Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Options
1339133923394339633973691

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,270 ✭✭✭thomil


    It's far beyond that though. If you look at any of the far-right parties that have risen all over Europe across the last few decades, Front National in France, AfD in Germany, FPÖ in Austria, Fidesz in Hungary, all of these will have close links to Russia, far closer than the links the likes of Angela Merkel had, and for which she was regularly chewed out. There has been an ongoing process to derail or slow down the process of European consolidation, on a political and societal level, and the main actors in this process can invariably be traced back to either Moscow, or individuals sympathetic to the Kremlin. This is nothing new, it started way before the first "little green men" set foot in Crimea and has been going on for a long time, at least since the early 2000s.

    Good luck trying to figure me out. I haven't managed that myself yet!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,740 ✭✭✭zv2


    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,437 ✭✭✭jmreire


    Putin will never succeed in controlling any of Ukraine long term. With the full might of the old USSR behind them, they could not hold Afghanistan, and when they departed, they left behind all their heavy military equipment, pretty much the same as the US had to do when they pulled out of Afghanistan. (difference being that strictly speaking, the US had already handed over their equipment to the Karzai Government, who in turn lost it to the Taliban) Russian occupation (if it comes to that) will be a re-run of Afghanistan, but 100 times worse, as the Russian death toll is already proving.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,740 ✭✭✭zv2


    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,403 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭smokingman


    I'm on holiday in Europe for 4 days and I've already seen 2 Russian families turn tail and leave an establishment after being refused service for being absolute c*nts.

    Let's face it, every nation needs to deport them and refuse entry because maybe then, they'll get the message that their own country is viewed by any normal functioning country, as a piece of ****.

    I know Russians and a few Belarussians and it's genuinely time to force them to look in the mirror.

    Subtlety does not work on them. It's time to **** up their hollibops



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭weisses


    Then why did you say it was nearly 3 years? 2014 is more than 3years ago, right ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,484 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    I disagree. Misinformation should always be countered with facts.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,081 ✭✭✭riddles


    Would this information be better not shared as it represents a competitive advantage or is the PR part the bigger outcome?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 156 ✭✭Roald Dahl


    This is indeed heartwarming. Please tell us more!



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's not really anything secret. It's basic signals intelligence. Both sides will be trying to locate drone operators and send some mortars or artillery that way.

    The feed from the common FPV drones is an unencrypted analog signal; they're consumer-based. Anyone in the vicinity can intercept and watch the feed. Both sides can also triangulate the control signal. It should be common sense not to operate from one position all the time, or from a base, but apparently Russia are that stupid.



  • Registered Users Posts: 156 ✭✭Roald Dahl


    I could never figure out the affinity between the far right in Germany and Russia.


    I lived in Germany for some years and hear many tales of Russian antics during their occupation in the DDR. I would have thought that being far-right would also mean being ultra-nationalistic, which would naturally extend to a yearning for the return of lost territory, such as Königsberg. This would of course place the likes of the AfD very much at odds with Russia. This oddly seems not to be the case, however. For the life of me I was never able to figure this one out.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,140 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    in passing, the argument i saw articulated was that the AFD being mainly a working class party are not happy with inks with Russia being degraded, as access to cheap energy from Russia will be gone which means the decimation of German manufacturing, this would hit working class people more.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,413 ✭✭✭✭Say my name


    @thomil will answer more comprehensively.

    But I think it comes down to funding and the Kremlin funds these far rights groups in their enemy countries for destabilisation purposes. The Kremlin gains the disarray and paralysis in countries abroad and then has the support of these parties they helped get elected and financially looked after.

    The biggest threat the Kremlin have is a stable, strong, united European Union both militarily and economically next door. If they are all fighting like a bag of cats next door it stops them being a formidable military force and keeps the Russian citizens in Russia.

    Despite the huff of Russia they just have the population of two EU countries Germany and France and the financial economy of one country Italy.

    However to keep Europe from seeing this power it has to be kept in disarray and this way far right each country nationalistic parties instead of pan European nationalism that gets in order together.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,306 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The biggest threat the Kremlin have is a stable, strong, united European Union both militarily and economically next door. If they are all fighting like a bag of cats next door it stops them being a formidable military force and keeps the Russian citizens in Russia.

    Not just true for Kremlin really, albeit they're the most antagonistically inclined towards the idea. A truly united Europe - let's go crazy and go full USE megastate - would quickly become one of the world's biggest superpowers, and you'd speculate if America would cease to become so chummy if the EU was a single, unified voice that could wield Soft Power as effectively as America.

