Is Russia being unfairly portrayed in western media ?

[Brecht]

Originally Posted by crinolynne

NATO is an aggressive military alliance... I should bloody well hope so! Can't imagine what the point of a military alliance would be otherwise. I seem to remember where the tanks came from in Prague in '68.

I wonder if you have the same memories as the people in Vietnam or Iraq.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by Nobody1

While this is certainly true, the US Congress and some military dinosaurs seem to disagree.


And I'm pretty sure they will not do this. In fact, I'm pretty sure they'll tell him the exact opposite.

And I'm also pretty sure that he'll believe it.

I would hope that realism would triumph over rhetoric. If not, then we are pretty much screwed.

Curtis LeMay believed that 100+ million casualties and the loss of several of our major cities would be acceptable losses. Most of us strongly disagreed.

By the way, H.R. McMaster is a very bright man. I am sure that he very clearly understands that any nations to be built in Afghanistan and Iraq will be determined by the peoples of those nations and will be consistent with their cultural traditions.

In his previous position, the general made the same pleas that the Joint Chiefs made in this last go round. The Pentagon wants major investments to be made in new weapons systems, expanded recruiting and advanced training. IMO their priorities are not consistent with the fiscal realities of the present moment. This is particularly true in light of the President and Republican Congressmen wishing to push through major tax cuts (although both are in favor of increased military spending.) If the United States wishes to ramp up military spending to Cold War levels, meet it obligations to retirees and fund health insurance to a large group of people, while paying interest costs on the vast sums previously borrowed, a major tax increase is in order.

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by palo5

Absolutely not! Nato is an aggressive military alliance, used these days for US purposes to promote arms sales and war in general

Russia will never have a part in that corruption!

Not sure if you are being serious, but I need to point out that Russia is one of the top arms exporters in the world as well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry

Ranking number two in the nifty little chart down below. Still behind us "imperialist" Americans though. We're number one!

Who is buying Russian guns these days, though, African dictators? I watched that one movie called "Lord of War" which was a fictionalized account of the huge illicit selloff of Soviet stockpiles in the 1990s, and lots of stuff apparently went to arm different sides in African conflicts. A few people sure made out back then.

Originally Posted by Brian249x

Especially since the whole purpose of NATO is to menace Russia. Once again, I must point out that it took some particularly obtuse strategists to add Poland, the Baltic states, and other former Warsaw Pact nations to NATO. The best that can come of that arrangement is that those nations will be expelled or allowed to leave voluntarily.

What makes the whole thing even sillier is the United States really can't fight a land war with Russia and a nuclear war would be an absolute disaster. I am pretty sure that Generals Mattis and McMaster could to explain this to Mr Trump if the president actually had an inclination to fight Russia. Now, if they can just get him to stop upsetting Iran.

Only a fool would want a land war with Russia. Smart people remember what happened to Napoleon and Hitler.

[crinolynne]

Originally Posted by Brecht

I wonder if you have the same memories as the people in Vietnam or Iraq.

Neither were Nato operations.

[AmateurEmale]

I wish we could go back to the good feelings about 1985-1992 when there was the idea that we could all get along on this small planet. Scorpions, the hard rock band of Germany, made songs about it, as their country was still divided between East and West through 1989-1990.

And then there was this band who were actually from Russia: Gorky Park, who played with certain stereotypes of the time and not only parodied the sickle and hammer in their album artwork, they made a few music videos and explicitly thanked Mikhail Gorbachev for allowing more freedom of expression in the USSR. Critics called them "perestroikan posers" (I prefer the Met-Art and Femjoy kind myself...) but they were a decent band.

For this Gorky Park video, try: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrSKG3TS0uE>

Do any of you from Eastern Europe have any opinions on how musicians of Russia are depicted, or is this getting off the subject? I have learned to treat you as fellow human beings since the 1980s, and to never confuse governments with their people.

[george anson]

The coverage of Russia to me is rather biased. And predominantly anti Russian. Everything Russia does or more specifically Putin is regarded as potentially hostile and underhand.

And it has always been this as Saul David in his Timewatch retrospective of media coverage of Russia showed. The sole time Russia was portrayed in a positive light was when it joined with the Allies and Stalin became Uncle Joe and his bands of heroic soldiers defying the Nazi horde.

I think it is a real shame that since 1990 there seems to be real agitation for a new Cold War. The game of spheres of influence too is much in evidence. And I think Russia has a legitimate cause for feeling sore about it. NATO promised never to encroach on Russia's borders. But it did.

The EU and the US meddled in Ukraine while accusing Russia of doing the same but claimed all the trouble was down to Russia trying to install a puppet. I would describe Poroshenko as a puppet and several of his cabinet are foreigners.

When it suited NATO to undermine a staunch ally of Russia, Serbia on the basis of self determination for ethnic Albanians in Kosovo it has been rather reluctant to award the same thing to the predominantly ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine and suspiciously quiet on the current Catalonia issue.

And while describing Russin war crimes in Syria noticeably quiet on the deliberate bombing of Serbian civilians. And remember the Georgia affair ?

Very quick to jump to pointing the blame at Russia when as we discovered later the American puppet Sarkashvili ordered the invasion of South Ossetia. Famously declaring Russia has no history and no culture....

