I'm just saying when the time comes, after he dies he will tag along with Kim Jong Un as one of the most evil person to have lived in the 21th century, and one of the worst leaders of Russia who are sadly many. And for reasons already explained: no opposition, in power for more than 15 yrs and influencing votings, media control and propaganda, a corrupted state, an hyper centralised state, minorities without any representatives or power, cult of personality, annexing part of some countries, and other smaller problems like denying human rights and maintaining an oligarchy etc... The list is long and I hope he's prepared for the lowest level of hell he believes in.
he will be considered a national hero, trust me
Is Stalin considered a national hero in Russia too? Because if war would came to your doorstep Putin, unless he was desperate enough to fire nukes, would throw you all guys under enemy fire, just to keep his ass safe, just like comrade Joseph did back then. We all know how it ended, over 20 million of Russians dead, that is like a half of Ukraine, imagine that. This is what your leader thinks of you guys, a cannon fodder.
You're Polish. How can you now know that many in Russian consider Stalin a national hero ? I'm serious, maybe not so much as Lenin, but both are revered by part of the older generation. And Putin will probably be an even bigger national hero - he did a lot of ego boosting things for Russia, while not costing millions of Russians lives (yet... and probably never, regardless of Russia's aggression I don't see this escalating or any significant war between Russia and Europe/USA).
It was a rhetorical question I guess. My point was to depict so called Russian national "heroes", which in general, are nothing more than tyrants, oppressors and mass murderers.
On April 10 2014 11:25 Yoav wrote: What the hell is the story with the Independent poll? It looks like some Russian media agency sent their entire viewership to spam the poll. Half the comments are in Russian, and they are almost uniformly conspiracy-theory-crazy right-extremist pro-Russian. The hell?
I voted for Obama because he represents my country, but the results were shocking. How many trolls were voting in this poll to earn Putin 92% of the votes? The comments are about as bad as on Yahoo articles, too. But Jesus, it's like every Russian with Internet went to that site to vote for Putin.
How Crimeans felt is irrelevant. Crimea was technically Ukrainian territory and was made to become Russian territory via the entrance of Russian forces outside of their allotted bounds (their bases). That is conquest, whatever way you spin it.
Euromaidan was obviously the root of instability in Ukraine, but Gorsameth appears to be stating that Russia influenced more instability.
If I got this right the argument from the Russian perspective goes like this: Crimea was Russian until 1954 when the Ukrainian leader of the Soviet Union Nikita Chruschtschow gave it to Ukraine as a present without asking the mostly Russian population on Crimea if they want this. It didn't really matter at that time because the Soviet Union was one entity after all. But can a state leader legally just give away part of one state to another state without asking the population if they want this?
The people on Crimea now held a referendum where the absolute majority voted to become part of the Russian Federation. The argument they were forced with weapons to vote in favor is bullshit - when you get a notable increase in pensions or salary just by joining the Russian Federation which they get because living standards are far higher in Russia than in Ukraine, being ethnic Russian yourself well what would you vote if you just want to have a better life? Many of the soldiers on Crimea deserted to join the Russian forces.
And why does it matter what the people in Kiev want but doesn't matter what the people in Sevastopol want? It's not logical.
On April 09 2014 21:19 Ghanburighan wrote: I cannot believe people still doubt Russian interests in seizing back Ukraine. They are openly demanding `federalization' (read any comment by Lavrov in the next few weeks); what this means is that each region will be made independent and it can then seek unification with Russia if it wishes, or receive a semi-controlled status like Transnistria or South-Ossetia, etc. If that doesn't work, they have an invasion force waiting. But make no mistake, this is about controlling Ukraine, the methods are inconsequential.
Oh and what is so bad about being a federation? Russia is a federation. Germany is a federation. The U.S. is a federation, Belgium too with a flamish speaking part and a frensh speaking part. It's a matter how the federation is designed to guarantee the same rights for all people living there.
Maybe the majority of Crimeans were for joining Russia (given that Ukrainian TV was cut off, and the only news they could get was non-stop Russian propaganda). I wouldn't be surprised it most wanted to join Russia, but it was a foreign invasion, a rigged vote, and massive propaganda.
