating contact with minors/children who do not self identify as LGBT for the express purpose of encouraging the minor/child to explore non-traditional sexual relationships when there had not been interest previously. Basically what the law makes illegal is walking up to a minor that doesn't identify as LGBT and be like "Yo, what do you think about having sex with a man/woman? I think it's something you should try sometime!" Cliff notes from the article: + Show Spoiler +1. The law never mentions or uses the word gay, lesbian, homosexual or any other LGBT identifier. [Chapter 2 & Appendix]
2. The law focuses on children, it’s title is “On Protections of Minors from Propaganda of Non-Traditional Sexual Relations”. The messaging and strategy to bring the ban on propaganda from the law of several regions to national laws is part of a larger family values push and is based on the successful anti-same sex marriage push in the United States. [Chapter 2]
3. Russia is actually expanding protections of members of the LGBT community: On September 20, 2013 the official delegation of the Russia Federation announced their willingness to take all required measures to prevent homophobic hate crimes and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation at the 24th UN Human Rights Council. [Chapter 2]
4. There have been regional (much harsher) versions of the propaganda ban in effect for 7 years and there were only 2 convictions for violations of the regional laws and both were overturned. [Chapter 3]
5. In 6 months of the Federal Law there have been 3 convictions: 2 were acts of civil disobedience to challenge the legality of the law, the other is a story which you must read. [Chapter 3]
6.Statistically you are far more likely to be the victim of an anti-LGBT Hate Crime in the United States than in Russia. [Chapter 4]
7. In Russia you cannot be fired from your job for being an LGBT individual, in the United States you can. [Chapter 4]
8. Since 1993 gay sex was made legal in Russia, in 12 US States gay sex is a crime.[Chapter 4]
9. While President Obama says “I have no patience for countries that try to treat gays or lesbians or transgender persons in ways that intimidate them or are harmful to them.” his policies demonstrate he has nothing but patience. [Chapter 5]
10. The group impacted most if found to be in violation of the law: Multinational corporations. [Chapter 6] e: p. 35 ff. is where American and Russian laws get compared directly. I gotta admit I wasn't aware of some of those myself before finding this piece. I for example didn't know that gays were allowed to openly serve in the Russian military since 2003 or that there are blood donation bans on gays in the US.
Except if you're open gay in the russian military you're opening yourself up to beatings, discrimination and "training accidents". The law is mostly there so people can't claim being homosexual to get out of military service; russia still uses conscription. The law isn't about homosexual acceptance.
|
On March 19 2014 13:22 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:50 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:26 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:04 zlefin wrote:
Which slander? Citations please. A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia". That isn't slandering. Actually the situation for gay people in Russia is really terrible. There are a lot of homophobic hate crimes happening in Russia, and also the law you're talking about has been signed. http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130630/181970032.html Said law isn't about a crackdown on gays in any shape or form. Here is a 70 page article by an American Journalist pulling that whole thing apart better than any source I've seen so far. In the 7+ years that variations of this law have been in effect in various regional versions no single person was convicted. In the 6 month the federal law has been in effect so far there have been 3 convictions. 2 of which were civil cases trying to challenge the law and with exactly one "real" conviction since 2006: A 120$ fee against a protestor, not because of his protest but because of an image of his protest going viral half a year later and a teen filing a complaint against it (admittedly under pressure by his father but there you go). The article explains the details a lot better than I can in a couple of sentences but the gist of it is that Russia has actually more liberal laws on LGBT issues compared to 10+ US states and the law aims to hurt one specific thing more than anything else: Multinational broadcasting corporations. The text of the law bans adults from initiating contact with minors/children who do not self identify as LGBT for the express purpose of encouraging the minor/child to explore non-traditional sexual relationships when there had not been interest previously. Basically what the law makes illegal is walking up to a minor that doesn't identify as LGBT and be like "Yo, what do you think about having sex with a man/woman? I think it's something you should try sometime!" Cliff notes from the article: + Show Spoiler +1. The law never mentions or uses the word gay, lesbian, homosexual or any other LGBT identifier. [Chapter 2 & Appendix]
2. The law focuses on children, it’s title is “On Protections of Minors from Propaganda of Non-Traditional Sexual Relations”. The messaging and strategy to bring the ban on propaganda from the law of several regions to national laws is part of a larger family values push and is based on the successful anti-same sex marriage push in the United States. [Chapter 2]
3. Russia is actually expanding protections of members of the LGBT community: On September 20, 2013 the official delegation of the Russia Federation announced their willingness to take all required measures to prevent homophobic hate crimes and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation at the 24th UN Human Rights Council. [Chapter 2]
4. There have been regional (much harsher) versions of the propaganda ban in effect for 7 years and there were only 2 convictions for violations of the regional laws and both were overturned. [Chapter 3]
5. In 6 months of the Federal Law there have been 3 convictions: 2 were acts of civil disobedience to challenge the legality of the law, the other is a story which you must read. [Chapter 3]
6.Statistically you are far more likely to be the victim of an anti-LGBT Hate Crime in the United States than in Russia. [Chapter 4]
7. In Russia you cannot be fired from your job for being an LGBT individual, in the United States you can. [Chapter 4]
8. Since 1993 gay sex was made legal in Russia, in 12 US States gay sex is a crime.[Chapter 4]
9. While President Obama says “I have no patience for countries that try to treat gays or lesbians or transgender persons in ways that intimidate them or are harmful to them.” his policies demonstrate he has nothing but patience. [Chapter 5]
10. The group impacted most if found to be in violation of the law: Multinational corporations. [Chapter 6] e: p. 35 ff. is where American and Russian laws get compared directly. I gotta admit I wasn't aware of some of those myself before finding this piece. I for example didn't know that gays were allowed to openly serve in the Russian military since 2003 or that there are blood donation bans on gays in the US. Except if you're open gay in the russian military you're opening yourself up to beatings, discrimination and "training accidents". The law is mostly there so people can't claim being homosexual to get out of military service; russia still uses conscription. The law isn't about homosexual acceptance.
