Has Russia a hostile regime?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by KGB_resident, Aug 30, 2006.

?
  1. Yes

    31.3%
  2. Rather yes

    18.8%
  3. Not sure

    12.5%
  4. Rather no

    12.5%
  5. No

    25.0%

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.mosnews.com/news/2006/08/30/russiahostile.shtml

     
  2. It would be much better if Russia copied america and used its military to "pressure" other countries perhaps?
     
  3. Of course it has: dreams of Imperial glory remain, only the means of achieving the desired effect have changed.
     
  4. Dreams of Imperial glory remain in the UK too. Or not?
     
  5. Possibly - but the difference is that our body politic is essentially liberal/democratic, and has spent about 50 years adapting to the loss of empire. Yours is essentially autocratic/dictatorial, and has had the experience of going from world superpower to vodka soaked third world banana republic in one decade.

    We only have to consider Hungary, Latvia, Lithunia, Estonia, Finland, Poland, etc etc etc , to assess whether russia is 'hostile' or not.

    The UK spent about 1000 years learning to accept that people count. Russia spent about 1000 years trying to deny historical inevitability, and as a result your army officers are now living in the railcars that brought them back from east germany 15 years ago, your population life expectancy is reducing every year from alcohol related diseases, half of the ukraine is uninhabitable because of the crapulous safety standards engendered by norms rather than science, and you couldn't even do better than us in Afghanistan 100 years later, with air power as opposed to horses... Foreign adventures are the only option left to mr putin.
     
  6. I'd say so.

    I like your signature, Sergey.
     
  7. Russia has an excellent relations with Hungary, no problem at all. Economic relations are developing fast.

    As for Finland then existed border was confirmed in Helsinki act 1975 (Btw, Ireland is a good analog of Finland).Some Finns don't like Russia along with inhabitants of Baltic states. But can you say that all inhabitants of all former British colonies adore the UK? Unlikely.

    Probably you absolutely unware about Russian cultere, about L.Toltoy, F.Dostoyevsky. Namely he said: The whole world doesn't cost one tear-drop in the eyes of a child.

    And apparently the UK can't do better that Soviet Union in Afghanistan too

    Foreign adventures are too expensive nowdays as we can see. Russia is now switched from tanks to banks (reserves of Russian central bank are now $277blns.).

    It is a bit strange. Last 15 year (after the collapse of Soviet Union) Russia hasn't sent its troops for any 'adventure' while the UK performed them a lot. Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan.

    You said that the UK spent about 1000 years learning to accept that people count. And I suppose the UK is still learning that beating to the death of a prisoner in British custody is not good.
     
  8. Eh Sergey Swap ya a Dear Tone for a Boris.
    john
     
  9. Oh, Sergey, Sergey, Sergey: That last sentence sums up the whole point at issue here: yes, just like Bloody Sunday, there are incidents that display the ruthlessness which the British state - like any other - is capable of at times, or that it's 'organs' use without the knowledge of the hierarchy. The key difference, as you well know, is that such incidents are genuinely debated and deplored by - for example - the majority of the people on this board, whereas sometimes you lot appear to positively enjoy brutalising your opponents.

    I note with interest that you observe that you haven't sent your troops anywhere for any foreign adventures for 15 years. Very true - but since you mention internal security in Northern Ireland, perhaps we could compare our record there with, oh, I don't know - let's say, Chechnya?? That provides an object lesson in your lack of hostility to anyone who wants out from under the Russian yoke... (within the last 15 years)

    As for Finland and Hungary: there are plenty of people still alive in both countries who well remember the effect of large numbers of brown clad Russian 'tourists' turnning up on the doorstep, uninvited. If you think that relations are excellent, go down town in one of their cities on a Saturday night, walk up to a group of young men, and announce proudly that you are a Russian. Make sure your hospital insurance is paid up first...
     
  10. Nibbler!

    I understand you and agree with many your points. And it seems to me that you understand my points pretty well (though you may disagree)

    Comparison of Russia and Iran is not correct. Culturally Russia belongs rather to the West not to the East. If building of 'true democracy' in such a country as Iraq is softly speaking not so easy task then Western-type democracy in Russia is a question of time, it is not something absolutely impossible even in the near future.

    As for 'a hostile regime' then I realise that Putin's regime is not welcomed in Washington for obvious reasons, because 'the regime' cares mainly for Russian interests, not for American ones (nothing wrong with it I suppose). Btw, USA doesn't care about Russian interests, moreover tries to act against them. OK, but what could the Americans expect in return?

    As for 'hostility' to the West then Russia has excellents relations with Germany, France, Italy, with other countries. Russia is not a threat for Western (not American but Western) interests.

    As for the UK then there are two possibilities: blindy follow American course or care about own British interests. What would you prefer? Though I know the answer.

    The restoration of the British empire is technically impossible while Russia could in theory try to built new 'Russian empire'. But it is unworthly task not because there are no dreamers in Russia but for obvious economical reasons.

    American 'empire' is founded on huge economics but year by year its relative weight in the World economics goes lower and lower. So military adventures are attempts to save imperial status. By contrast Russian economics is fast developing and any military adventure could harm this process.

    So according to economical considerations Russia is interesting in peacfull development, not in wars. Moreover the Russians have now mainly one dream - prosperous life and unclouded future for children.