As to the federation part, that's Ukraine's choice. Not yours, not mine, not Russia's, not Americas. How can Russia even demand that? Saying "it'll be civil unrest or a federation"-Lavrov (I don't have the exact quote). Basically, that's a threat- if you don't become a federation we'll destabilize you.
The thing is even when you imply the vote was unfair and invalid the majority of the population on Crimea still wants to be part of Russia. Don't nail me on the exact numbers somewhere around 60% of the people living there are ethnic Russian, 30% Ukrainian and 10% crim tartars. If you really want I can look up a source. I already told you living standards are higher in Russia and people in administration and pensioneers automatically get higher wages now because they joined Russia.
Btw it is your interpretation that the second option means to join Russia later. It would have been a possibility, yes, but we will never know if this would have happened because the people voted for option 1 - join Russia now.
About the TV thing, well being ethnic Russians they watch Russian TV anyway like a lot of people in eastern Ukraine do.
Now how can Lavrov demand a federation. Well simple: He just states this is what people in eastern Ukraine want. So why not find out what people want by letting them vote?
On April 10 2014 08:07 Mc wrote: Are you a Russian troll pretending to be from Germany? You seem to imply that it was a fair vote. The Crimeans had not way to vote 'No'. They could vote for being annexed by Russia now, or having the option to do it later. People who wanted to stay in Ukraine weren't able to voice that.
I kid you not this kind of nonsense is so popular over here, especially online. The whole NSA mess seems to have blown several people's brain out. I don't know if it's Anti-Americanism or something else but the acceptance for what Russia did is really high here.
Well I tried to write my post from a Russian perspective. There are so many posts here from the other side that I thought why not show the Russian side. And I did it with facts. Not facts you like it seems.
Btw I'm far from Anti-American having friends from the U.S. I just get the impression people here think Russia is some regional power that can be intimidated easily. The 'regional power' statement by Obama is delusional.
On April 10 2014 09:41 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: Yes, I am aware of what transpired in Crimea. We know that even disregarding a falsified referendum result, the majority of Crimeans are probably well in favor of joining with Russia (which was discussed earlier in this thread).
BUT this does not mean another country can take it over. It is NOT justified, even if the real reason was for Russia to secure its military and strategic assets in Crimea which at least they feared could have been compromised if Ukraine joined with blocs other than Russia.
But this is what happened. Crimea is Russian now and there is nothing we can do about it. Sure you can bring up sanctions - Russia will not give in. And then? What next? I think you can be pretty sure Putin will not give in to sanctions. If Russia were some kind of Iraq you could say nono and go in military wise, but this is out of the question here.
For the German speaking people I'd like to link a youtube video of "Me, Putin" which is a documentary done by NDR - for all non-Germans part of ARD - portraying the Russian leader: At minute 20:30 you see him talk in German in front of our parliament talking about what he thinks the partnership between Russia and Europe / U.S. is like. This was in the year 2001. At 22:15 you see Putin's reaction when asked about NATO's missile defense shield in Poland which is supposed to be against Iran.
That the vote was invalid isn't really something that needs to be implied; because it's an observable fact. Russia is kinda in between a regional power and a global power. Their actual global reach is quite limited; they can throw some money around, but not all that much, nor does their force projection extend that far really.
Also, we could militarily take Russia, quite easily; it's just not worth the trouble. Easier to wait it out until Russia collapses again. It's also not at all clear that the crimeans wanted to join Russia (have ties with, sure, but not join)
Well I tried to write my post from a Russian perspective. There are so many posts here from the other side that I thought why not show the Russian side. And I did it with facts. Not facts you like it seems.
facts? "Russians get more money than Ukrainians therefore its totally logical that the vote in Crimea was fair" Even the Russians didnt believe this, which is why (a) the actual election was highly manipulated, with both a loaded question, questionable outcome of the voting -- Crimean Tatars declare they are boycotting the elections and the Russians report 80 turnout? (b) was rushed first from May 25th when the Ukrainian Presidential elections were due to March 30th to finally March 14.