Mind showing me case examples of beatings or discrimination towards gays in the Russian military?
|
On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia".
I'm pretty amazed that not one (major) US media organization checked their facts on this. Is it really that easy to spread misinformation? I believed it too...at a certain point you assume that a story must be true when its reported on by so many sources and none of them find any misrepresentation or errors. This is just incompetence on a massive scale or deliberately ignoring their fundamental role as journalists to make for a flashy news story. Probably the a combination of the two, but after this I just can't take the news media all that seriously anymore. There were incidents in the past but this is just absurd
|
On March 19 2014 13:22 r.Evo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 13:11 Sub40APM wrote:On March 19 2014 12:50 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:26 Nyxisto wrote:On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:04 zlefin wrote:
Which slander? Citations please. A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia". That isn't slandering. Actually the situation for gay people in Russia is really terrible. There are a lot of homophobic hate crimes happening in Russia, and also the law you're talking about has been signed. http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130630/181970032.html Said law isn't about a crackdown on gays in any shape or form. Here is a 70 page article by an American Journalist pulling that whole thing apart better than any source I've seen so far. In the 7+ years that variations of this law have been in effect in various regional versions no single person was convicted. In the 6 month the federal law has been in effect so far there have been 3 convictions. 2 of which were civil cases trying to challenge the law and with exactly one "real" conviction since 2006: A 120$ fee against a protestor, not because of his protest but because of an image of his protest going viral half a year later and a teen filing a complaint against it (admittedly under pressure by his father but there you go). The article explains the details a lot better than I can in a couple of sentences but the gist of it is that Russia has actually more liberal laws on LGBT issues compared to 10+ US states and the law aims to hurt one specific thing more than anything else: Multinational broadcasting corporations. The text of the law bans adults from initiating contact with minors/children who do not self identify as LGBT for the express purpose of encouraging the minor/child to explore non-traditional sexual relationships when there had not been interest previously. Basically what the law makes illegal is walking up to a minor that doesn't identify as LGBT and be like "Yo, what do you think about having sex with a man/woman? I think it's something you should try sometime!" Cliff notes from the article: + Show Spoiler +1. The law never mentions or uses the word gay, lesbian, homosexual or any other LGBT identifier. [Chapter 2 & Appendix]
2. The law focuses on children, it’s title is “On Protections of Minors from Propaganda of Non-Traditional Sexual Relations”. The messaging and strategy to bring the ban on propaganda from the law of several regions to national laws is part of a larger family values push and is based on the successful anti-same sex marriage push in the United States. [Chapter 2]
3. Russia is actually expanding protections of members of the LGBT community: On September 20, 2013 the official delegation of the Russia Federation announced their willingness to take all required measures to prevent homophobic hate crimes and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation at the 24th UN Human Rights Council. [Chapter 2]
4. There have been regional (much harsher) versions of the propaganda ban in effect for 7 years and there were only 2 convictions for violations of the regional laws and both were overturned. [Chapter 3]
5. In 6 months of the Federal Law there have been 3 convictions: 2 were acts of civil disobedience to challenge the legality of the law, the other is a story which you must read. [Chapter 3]
6.Statistically you are far more likely to be the victim of an anti-LGBT Hate Crime in the United States than in Russia. [Chapter 4]
7. In Russia you cannot be fired from your job for being an LGBT individual, in the United States you can. [Chapter 4]
8. Since 1993 gay sex was made legal in Russia, in 12 US States gay sex is a crime.[Chapter 4]
9. While President Obama says “I have no patience for countries that try to treat gays or lesbians or transgender persons in ways that intimidate them or are harmful to them.” his policies demonstrate he has nothing but patience. [Chapter 5]
10. The group impacted most if found to be in violation of the law: Multinational corporations. [Chapter 6] e: p. 35 ff. is where American and Russian laws get compared directly. I gotta admit I wasn't aware of some of those myself before finding this piece. I for example didn't know that gays were allowed to openly serve in the Russian military since 2003 or that there are blood donation bans on gays in the US. my comment on the article. + Show Spoiler +I didnt read through the whole thing but one statement in the summary is factually wrong without any research -- gay sex is not a crime in any US state. And two seem to be purposely worded to create a misconception -- Russian police do not record most anti-gay hate crimes as anti-gay hate crimes and the decriminalization of gay sex occurred during hte much more liberal period in Russia. Seems to me -- based on the tone of the article