Yes Russia has many problems. It is still trying to assert as Putin sees himself as a world player and power and yes it is far from ideal when oligarchs and cronies live the life of riley while many struggle along in Russia itself. I think the big point is that many in the west would like to see a submissive Russia out of the world game. But it's not going to happen despite the current economic problems.

Russians as a whole are tremendously pride of their country and it's heritage and anyone they see as maintaining that position for their nation is someone to get behind. More so given the huge mess that the country dissolved into post 1990 and the alcoholic bozo regime of Yeltsin that created the oligarch class.

[Schwenck]

Is Russia being unfairly portrayed in western media ?

If it is, it is because Western Media is far to kind towards Russia, to keen to see an even handed position.
Russia is threatening all of Eastern Europe.
Russia has already invaded the Ukraine.
Russian missile has shot down a plane over Ukraine, killing over 300 people.
Russia has murdered opponents at home.
Russia has attempted to murder opponents in the UK and has murdered another person as a result.
Russia prevents anybody that has some support standing in elections.
Russia is using internet techniques to interfere with other countries elections and referendums.
Russia is clearly going to keep threatening vulnerable neighbours and keep trying to split up Western Europe and Nato.

As Russia is effectively a dictatorship, and western countries are democracies, then Russia has a great advantage in terms of audacity and illegality. The Western Countries need to get their act together to combat this, otherwise Russia will just get further emboldened. The way Hitler was not effectively handled from 1934-39 by the the European powers should be in all Western Countries thoughts at the moment. Needless to say, the UK leaving the EU, at this point in history, is about the most stupid national act since Chamberlain's Munich Treaty, and Putin will be grinning as much as Hitler.

[Schwenck]

Originally Posted by palo5

Absolutely not! Nato is an aggressive military alliance, used these days for US purposes to promote arms sales and war in general

Russia will never have a part in that corruption!

Nato has never invaded another country.
Russia has invaded in Europe alone:
Poland (more than once)
Estonia (1939)
Latvia (1939)
Lithuania (1939)
Finland (1939)
Hungary (1956)
Czechoslovakia (1968)
Ukraine (2014)

You might add Belarus and Moldavia to the list

Russia has a very aggressive stance to it's neighbours.

I am a bit surprised though that a Russian troll is bothered to post on a site such as this - but that shows you how determined and how resourced they are. It is serious for them, and the West has yet to wake up to it. It really is the 1930s again.

[Schwenck]

Originally Posted by george anson

The coverage of Russia to me is rather biased. And predominantly anti Russian. Everything Russia does or more specifically Putin is regarded as potentially hostile and underhand.

And it has always been this as Saul David in his Timewatch retrospective of media coverage of Russia showed. The sole time Russia was portrayed in a positive light was when it joined with the Allies and Stalin became Uncle Joe and his bands of heroic soldiers defying the Nazi horde.

I think it is a real shame that since 1990 there seems to be real agitation for a new Cold War. The game of spheres of influence too is much in evidence. And I think Russia has a legitimate cause for feeling sore about it. NATO promised never to encroach on Russia's borders. But it did.

The EU and the US meddled in Ukraine while accusing Russia of doing the same but claimed all the trouble was down to Russia trying to install a puppet. I would describe Poroshenko as a puppet and several of his cabinet are foreigners.

When it suited NATO to undermine a staunch ally of Russia, Serbia on the basis of self determination for ethnic Albanians in Kosovo it has been rather reluctant to award the same thing to the predominantly ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine and suspiciously quiet on the current Catalonia issue.

And while describing Russin war crimes in Syria noticeably quiet on the deliberate bombing of Serbian civilians. And remember the Georgia affair ?

Very quick to jump to pointing the blame at Russia when as we discovered later the American puppet Sarkashvili ordered the invasion of South Ossetia. Famously declaring Russia has no history and no culture....

Yes Russia has many problems. It is still trying to assert as Putin sees himself as a world player and power and yes it is far from ideal when oligarchs and cronies live the life of riley while many struggle along in Russia itself. I think the big point is that many in the west would like to see a submissive Russia out of the world game. But it's not going to happen despite the current economic problems.

Russians as a whole are tremendously pride of their country and it's heritage and anyone they see as maintaining that position for their nation is someone to get behind. More so given the huge mess that the country dissolved into post 1990 and the alcoholic bozo regime of Yeltsin that created the oligarch class.

Yet another Russian troll: this is all rubbish and lies. I am astonished that the Russian internet operation bothers with a site such as this. THAT IT CLEARLY DOES BOTHER ABOUT IT, show how comprehensive and widespread their internet operations are. They will insinuate their propaganda everywhere they can.

[Schwenck]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

Communism was a revolution like the French revolution (and maybe like the American revolution). A revolution against unfair monarchy. Hopefully for them, after their revolution American people created a democracy, when French people had to fight against all the other European monarchies and sadly... Stalin was a paranoiac monster, when Tito was not.

No, the Communist took over via a coup, months after the Revolution against the Tsar had happened. Nothing like the French or US 'revolutions'. The US did create a sort of democracy (lot's of people disenfranchised), which has developed into pretty much a full democracy over the years. The French Revolution certainly didn't result in democracy, but bloodshed and war. The French, by the way started the post revolutionary wars by declaring war on Austria.