On April 10 2014 13:40 zlefin wrote: That the vote was invalid isn't really something that needs to be implied; because it's an observable fact. Russia is kinda in between a regional power and a global power. Their actual global reach is quite limited; they can throw some money around, but not all that much, nor does their force projection extend that far really.
Also, we could militarily take Russia, quite easily; it's just not worth the trouble. Easier to wait it out until Russia collapses again. It's also not at all clear that the crimeans wanted to join Russia (have ties with, sure, but not join)
Yeah, I agree with you that Russia is between a regional and a global power. I disagree with your statement Russia could be taken easily military wise. The Russian nuclear doctrine is to go nuclear when the integrity of the Russian Federation is threatened severly.
Well I tried to write my post from a Russian perspective. There are so many posts here from the other side that I thought why not show the Russian side. And I did it with facts. Not facts you like it seems.
facts? "Russians get more money than Ukrainians therefore its totally logical that the vote in Crimea was fair" Even the Russians didnt believe this, which is why (a) the actual election was highly manipulated, with both a loaded question, questionable outcome of the voting -- Crimean Tatars declare they are boycotting the elections and the Russians report 80 turnout? (b) was rushed first from May 25th when the Ukrainian Presidential elections were due to March 30th to finally March 14.
You are quoting something I did neither say nor imply and if you read this out of my statement maybe you should read it again. Btw it's a bad way of arguing to put someone words in the mouth and you did this by "quoting" something I did not write.
I give you the vote was influenced, but my argument is that it doesn't matter because the majority still wants to be a part of Russia. Otherwise I'm 100% sure we would upto now have seen a lot of pictures of unhappy Crimeans protesting against Russia.
How Crimeans felt is irrelevant. Crimea was technically Ukrainian territory and was made to become Russian territory via the entrance of Russian forces outside of their allotted bounds (their bases). That is conquest, whatever way you spin it.
Euromaidan was obviously the root of instability in Ukraine, but Gorsameth appears to be stating that Russia influenced more instability.
If I got this right the argument from the Russian perspective goes like this: Crimea was Russian until 1954 when the Ukrainian leader of the Soviet Union Nikita Chruschtschow gave it to Ukraine as a present without asking the mostly Russian population on Crimea if they want this. It didn't really matter at that time because the Soviet Union was one entity after all. But can a state leader legally just give away part of one state to another state without asking the population if they want this?
The people on Crimea now held a referendum where the absolute majority voted to become part of the Russian Federation. The argument they were forced with weapons to vote in favor is bullshit - when you get a notable increase in pensions or salary just by joining the Russian Federation which they get because living standards are far higher in Russia than in Ukraine, being ethnic Russian yourself well what would you vote if you just want to have a better life? Many of the soldiers on Crimea deserted to join the Russian forces.
And why does it matter what the people in Kiev want but doesn't matter what the people in Sevastopol want? It's not logical.
On April 09 2014 21:19 Ghanburighan wrote: I cannot believe people still doubt Russian interests in seizing back Ukraine. They are openly demanding `federalization' (read any comment by Lavrov in the next few weeks); what this means is that each region will be made independent and it can then seek unification with Russia if it wishes, or receive a semi-controlled status like Transnistria or South-Ossetia, etc. If that doesn't work, they have an invasion force waiting. But make no mistake, this is about controlling Ukraine, the methods are inconsequential.
Oh and what is so bad about being a federation? Russia is a federation. Germany is a federation. The U.S. is a federation, Belgium too with a flamish speaking part and a frensh speaking part. It's a matter how the federation is designed to guarantee the same rights for all people living there.
Maybe the majority of Crimeans were for joining Russia (given that Ukrainian TV was cut off, and the only news they could get was non-stop Russian propaganda). I wouldn't be surprised it most wanted to join Russia, but it was a foreign invasion, a rigged vote, and massive propaganda.
As to the federation part, that's Ukraine's choice. Not yours, not mine, not Russia's, not Americas. How can Russia even demand that? Saying "it'll be civil unrest or a federation"-Lavrov (I don't have the exact quote). Basically, that's a threat- if you don't become a federation we'll destabilize you.