and the constant reference to America as the contrast -- the article is more concerned with bashing America's approach to gay rights than Russia's. It is more about Americas approach towards the Russian "anti-gay law" for which you need to actually look at a comparison to America. When it comes to hate crimes, the author of the paper I linked actually spent multiple pages trying to explain whether the Russian numbers are too low because of bias or because they actually are that low. For reference, SOVA (the organization behind those numbers) is endorsed by, among others, the UN, the Council of Europe, Amnesty International USA, the US Department of State and Human Rights Watch. (p. 47 ff.) Show nested quote +Carlos Maza, writing at Equality Matters, also argues that "the presence of sodomy laws can cause gays and lesbians to be dragged into humiliating, costly, and discriminatory legal disputes." He points to a 2008 case in North Carolina in which two men were arrested by the Raleigh Police Department for having consensual sex, and even though the charges were later dropped, one of the men said the "awful" ordeal "humiliated" him. http://theweek.com/article/index/242412/why-do-so-many-states-still-have-anti-sodomy-laws
Ya maybe on the data, like I said I am however skeptical based on the formulation of that paper on the issues that I actually am well versed on. Re sodomy laws: Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). Thats all you have to say if someone tries to charge; local cops trying to charge you with a state sodomy laws are the equivalent of trying to charge an interracial married couple for mixing races or trying to arrest women for voting. its illegal, no matter what the local statute says.
|
On March 19 2014 14:14 radscorpion9 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 12:19 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 12:04 zlefin wrote:
Which slander? Citations please. A good example of western countries slandering Russia not too long ago is the whole discussion about their "anti-gay" laws that don't exist in the propagated form (hell, there's no "anti-gay law" in the first place). It's a textbook example of a marketing campaign gone wild without any "reputable" media source checking their facts at any point in time because "evil Russia". I'm pretty amazed that not one (major) US media organization checked their facts on this. Is it really that easy to spread misinformation? I believed it too...at a certain point you assume that a story must be true when its reported on by so many sources and none of them find any misrepresentation or errors. This is just incompetence on a massive scale or deliberately ignoring their fundamental role as journalists to make for a flashy news story. Probably the a combination of the two, but after this I just can't take the news media all that seriously anymore. There were incidents in the past but this is just absurd
I would describe it as an anti-gay law. Basically it is interpreted as banning gay parades or doing anything gay in public because children might see it. Please take into account that Russia is extremely homophobic. Pew Research poll : "should homosexuality be accepted in society?".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Pride
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/russia-gay-pride-parade
Also, it's trying to link homosexuality with paedophilia. That homosexuals are out there to get our children. I actually believe there is a statistical link, but it's obviously not the case that most gays are paedophiles and the government shouldn't be suggesting that.
|
Old habits die hard, especially when it's to do with deportation:
Crimean Deputy Prime Minister Rustam Temirgaliyev said in an interview with RIA Novosti on Tuesday the new government in Crimea, where residents voted Sunday to become part of Russia, wants to regularize the land unofficially taken over by Crimean Tatar squatters following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Source: note it's RIA novosti - caution advised
|
Russia warns of "consequences" in response to sanctions. What these consequences would be, who knows:
After Mr Lavrov spoke to Mr Kerry, the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement: "(Crimea) republic residents made their democratic choice in line with the international law and the UN charter, which Russia accepts and respects.
"The sanctions introduced by the United States and the European Union are unacceptable and will not remain without consequences."
It did not spell out what those consequences might be.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26641217
|
Russian Federation117 Posts
On March 19 2014 07:49 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 07:34 FatCat_13 wrote:
There's no East vs West. There are Russia, USA, Germany and China. Sorry if someone feels insulted about it but the other countries decide nothing.
Somehow it has historically happened those 4 countries provide the neccessary stability in the world nowadays. In both aspects - economic and military power. It is their mission at this moment of time to play the roles of the opposites to keep everybody calm.
I've been in Russia, USA and Germany many times. The people are all the same. economic power? Russia is on par with Italy and below Brazil. Japan is richer and could be mightier too if they didnt feel so terrible about the last time they tried to be an Empire.
Having economic power is not the same as being rich. It is rather being able to influence on those being rich.
|
I guess it was clear yesterday, but truces count for shit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
