Blaming Russians

[msmob]

You seem to know every little detail of what happened in Syria or Iran.[/size]

Well, a LOT more than most... I lived and worked in the region for long enough ..Long enough to treat your 'assertion' with the contempt it deserves

Saddam doesn't have to be friendly with Syria and Iran. A high ranking Iraqi general said they took WMD's to hide in Syria right before Bush W invaded. 56 747's and 27 truck convoys were included. Just because you didn't personally witness it doesn't mean it didn't happen. [/size]


'Silly boy' - DO pay attention ...  Syria helped in Desert Storm ..Do you SERIOUSLY think such a convoy would be 'missed' - considering the border was closed?

Now we got all kinds of Iraqi chemical weapons floating around in the Syrian War. Go figure.[/size]

I figure you are ( as usual - spouting nonsense to fill cyber-space as you've nought better to do ...

]Saddam also flew part of his Air Force to Iran to escape destruction by American planes. I don't need to Google that because I remember the news of it happening when it happened but you may think it didn't happen because you know the region and didn't witness it.[/size]

Not so sure 'Saddam' ordered them to be flown - rather some (Shia)  Iraqi pilots took it upon themselves ...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-airforce/iraq-air-force-wants-iran-to-give-back-its-planes-idUSCOL54415720070805

Better to ask questions , BillyB ... I can save you lots of embarrassment

[tfcrew]

  We Americans are very good at this game, and pretending we are the good guys just trying to help!
 

Gee thanks.
That makes me feel like I am good at something

[ML]

Putin only got about 80% of the votes cast.

So there is continuing evidence that most Russian people do not agree with and support his invasion of Ukraine and the killing of Ukrainian people.

[SANDRO43]

This statement:

Putin only got about 80% of the votes cast.

logically seems to contradict the following one:

So there is continuing evidence that most Russian people do not agree with and support his invasion of Ukraine and the killing of Ukrainian people.

[DaveNY]

Russia: Five Reasons Why Putin's Election Is a Sham

All 5 reasons are widely known and many agree that some or all are legitimate in whole or part. The five are:

1. No Real Political Opposition Is Allowed
2. Electoral Corruption Is Widespread
3. Putin Controls the Media and Dominates Coverage
4. Russia Is a Gangster State, and Putin Is the Godfather
5. Putin’s Past Record in Elections Is Terrible

As the article states “Russia is not a full-blown dictatorship where Putin has dictatorial control over the population. It is very much strong one-man rule and a presidential regime, but it is not a dictatorship. And even the most gruesome dictators in Africa or other parts of the world go through elections.

“So, in a sense, Russia cannot be the odd man out by not calling elections.”

http://www.newsweek.com/russia-5-reasons-why-putins-election-sham-850996?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=yahoo_news&utm_campaign=rss&utm_content=/rss/yahoous/news&yptr=yahoo

[ML]

Sandro, I was trying to be funny (or something) by obliquely referring to those here who say no evidence that Russian people in  general support what Putin is doing regarding invasion of Ukraine, etc.

I thought perhaps I was being a bit to subtle; thus it appears so.

[southernX]

Sandro, I was trying to be funny (or something) by obliquely referring to those here who say no evidence that Russian people in  general support what Putin is doing regarding invasion of Ukraine, etc.

I thought perhaps I was being a bit to subtle; thus it appears so.

no ML your post was understood well enough imo 

SX

[Davo2]

I've gained a deeper understanding over the days leading up to the election, from a Russian that doesn't support Putin or his foreign policy.  Someone who realises state corruption is the biggest issue facing Russians and gets her news from foreign  sources, she doesn't trust state media..... She voted for Putin as nothing is black and white.

Here's a few statements which made me stop and think.

Regarding her decision to vote for Putin :-

"Now a difficult situation in relation to Russia. If we do not vote for Putin in protest, then the communist party could win. This must never happen again, therefore, he is better than voting for someone else or no one"

Regarding  publics opinion of other candidates - Ksenia Sobchak :-

"She is not perceived as a candidate. And she is the daughter of Putin's friend. She's a front man....figurahead"

Regarding the situation in  general :-

"Russians will support Putin as there is no choice for other candidates"

"The fear is we will return to the bad times of the past"

" We have stability now, this must remain"

"Change will happen, but it is not the time for this to occur"

Basically, even for those who don't support him, it's a case of "better the Devil you know".... You can't blame them for that, given their countries past.

[BillyB]

I've seen enough truly independent polls to understand Putin is a popular guy. One can argue state controlled media brainwashed the people but regardless, many Russians like him brainwashed or not. If anything his vote count should be higher but many of his fans stayed home thinking he's going to win easily so why waste time leaving the house to vote?

[msmob]

I've seen enough truly independent polls to understand Putin is a popular guy. One can argue state controlled media brainwashed the people but regardless, many Russians like him brainwashed or not. If anything his vote count should be higher but many of his fans stayed home thinking he's going to win easily so why waste time leaving the house to vote?

As yes, BillyB has his finger on the pulse, again


Yeah,right

[Anotherkiwi]

This statement:logically seems to contradict the following one:

As the turnout was apparently only about 60%, 80% of those votes in fact represent less than half the total electorate, so in that sense ML is actually correct.

[ML]

In the typical case, when a diplomat is expelled, he/she is merely replaced by another diplomat from the same country.

Is that going to be the case with this latest (March 2018) round of expulsions; or will there be a  more or less permanent (until relations improve significantly) decrease in the number allowed?

[BillyB]

In the typical case, when a diplomat is expelled, he/she is merely replaced by another diplomat from the same country.

Is that going to be the case with this latest (March 2018) round of expulsions; or will there be a  more or less permanent (until relations improve significantly) decrease in the number allowed?

Last year the Russian Consulate in SF was closed by Trump. This year the Seattle Consulate is closed. I doubt they are simply going to replace diplomats if there's isn't a building where they can operate in.