The thing is even when you imply the vote was unfair and invalid the majority of the population on Crimea still wants to be part of Russia. Don't nail me on the exact numbers somewhere around 60% of the people living there are ethnic Russian, 30% Ukrainian and 10% crim tartars. If you really want I can look up a source. I already told you living standards are higher in Russia and people in administration and pensioneers automatically get higher wages now because they joined Russia.
Btw it is your interpretation that the second option means to join Russia later. It would have been a possibility, yes, but we will never know if this would have happened because the people voted for option 1 - join Russia now.
About the TV thing, well being ethnic Russians they watch Russian TV anyway like a lot of people in eastern Ukraine do.
Now how can Lavrov demand a federation. Well simple: He just states this is what people in eastern Ukraine want. So why not find out what people want by letting them vote?
On April 10 2014 08:07 Mc wrote: Are you a Russian troll pretending to be from Germany? You seem to imply that it was a fair vote. The Crimeans had not way to vote 'No'. They could vote for being annexed by Russia now, or having the option to do it later. People who wanted to stay in Ukraine weren't able to voice that.
I kid you not this kind of nonsense is so popular over here, especially online. The whole NSA mess seems to have blown several people's brain out. I don't know if it's Anti-Americanism or something else but the acceptance for what Russia did is really high here.
Well I tried to write my post from a Russian perspective. There are so many posts here from the other side that I thought why not show the Russian side. And I did it with facts. Not facts you like it seems.
Btw I'm far from Anti-American having friends from the U.S. I just get the impression people here think Russia is some regional power that can be intimidated easily. The 'regional power' statement by Obama is delusional.
On April 10 2014 09:41 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: Yes, I am aware of what transpired in Crimea. We know that even disregarding a falsified referendum result, the majority of Crimeans are probably well in favor of joining with Russia (which was discussed earlier in this thread).
BUT this does not mean another country can take it over. It is NOT justified, even if the real reason was for Russia to secure its military and strategic assets in Crimea which at least they feared could have been compromised if Ukraine joined with blocs other than Russia.
But this is what happened. Crimea is Russian now and there is nothing we can do about it. Sure you can bring up sanctions - Russia will not give in. And then? What next? I think you can be pretty sure Putin will not give in to sanctions. If Russia were some kind of Iraq you could say nono and go in military wise, but this is out of the question here.
For the German speaking people I'd like to link a youtube video of "Me, Putin" which is a documentary done by NDR - for all non-Germans part of ARD - portraying the Russian leader: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urGLJlEECIc At minute 20:30 you see him talk in German in front of our parliament talking about what he thinks the partnership between Russia and Europe / U.S. is like. This was in the year 2001. At 22:15 you see Putin's reaction when asked about NATO's missile defense shield in Poland which is supposed to be against Iran.
First off Crimea is Russia now. There is nothing we can do about it. We can't fight Russia, and we shouldn't so on those points I agree with you. Sanctions can hurt/annoy some of the people in power, and slightly destabilize their economy. That seems like a positive way to somewhat deter Russia from making some moves. Are they a given to work? No, but they make a positive statement that Russia's action were wrong and unacceptable . I admire trying to view things from the other perspective and I try to do so also. But you said " The people on Crimea now held a referendum where the absolute majority voted to". Which is extremely misleading, since the vote didn't have an option for "NO" or the status quo. How can you consider that to be a fair representative vote. I'm pretty sure most Crimeans at the time where for joining Russia. The fact that Ukrainian TV was cut off (for the significant 30 or 40% Tatar/Ukrainian population) is significant, Russian military was everywhere. If you want to say that most Crimeans were for Russian annexation than say that, but don't say they "Crimea voted", when it wasn't really a vote.