    But yes, to those in Russia who'd like nothing more than to basically re-form the USSR - and Putin has made no bones about this - the first step would be fracturing what had been a growing sense of European unity. Federalisation is coming, assuming some seismic gepolitical event doesn't completely destroy the EU; what happens next will be interesting.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,140 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    As I understand it, Putin has said he regrets the demise of the Soviet Union , but thats not the same as wanting to kick start it again, Im sure he has a realistic view or the situation and isnt some Downfall madman putting fake lines on maps. reforming the Soviet Union would mean invading Eastern Europe which is absurd

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭weisses


    Please enlighten me why you are sure his views are realistic in the context of why it was necessary to invade a neighboring sovereign country .. I'm goin with the madman /small penis syndrome narrative



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,634 ✭✭✭RoyalCelt


    Where do Russia go from here if there's another month of Bakhmut level losses for no gains at Avdiivka? Will they continue at this rate for the winter or take a break?



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    It's more or less exactly what he said he wanted to do ,he wants to redraw maps to include former Soviet occupied states under the guise of protecting those independent countries from Western occupation



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,306 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The site is down, but for anyone quibbling the semantics of what Putin intends, he literally wrote an essay on the subject wherein, among other pearls of wisdom, opined that Ukraine was part of "Historical Russia", and basically valid for (re)absorption. Doesn't matter if it's called USSR or the Bonerland, the intent is more important than the nomenclature: the "USSR" insofar as it means a giant, functionally authoritarian gaggle of states controlled by Moscow, is a desire of many Russian "Nationalists" - including Putin.




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,740 ✭✭✭zv2


    Well, Putin's logic is "Give me Poland or I'll nuke Warsaw. Give me Germany or I'll nuke Berlin"...and so on. He must be stopped now.

    Post edited by zv2 on

    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,703 ✭✭✭✭briany


    In fairness, if that was the tac he wanted to take, he could do it now as Russia ostensibly has the nuclear stockpile and it doesn't require an extra troop commitment. Any leader with nuclear weapons could theoretically do similar, i.e. "I will commence nuclear armageddon if I am not immediately ceded the following territories", but they don't, because it's just too costly. So, whenever Putin threatens nukes in an offensive capacity, he's bluffing. If Russia were in danger of falling and ceasing to exist as a state, then I think there's a realistic chance of pressing the button, but that's why Russia is essentially safe from this kind of overt military invasion. No country is ever going to try it while thousands of nuclear missiles sit in a state of readiness or near readiness.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,140 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    comforting narratives are comforting but for example see below, now its not to say that Putin was blameless , but I believe this was was avoidable if the US didnt treat the globe like their sandbox



    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,367 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    If NATO hadn't expanded, the Baltic States and other Eastern European states would be going through the domination we see Russia trying on versus Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Belarus.

    Russia and the USSR signed several treaties, from the Helsinki Accords to the Budapest Accords, accepting in general terms that such states were free to choose their own security arrangements and specifically with Budapest, recognising Ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty. Sovereignty includes the right to make such decisions.

    Ukrainian 'neutrality' is what Russia wanted, so that it could dominate and subvert Ukraine and bring it into its orbit. Ukraine would not be neutral in such an eventuality, but a Russian puppet like Belarus.

    The blame for this war attaches entirely on Russia. The US and others can perhaps be faulted for not helping Ukraine more to deter Russia, especially after the Crimean invasion (another breach of Budapest).

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Nobody wanted Ukraine in NATO or Europe despite both being raised at least once since the mid1990s ,even now Ukraine are a long way off EU membership and likely NATO too and there is zero guarantees of either happening in the next few years despite calls for both to happen without the full due process every other countries have went through to become a member of either.

    But this war is now 10 years old and there was no discussion on Ukraine and NATO in 2014



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,740 ✭✭✭zv2


    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,428 ✭✭✭macraignil


    Why are you posting a link to this absolute horses**t. Ukraine has not got destroyed in spite of putin's best efforts. He has sent his troops to commit mass murder and other war crimes in a country that had an existing treaty agreeing international borders at the pre 2014 lines. He is using some fighting the west narrative to keep hold of power in moskow at the cost not only to innocent Ukrainians but thousands of his own people. Blaming the US for putin's mass murder and socioeconomic destruction of the russian federation is comical.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,703 ✭✭✭✭briany


    I hate this stupid word 'globalist', favoured by conspriacy theorists everywhere.

    The USA and Europe have interests all around the globe. Russia has had same, but maybe not to the same level, but would like to - something, something wah, wah, wah, unipolar world. China same. Saudis same. They all want influence. They all want their values to be exported because it allows the previous sentence. If US and Europe are globalist, then so is everyone else, but others may not be as far ahead in the geopolitics game, so they complain.

    Globalism, as in the practice of doing business and politics on a global scale, will be with us as long as it is practical to do so.

