Dedicated Russian thread

Well, you have explained official position of Canadian government absolutely clear. However, are there any sanctions directed against Israel for annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, that are in force now? Does Canadian government plan to mull sanctions (additional sanction) if Israel will annex new territories in the West Bank?
Canada has not imposed any unilateral sanctions on Israel.

If you are going to complain about Canada taking a greater interest in Crimea than in Palestine, then yes Canada does have a greater interest in Ukraine than in the Middle East for long standing historical reasons dating back more than a century of which you are aware.
 
Bloomberg published a new article about Russian failed health system, about incompetence of the authorities in the context of COVID pandemic.
There is nothing special. The article is one of many similar ones. For example the author wrote
the rapid spread of the illness has exposed a Russian health system that’s suffering from poor funding, incomplete reforms that neglected much of the country
It is illustrated by strange (from the first glance chart)

1589996360668.png


One could ask how the chart does back the point that the author tries to make? But look at
19 May 2020 г., 08:30 GMT+3 Corrected 20 May 2020 г., 04:41 GMT+3
Initially the Chart showed that Russia always had less bed per 1000 populations than OECD Member states.
Russian embassy complained to Bloomberg with reference to the primary source - the World Bank and Bloomberg had to correct the chart.
Now Putin's agitprop machine uses this mistake to accuse Western mass media in fabrication of fake news and in factual falsifications.
 
Canada has not imposed any unilateral sanctions on Israel.

If you are going to complain about Canada taking a greater interest in Crimea than in Palestine, then yes Canada does have a greater interest in Ukraine than in the Middle East for long standing historical reasons dating back more than a century of which you are aware.
I understand your point. But at the same time
Guided by shared values and principles, Canada and its G7 partners recognize the importance of working together to build a more peaceful, prosperous, and sustainable world. Canada strongly supports a rules-based international order, built around the core principles of democracy, gender equality and human rights, the rule of law, territorial integrity, and free and open trade that benefits all citizens, not just the wealthiest few.
First of all, do you know what are these rules exactly?
And what the first priority for Canadian government from your point of view?
Rules-based international order or own national interests?
Of course I understand that Canada has its own national interests, that there is a lot of Canadians of Ukrainian and Jewish descent.
 
I understand your point. But at the same time

First of all, do you know what are these rules exactly?
And what the first priority for Canadian government from your point of view?
Rules-based international order or own national interests?
Of course I understand that Canada has its own national interests, that there is a lot of Canadians of Ukrainian and Jewish descent.
With regards to "rules-based international order or own national interests", these are seen as one in the same. As a mid sized country Canada identifies its national interests as being to constrain the larger powers to operating within a "rules based system" rather than allowing them to act capriciously. This includes constraining the US as well as Russia and China.

The following video clip near the end of this video (29:29) may give you a brief explanation of that. Note the speaker's affiliation.

 
With regards to "rules-based international order or own national interests", these are seen as one in the same. As a mid sized country Canada identifies its national interests as being to constrain the larger powers to operating within a "rules based system" rather than allowing them to act capriciously. This includes constraining the US as well as Russia and China.

The following video clip near the end of this video (29:29) may give you a brief explanation of that. Note the speaker's affiliation.

Constraining the US? Seriously? Anyone who believes that Canada, through NATO and by other means tries to constrain the USA lives in a fantasy World.
If Canada supports "rules-based international order" then it would be logical to expect that Canada would not take part in any military operation not authorised by UNSC.
 
Constraining the US? Seriously? Anyone who believes that Canada, through NATO and by other means tries to constrain the USA lives in a fantasy World.
That’s what true alliances are all about. NATO is wholly different to the CSTO. Consensus decisions. It doesn’t stop unilateral decisions being taken and isn’t perfect by far, but it can temper some decisions.

When NATO make statements, it’s by consensus, not simply what the US wants to say.
 
Aptly demonstrated by the different political choices made by France and the U.K. (and others) in regard to participation in the wars of choice of the past twenty years.
 
When NATO make statements, it’s by consensus, not simply what the US wants to say.
But in fact all NATO made statements are something that Washington wants to say.
If you know about counter example then let me know.
 
Aptly demonstrated by the different political choices made by France and the U.K. (and others) in regard to participation in the wars of choice of the past twenty years.
If you mean the war in Iraq then it was so doubtful and poorly justified that indeed such countries as France and Germany didn't join to Washington, while mr.Blair using falsehoods like 45 min. claim blindly followed orders from Washington.
If you mean another examples where London demonstrated independent approach then please recall them.
 
But in fact all NATO made statements are something that Washington wants to say.
If you know about counter example then let me know.
If you mean the war in Iraq then it was so doubtful and poorly justified that indeed such countries as France and Germany didn't join to Washington, while mr.Blair using falsehoods like 45 min. claim blindly followed orders from Washington.
If you mean another examples where London demonstrated independent approach then please recall them.
You have just contradicted yourself
The whole of NATO goes along with the US except for when they don’t
 
The whole of NATO goes along with the US except for when they don’t
I took him to mean that NATO as an organisation goes along with the US, while individual members don't always.

It's worth remembering the occasions post-Cold War on which NATO stepped beyond mutual defence of the North Atlantic Area in pursuit of its goals. Not every country went along, but the organisation provided the framework and control structures for those that did.
 
You have just contradicted yourself
The whole of NATO goes along with the US except for when they don’t
I don't see here any contradiction.
NATO as an organisation makes only statements instigated by Washington.
At the same time there was jnly a handful cases (exceptions) where Washington's dictate was not comletely successful.
So in fact Washington determines NATO's policy and position of the great majority of member states is irrelevant in this context. For example, hardly it is possible to expect even mild critics of Israel from NATO while the majority of NATO members condemn existing and planned annexations.
 
But in fact all NATO made statements are something that Washington wants to say.
If you know about counter example then let me know.
You mean the independent countries in NATO cannot make statements as part of NATO? Seriously?

NATO makes many statements, which will have a consensus of all member states. As I said, it’s not the CSTO. Some examples of NATO statements agreed by all member states:Press Releases

There’s plenty of debate on the 2% of GDP by 2024 as an example. Not all NATO members are going to make that goal. That’s probably why it’s ‘aim to’ rather than ‘will’.
 
Constraining the US? Seriously? Anyone who believes that Canada, through NATO and by other means tries to constrain the USA lives in a fantasy World.
If Canada supports "rules-based international order" then it would be logical to expect that Canada would not take part in any military operation not authorised by UNSC.
 
1590071005780.png

So anyway Canada was among a few NATO countries that supported a military operation not authorised by UNSC.
In political English it can be described by a phrase 'support rules based world order'.
Walter John "Walt" Natynczyk, CMM MSC CD[3] (/nəˈtɪntʃɪk/ nə-TIN-chik)[4] is a Canadian politician and retired Canadian Army general who has served as Deputy Minister of Veterans Affairs since 2014.[5] He was the President of the Canadian Space Agency from 2013 to 2014 and Chief of the Defence Staff of the Canadian Armed Forces from 2008 to 2012.
In January 2004, he deployed with III Corps to Baghdad, Iraq, serving first as the Deputy Director of Strategy, Policy and Plans, and subsequently as the Deputy Commanding General of the Multi-National Corps – Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom.[8][9] Natynczyk led the Corps' 35,000 soldiers, consisting of 10 separate brigades, stationed throughout the Iraq Theatre of Operations.
So maybe not on initial stage but Canada took part in the Iraqi war - military operation not authorised by UNSC.

Now let's look at the military operation against Yugoslavia, also not authorised by UNSC. Canada within its concept to support rules based world order, took part in that military operation.

Operation Mobile (French: Opération Mobile) was the name given to Canadian Forces activities in the 2011 military intervention in Libya.
It was also a military operation not authorised by UNSC. In fact Canadian government took part in just 'regime change' operation - one of many similar.
------------------
To understand why Moscow decided to establish control over Crimea one should review the whole history of unlawful wars and military interventions where Western powers - the USA and other countries including Canada took part.
 
Last edited:
It appears that Ramzan Kadyrov, the horrible thug and Putin's right hand murderer who runs Chechnya for him, is in hospital in Moscow with Coronavirus.
Oh dear.
How sad.
Never mind.
 
It appears that Ramzan Kadyrov, the horrible thug and Putin's right hand murderer who runs Chechnya for him, is in hospital in Moscow with Coronavirus.
Oh dear.
How sad.
Never mind.
He is relatively young and in good physical form. And of course he will receive the best possible treatment. Let's wish him fast recover ... to appear in the court later or sooner.

1590077774947.png
 
Pres.Putin has so called confidants (about 500) - officially registered ones. There are different people - public figures, scientists, journalists, sportsmen, singers, actors. Proposition to be Putin's confidant as a rule is accepted. Anyway some dare not to reject such an offer. There are only a few exceptions. It is? for example, a well known (and very good) actor Pavel Derevyanko.

1590079328969.png


He as Nestor Makhno - the leader of Ukrainian rebel army during Russian revolution (100 year ago)

1590079018061.png


He as Emperor Petr the 3-d, betrayed by his wife and killed by her lover. The wife herself became Empress Catherine 2-d the Great.
 
I wonder whether Russian news channels will push this as much as they did aid to western countries?

As I mentioned above, what Russia (and other countries) say was the cause of death when suspected or confirmed C-19 isn’t always put down to C-19:
The city of Moscow said on Wednesday it had ascribed the deaths of more than 60% of coronavirus patients in April to other causes as it defended what it said was the superior way it and Russia counted the number of people killed by the novel virus.
1800 more deaths than this time last year in Moscow alone:
Moscow’s Department of Health acknowledged in a statement on Wednesday that the number of deaths in April, 11,846, had been 1,841 higher than the same month last year and almost triple the number of people registered as having died of the virus.
They say they carry out autopsy’s in 100% of cases and put the deaths down to vascular and other terminal conditions and not whether caused/exacerbated by C-19:
“Therefore, post-mortem diagnoses and causes of death recorded in Moscow are ultimately extremely accurate, and mortality data is completely transparent,” it said.

“It’s impossible in other COVID-19 cases to name the cause of death. So, for example in over 60% of deaths the cause was clearly for different reasons such as vascular failures (such as heart attacks), stage 4 malignant diseases, leukaemia, systemic diseases which involve organ failure, and other incurable fatal diseases.”
 

Latest Threads

Top