As to, whether Crimeans desire to be separate vs Kiev's desire for unity, yes it's a complex question for many countries with diverse populations. Often times they want to secede. Should we always support independence? Should we allow much more powerful foreign governments to invade and hold a 'referendum'? Other than in extreme cases, where the population of the succeeding area is being persecuted I'd say for stability's sake no. Even in those cases, sending in foreign "peace keepers" should be done very rarely and cautiously. Chechnya for sure 'deserves' independence from Russia, which has abused and killed it's population for decades. However, I'm not advocating sending in EU/NATO peacekeepers to hold a vote there :p
Edit: And I do realize that you were trying to voice the "Russian" perspective. But that perspective tends to ignore a lot of facts, so I had to argue with it In general I ACCEPT and even sympathize a little with the the argument "Crimea is very Russian, it's very important in our history, they mostly wanted to join us, so Crimea should be Russian. I don't care for international law much, and I care more about Russians then the 35% non-Russian population in Crimea so I support what Russia did in Crimea. Also we were concerned about the future of our military port if Ukraine sides too much with Europe". Any farther justification, trying to make it seem like it was done according to international law, or a fair vote, or that Russians didn't invade, sabotage, sink Ukrainian ships, etc. is delusional.
On April 10 2014 11:25 Yoav wrote: What the hell is the story with the Independent poll? It looks like some Russian media agency sent their entire viewership to spam the poll. Half the comments are in Russian, and they are almost uniformly conspiracy-theory-crazy right-extremist pro-Russian. The hell?
This doesn't even reflect Russian people, Putin’s party and its partners have for years employed people to vote and comment on the Internet, a process that incorporated botnets into nor too long ago. Evidence of botnet activity was also seen here on TL when a bot posted the Paet video.
I give you the vote was influenced, but my argument is that it doesn't matter because the majority still wants to be a part of Russia. Otherwise I'm 100% sure we would upto now have seen a lot of pictures of unhappy Crimeans protesting against Russia.
Guess everyone was in love with the Soviet Union, nary a public protest until the late 1980s. History is full of examples of people being intimidated enough not to protest, and if you are a Crimean Tatar you literally just began to recover from the previous Russian ethnic cleansing, why risk another one again. Even Russian posters on this thread -- not all -- have posted incredibly hostile language towards Muslims or Tatars and this is an internet video game forum so they represent some of the best educated, richest, English speaking Russians.
But I guess you know better than the actual government of Russia that went out of its way to rig the elections. Should have sent them a memo, would have saved them millions not to mention all that bad PR.
The UK, Poland and Sweden have proposed that a European Union civilian mission is set up to help Ukraine improve its justice system.
In a leaked joint paper the three countries argue that "re-establishing confidence in the rule of law in Ukraine will be vital for future stability."
The idea is due to be discussed by ambassadors to the EU in Brussels on Monday afternoon.
Yes. This would be great. The Ukrainian government should go one step further and invite retired judges from Sweden, Norway, Denmark to come in and actually run the judiciary system. Its the only way to undo hundreds of years of corruption ingrained in the judicial system.
On April 10 2014 11:25 Yoav wrote: What the hell is the story with the Independent poll? It looks like some Russian media agency sent their entire viewership to spam the poll. Half the comments are in Russian, and they are almost uniformly conspiracy-theory-crazy right-extremist pro-Russian. The hell?
This doesn't even reflect Russian people, Putin’s party and its partners have for years employed people to vote and comment on the Internet, a process that incorporated botnets into nor too long ago. Evidence of botnet activity was also seen here on TL when a bot posted the Paet video.
I don't know if "employ" is the right word here. Do you have any evidence to back that up? I think that a lot of Russians are simply extremely proud/nationalistic. This is a glorified moment for many Russians, backed up by a well done propaganda campaign. They feel pride and also injustice (that the West doesn't support them), and thus are taking to the interwebs. A lot of Europeans just don't care that much about Ukraine since it doesn't affect them. I wouldn't be surprised that there weren't some the nashi movement didn't have some sort of activity/class about 'voicing your opinion' and defending mother Russia.
Doesn't that seem like a more probable explanation than Putin actually hiring people to write really stupid comments in really poor English or Russian on random forums that don't really matter? Also, if they were paid their arguments I think their arguments would be much more refined. And as I said there would probably some more concrete evidence that these are paid trolls
Indeed, bringing in foreign help (carefully chosen of course) is all too often neglected. I understand people like to "do it themselves" and forge their own path, it just doesn't work as well.
People get paid to do all sorts of stuff to make things look good; I don't see why that wouldn't apply to internet posting as well. The question is which is which; and what the distribution is.
and re: banaora; Russia's conventional military would get crushed vs the west; and it wouldn't use its nuclear arsenal over crimea alone. And of course it can't win even with it's nuclear arsenal; it'd still get crushed, it'd just take down more people with it. Pity we can't just assassinate the Russian leadership or something; get some decent people in charge over there.
Russia's central bank has published balance of payments data that showed an estimated $63.7 billion in net capital outflow in the first three months of this year - as much as the $63 billion in outflows seen during the whole of 2013.
The bank first published a figure of $50.6 billion on Tuesday, but later included an adjusted total to add $13.2 billion in forex transactions between banks and the central bank, which analysts say provides a clearer picture of total capital flight.
But never fear, great leader is on the case!
Reacting to such trends, President Vladimir Putin has called for the business climate to be improved "substantially" and "at an accelerated pace", though previous such exhortations have delivered scant results.
On April 10 2014 14:34 zlefin wrote: Indeed, bringing in foreign help (carefully chosen of course) is all too often neglected. I understand people like to "do it themselves" and forge their own path, it just doesn't work as well.
People get paid to do all sorts of stuff to make things look good; I don't see why that wouldn't apply to internet posting as well. The question is which is which; and what the distribution is.
and re: banaora; Russia's conventional military would get crushed vs the west; and it wouldn't use its nuclear arsenal over crimea alone. And of course it can't win even with it's nuclear arsenal; it'd still get crushed, it'd just take down more people with it. Pity we can't just assassinate the Russian leadership or something; get some decent people in charge over there.
I see your point (this seems like a valid strategy- pay a group of people to troll forums in support of Russia), but from reading many forums overrun with pro-Russia posters, it seems the posters are just teenage internet trolls fighting the cyber war on their own free time for Matuska Rossija.. That's the impression I get from reading their posts (incoherent, no logic, horrible english). Maybe it's that the majority of them are Russian internet trolls, while there are also some hired PR people writing more coherent posts. To me that's just a possibility (I'm about 50/50 on whether they exist or not) - I'd need some sort of proof to back that claim up. Anyone got some?
Maybe some of the posters in this forum (especially the new posters) are just doing their job
On April 10 2014 14:34 zlefin wrote: Indeed, bringing in foreign help (carefully chosen of course) is all too often neglected. I understand people like to "do it themselves" and forge their own path, it just doesn't work as well.
People get paid to do all sorts of stuff to make things look good; I don't see why that wouldn't apply to internet posting as well. The question is which is which; and what the distribution is.
and re: banaora; Russia's conventional military would get crushed vs the west; and it wouldn't use its nuclear arsenal over crimea alone. And of course it can't win even with it's nuclear arsenal; it'd still get crushed, it'd just take down more people with it. Pity we can't just assassinate the Russian leadership or something; get some decent people in charge over there.
I see your point (this seems like a valid strategy- pay a group of people to troll forums in support of Russia), but from reading many forums overrun with pro-Russia posters, it seems the posters are just teenage internet trolls fighting the cyber war on their own free time for Matuska Rossija.. That's the impression I get from reading their posts (incoherent, no logic, horrible english). Maybe it's that the majority of them are Russian internet trolls, while there are also some hired PR people writing more coherent posts. To me that's just a possibility (I'm about 50/50 on whether they exist or not) - I'd need some sort of proof to back that claim up. Anyone got some?
Maybe some of the posters in this forum (especially the new posters) are just doing their job
I guess they must not have as much of an effect as the old posters considering they are new to the game. The NSA and GCHQ.
“These ideas – discussions of how to exploit the internet, specifically social media, to surreptitiously disseminate viewpoints friendly to Western interests and spread false or damaging information about targets – appear repeatedly throughout the archive of materials provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden,” Greenwald revealed in the online publication, The Intercept.
Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums.
Maybe its time to drop the act. At this point nobody should have an excuse. To still believe you have a free press or freedom of thought or freedom of choice, you are tricking nobody but yourself I guess move along and vote for the donkey or the elephant and believe you have actually made a real change. Russia is really no different but at least they dont act like they are the becaon on freedom when they are the biggest hypocrites and biggest threat to the worlds freedom.
On April 10 2014 14:34 zlefin wrote: Indeed, bringing in foreign help (carefully chosen of course) is all too often neglected. I understand people like to "do it themselves" and forge their own path, it just doesn't work as well.
People get paid to do all sorts of stuff to make things look good; I don't see why that wouldn't apply to internet posting as well. The question is which is which; and what the distribution is.
and re: banaora; Russia's conventional military would get crushed vs the west; and it wouldn't use its nuclear arsenal over crimea alone. And of course it can't win even with it's nuclear arsenal; it'd still get crushed, it'd just take down more people with it. Pity we can't just assassinate the Russian leadership or something; get some decent people in charge over there.
Maybe some of the posters in this forum (especially the new posters) are just doing their job
yeah, especially funny when it comes from a guy who usually has 0.21 posts (42 posts in total from 2010) per week and all of a sudden this week he made 19 posts, guess in what thread
On April 10 2014 14:34 zlefin wrote: Indeed, bringing in foreign help (carefully chosen of course) is all too often neglected. I understand people like to "do it themselves" and forge their own path, it just doesn't work as well.
People get paid to do all sorts of stuff to make things look good; I don't see why that wouldn't apply to internet posting as well. The question is which is which; and what the distribution is.
and re: banaora; Russia's conventional military would get crushed vs the west; and it wouldn't use its nuclear arsenal over crimea alone. And of course it can't win even with it's nuclear arsenal; it'd still get crushed, it'd just take down more people with it. Pity we can't just assassinate the Russian leadership or something; get some decent people in charge over there.
Maybe some of the posters in this forum (especially the new posters) are just doing their job
yeah, especially funny when it comes from a guy who usually has 0.21 posts (42 posts in total from 2010) per week and all of a sudden this week he made 19 posts, guess in what thread
That is true - I started posting on TL.net because the political situation in E. Europe is very important to me. I have been occasionally reading TL.net for over 10 years (when it was primarily just a broodwar forum- I remember the website then had a horrible UI :p), but I have been mostly a lurker checking it like once every few months when I was really bored :p Since the Ukraine situation I have become very active in this forum. I guess 8/10 years ago I was active, totalling probably a few hundred posts, but I lost that account ages ago.
edit: I just found my old account account. I can't reset the password since it doesn't even have an email address associated with it :p
actually there is no need in excuses and explanations - i just wanted to show you when you start a "witch hunt" you can become the very first victim of it
Yeah I did self implicate myself since I do appear to be new via my post-count. And I highly doubt that there are any Russian paid forum trollers on teamliquid.net - it was said in jest. I actually have my doubts whether Russian paid web trollers exist at all.
On April 10 2014 19:13 Mc wrote: Yeah I did self implicate myself since I do appear to be new via my post-count. And I highly doubt that there are any Russian paid forum trollers on teamliquid.net - it was said in jest. I actually have my doubts whether Russian paid web trollers exist at all.
They certainly exist. They just arent as effective and/or advanced as western intel agencies. I remember seeing some guy who got banned on TL for being a paid samsung promoter and basher of apple or anything apple related. if we have samsung paid posters, you can be sure we have politically paid posters. You have to remember these guys are paid to sit down, browse forums and post. imagine how many forums one individual can browse in a given day.
On April 10 2014 19:13 Mc wrote: Yeah I did self implicate myself since I do appear to be new via my post-count. And I highly doubt that there are any Russian paid forum trollers on teamliquid.net - it was said in jest. I actually have my doubts whether Russian paid web trollers exist at all.
If the Bulgarian Socialist Party (the first English article I've found: here) is able to pay web trolls, then why wouldn't Russia afford it?
EPT
? I'm serious, maybe not so much as Lenin, but both are revered by part of the older generation. And Putin will probably be an even bigger national hero - he did a lot of ego boosting things for Russia, while not costing millions of Russians lives (yet... and probably never, regardless of Russia's aggression I don't see this escalating or any significant war between Russia and Europe/USA). 
![[image loading]](http://i57.fastpic.ru/big/2014/0410/af/a247f89d2f112b2c58dfe1f8b38e22af.png)
