Negative Russian behavior

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by KGB_resident, Apr 17, 2007.

  1. Absolutely negative

  2. Mainly negative

  3. Rather negative

  4. Mixed

  5. Rather stabilising

  6. On many points positive

    0 vote(s)
  7. Highly positive


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. Recently US States Department issued 'Strategic Plan'

  2. I'll translate:

    "... negative Russian behaviour ..."
    "... Russia refuses to bend over and accept whatever we tell them to ..."

    In some regards I welcome the resurgence of Russia (and the emergence of China) as counterweights to the frankly barking foreign policy the US indulges in these days. It is becoming increasingly difficult to see having the US as an ally as an asset these days. I wish it were not so.
  3. Have you ever in fact lived in the fluffy bunny liberal democracies of either Russia or China.....?
  4. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Well one thing is for sure. You don't want to say bad things about resurgent Russia. It is exercising it's newfound wealth and freedoms very effectively. Cup of irradiated tea with bullet biscuits anyone?
  5. I was born in the Soviet union and live in Russia. There are some benefits: vodka and beer are much cheepier than in the UK. Russian women (at least some of them) are not ugly-looking. In Moscow's shops and supermarkets you can buy literally anything. There is one really very serious problem though - huge number of cars on the streets.

    As for politicians then you have Blair-Brown-Prescott-Browne-and so on. We have Putin & facelees, stupid, corrupted idiots at power. It is possible that your politicians are much better than Putin's gang but unlikely. All politicians are the same.
  6. Jesus. Should this not be in the NAAFI bar?
    Russian women not ugly??????
    You can buy "almost" anything? What like a nuke? or as above some eradiated coffee? Or do you mean normal things like bread and milk are freely available now?
  7. Freely? Not at all. Try to find a place for parking of your car first. And your wife will no doubt spend hours in so called butiks. As a result family budget would be damaged heavily. At last you won't have any ability to reach shelves with bread and milk.
  8. I have (PRC) and I'd agree with OOTS' point. Those countries are far from perfect, but their existence as world powers does act as a reality check on the worst excesses of US policy making and vice versa. Having them around is certainly better in my opinion than not.
    How can this be a bad thing?
  9. I'd say the effect is mixed... like all nations, Russia has it's own priorities but it is mostly in it's interest to promote stability. Some might claim Putin wants to be a tzar but the truth is that he needed to aggressively counter the unscrupulous indutrialists who were driving that nation towards becoming an oligarchy. Commerce and industry are key to economic stability but when such is conducted without regard to laws... it's a scary situation.

    KGB_resident is quite accurate with the statement that all politicians are the same of course...
  10. US foreign policy (or anyone else's for that matter) has nothing to do with the moral high ground going on and on about "those dreadful Russians" is hypocritical in the extreme, given that the US and ourselves do business daily with far more unsavoury and unpleasant characters.

    Does Russia have laws forbidding women from driving ? No, the Saudis do and they're best friends because they've got oil.

    Does Russia allow female circumcision among parts of their society ? No, the Kurds do and they're our friends as they kill Sunnis on behalf of the US.

    Do the Russians starve their own people and threaten their neighbours with nukes ? No, the North Korean regime does and it is quite safe as the US will not spend blood and treasure to free them.

    Do ... but you get the point.

    The bottom line is, is it better or worse for UK interests to have the US counterbalanced ? I believe it is.
  11. OOTS, are you really a communist?
  12. Good lord no, the avatar dates me as one of those who used to learn all about the Red Army ... so we could kill them. Think of it as the online equivalent of the trophies in the mess. Well, mine at any rate.

    As for politics, I'd say conservative (small c) realist/cynic. Or grumpy old man if you listen to my wife.
  13. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    Sorry, but this is just nonsense. To blame the US for N Korea, when one of their main supporters has always been the Russians seems perverse at best, and deliberately provocative at worse. If you haven't noticed, the US is trying to stop the NKs getting nukes, and we are supporting them in this. As to whether the Russians threaten their neighbours with nukes - they certainly do - that's why so many East Europeans - who were brutally enslaved by the Russians not so long ago - are so keen on getting Missile Defence there. As to Russians starving their own people - well, they started doing this as Policy under Lenin, and carried on for many decades since then. Finally, ask the people of Georgia if they feel threatened by Russia!

    Is it best to have someone 'balance' the US? Possibly, but on many grounds it is probably not. Say what you will, the US is a Democracy, and Democracies do tend to be relatively rational in their behaviour, as opposed to the behaviour of de-facto dictatorships such as Russia, Libya, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, etc., which can change from one day to the next.
  14. Oh, ok then. I was just wondering why anyone would subscribe to this philosophy and thought maybe you could enlighten me...
  15. God help us, I hope not, but you may rue those words someday.