    It should be the right of every nation to choose who they align with. I should remind everyone that one of the turning points in the Ukraine/Russia relationship was Euromaidan and the wish of 'globalist' Russia to assert its interests over a country who wished to seek allegiances elsewhere.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,270 ✭✭✭thomil


    There are multiple threads at play here.

    For starters, at least as Germany is concerned, a lot of the initial support for the AfD came from East Germany, the states that formerly made up the GDR, and there in particular in the parts of Thuringia, Saxony & Saxony-Anhalt that, due to their geographical make-up would have been shielded from western radio & TV broadcasts. As such, post-1945 Soviet indoctrination worked much better there than it would in the areas around Berlin or up in the North, which is generally flat as a board. East German propaganda & education was also a lot more nationalist than you'd expect from a country subscribed to a supposedly internationalist ideology which, coupled with a lack of any proper attempts to process the events & crimes of the nazi years, created a witches brew of anti-western sentiment and nationalist ideology in the southern parts of the GDR, primarily in the post-war generations.

    As such, there was a real feeling of betrayal when the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, and this feeling of betrayal and alienation only increased when, in the years following reunification, Eastern German industrial plants, which had often been built in poorly-developed regions (Just look at places such as Eisenhüttenstadt or Leuna to see what I mean) and were often decades behind in terms of technology, were shut down or laid off vast numbers of their pre-unification work force. At the same time, the successor to the SED (East German Communist Party), the PDS, later Linkspartei or Linke, moved away from its previous martial & nationalist positions, moving more into a traditional far-left political party, alienating a lot of its former members in East Germany. This allowed more extreme parties, first the unabashedly neo-nazi NPD and later the AfD (NPD in suits) to take advantage of a readily-prepared support base, one that had generally good memories of the time when the big brother in Moscow was still on their side.

    Then, there are the social aspects. For all the propaganda about freeing the working people, GDR society was surprisingly conservative/reactionary and sealed off. While women were far more common in the workplace in the GDR compared to West Germany, particularly in the first twenty years of the GDR regime, their place in society wasn't all that different than it was in Germany pre-war, with a very clear emphasis on men being the pillars of society. The LGBT scene was actively suppressed, and to a far more extreme degree than in the west, with once again the first twenty years being the worst. And finally, there was basically no immigration. While there was an exchange with fellow socialist countries such as Vietnam, this was highly regimented, almost always tied to major infrastructure projects and for the most part, these foreign nationals were restricted to their own compounds, with only limited cultural exchange events under strict supervision of the party and the Stasi. This stood in stark contrast to the far more liberal situation in West Germany, and the resulting clash of ideologies post-reunification only reinforced the feelings of alienation & betrayal I mentioned earlier.

    So when Russia seemingly sorted its troubles out in the early 2000s, coupled with embarking on a decidedly conservative social policy under Putin, this became a welcome point of focus for a significant number of East Germans. Russia was seen as a welcome oasis of calm, a country where the proper order of things was being reestablished. It was also a welcome logistics base for some of the more radical elements of the far-right, with weapons readily available, loads of isolated areas for "training" and local authorities that could easily be bought off with hard currency.

    Of course, Russia also expertly played on the collective societal guilt of German society for the crimes committed during WW2, reinforcing the need for reconciliation and positioning a deepening friendship with Russia as the best way to do so, with an accompanying cooling of relations with the US & NATO being positioned as the best way to break out of the circle of post-war guilt. And for a while, this actually worked. Russia was seen as a "natural ally", public service broadcasters ran massive documentary series about Russia, from Kaliningrad to the Urals, highlighting the people and the culture. Hell, they even let a camera team onto a Typhoon class submarine during a routine deterrence patrol. Even my dad, who was an old-school left-wing liberal, was taken in to a certain degree, believing that the "Atlantic Bridge" as it was called in Germany, the close partnership between Western European states and the US, needed to go.

    So yeah, it's a complicated situation with no quick & easy answers, as you can see from this rambling reply.

    EDIT: There's one more thing that needs to be pointed out, despite the length of my post already: Yes, there was already an active far-right scene in West Germany at the time of reunification. The NPD, which I mentioned before, was a west German party. However, the far-right & neo-nazi scene in the West were generally disorganised, chaotic and impulsive, preferring direct action and violence over working their way through the system. They were also generally cash-strapped, so when the AfD started its rise in the late 2000s, with a well-established party structure and ample financial resources, it was able to not only absorb far-right movements in West Germany, but also weed-out the "undesirable" elements of these movements, while adopting their political positions & outlook. An AfD-internal strategy paper actually stated this in 2016: "We differentiate ourselves from the NPD through our conservative supporters, not through our policies"

    Post edited by thomil on

    Good luck trying to figure me out. I haven't managed that myself yet!



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement