The next Reich, coming to us sooner than we thought?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Fiona_TG, Nov 11, 2017.

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. There's ones going back to '88 and '85 on a cursory search. Russia didn't change their legislation then or even straight after the wall came down or any time between the end of the Nazi Party and 2014.

    Your point is:
    The article in RT states the concerns in the Duma. Only you are trying to say it's got nothing to do with the rise in Nazi'ism in Russia
    You're clearly trying to avoid the main thrust and obvious answer. Your denials and obfuscation and 'whataboutery' confirm it. Why you can't admit there's been a rise in Nazism in Russia escapes me. Maybe it's just all part of the plan to paint Ukraine as Nazi's and once again Russia as the victims.
     
  2. Your views
    Russian agitprop sites. Are you not Russian?
    Russian agitprop sites. Are you not Russian?
    - as above, when they (your views) differ from Putin's you may have a point.
    Mine? No.
    When I consistently agree with what the Mail says and push some lies, obfuscation, disinformation and 'whataboutery' to support what the Mail says consistently, you may have a point.
    I do not consistently agree with the Mail. I do not push what is on their agenda. I do not use lies, obfuscate, denial and 'whataboutery' to push the Mail's agenda. You do on Putin's agitprop.

    Accordingly, until you consistently push against something that the agitprop line disseminates other than your alleged dislike of Putin, I'll call it 'your' agitprop, much like it is 'your' troll factory. There are reams of evidence on this such as you pushing the war on Turkey and now not a mention. Reiteration of 'Nazi's' in W Ukraine (no mention of any in E Ukraine), compliance with the illegal occupation and annexation of Crimea, blatant lies and disinformation about MH17 etc etc.
     
  3. It had nothing to do with Washington. It had to do with the strength of the Ukrainian nationalist lobby in Canada, plus the desire of Canada to not to have to answer questions about why so many Nazi war criminals were given shelter in Canada after WWII. Cold War diplomacy also played a large role in this until the collapse of communism.

    A number of Ukrainian Nazi war criminals in Canada were on Israel's most wanted list but Canada would not either extradite them to anyone nor prosecute them ourselves. Here's the example of the infamous "Nazi bee keeper of Quebec", who was number 4 on the Simon Wiesenthal Centre's 10 most wanted list. Despite much pressure from Israel and various Jewish groups, he has since died peacefully in his sleep without ever answering for his alleged crimes. Quebec beekeeper accused of Nazi war crimes Very few Nazi war criminals of any sort in Canada were ever deported to face justice elsewhere.

    Here''s some more background reading:
    Matas: A few pertinent facts about Nazi war criminals in Canada
    Canada a haven for Nazi war criminals
    Nazi war criminals in Canada

    Of course a government can't simply admit the above, so excuses had to be found to vote against the UN resolution. And also of course, the UN resolution was a cynical ploy by Russia to find a stick to beat Ukrainian and Baltic State (who have plenty of Nazi skeletons in their own closet) nationalists with. Various third world countries also relished pointing out the hypocrisy of western countries who wanted to sweep inconvenient history under the carpet while pontificating about human rights when it suites them.

    Here's a good article by the Jerusalem Post which explains the background of why the Nazi past of so many east European countries is a diplomatic minefield. It's well worth reading.
    Russian-Ukrainian spat over anti-Semitism reaches the UN
    Here's what "Dr. Efraim Zuroff, a Nazi-hunter who heads the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Jerusalem office" had to say about it if you can't be bothered to read the whole story.
    I can't say I personally have much sympathy for anyone in Canada or abroad who wants to sweep that record under the carpet for votes or diplomatic advantage, or who acts as a Nazi apologist by waving his arms at the crimes committed by Stalin in an attempt to obfuscate the past crimes committed by the heroes of our current "friends".

    The Germans were big boys who owned up to what Hitler did. It's time for the other countries of central and eastern Europe to do the same for their own little Hitlers.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. I merely express my point of view. I live in Moscow and (due to the nature of my work - power energetics) visited a lot of regions in Russia. There are no visible marks of so called 'Nazis' in Russia. There is no anything that could be seen as public support for such ideas. Yes, some extremist group could behave in a manner that one may regard similar to Nazist but really it is not so big problem.
    So we have agree to disagree.
     
  5. I travel across the UK weekly. I don't see anything which makes me think we have Nazi's in the UK. However, I'm not blind and know there are those in the UK which support the Nazi ideology and there are neo Nazi groups.

    The point is, the Duma according to the RT article felt there was enough reason to have the legislation based on the comments in the articles. The person who raised that party from others etc. is now the Deputy Speaker for the Duma.
    As ever.
     
  6. I'm unaware about any troll factories.
    Putin's agitprop is not 'my' in any sense.
    I may agree or disagree with point made in Mail, BBC, RT, CNN.
    However, personally I'm not affiliated with any mass media, political party or anything similar.
    Yes, I'm Russian and what? Is it so big sin?
    You have right to have own views and write about your allegations, suppositions and ideas.
    I have exactly the same right.
    Any issue should be regarded separately and facts should be separated from allegations.
    If allegation contradicts to another allegation then we can not speak about 'lies'
    If some new facts contradict to previously made allegation then also we can not speak about 'lies' but about wrong allegations.
    If some allegations that contradict to well known (to a person who makes them) facts then we can speak about lies.
    If somebody believes that allegations are proven true 'beyond reasonable doubt' then still they are allegations.
    If you have another definition of 'lies' then it would be very kind of you to write about it directly.
     
  7. Your google-fu is weak. Just use English Google and type in 'Russian troll factories' There are plenty of hits.
    You push the same agenda, consistently
    When you consistently disagree with Putin's agitprop (other than on Putin), you may have a point
    We've discussed your DIDs previously
    I never said it was
    I do. As do you. I doubt this site would exist in Russia though
    As above
    So change 'West Ukraine' to 'Ukraine' and put a date on it
    That depends on the strength of the allegation and counter allegation.
    If there's an allegation you can use the word 'alleged'
    As above about strength of allegations and counter allegations.
    Not in a Court of Law
    This'll do: the definition of lie
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. So if one makes an allegation, expresses opinion, suggest something that doesn't contradict to known to him facts then they are not lies. Though they could be sincere mistakes.
    Do you agree with it?
    Let's regard an example.
    His excellency @MARSHALVAUBAN wrote
    Are they lies? No, because he sincerely believed it. His excellency was unable to back his points by facts. So they are just baseless allegations and not lies at all.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2017 at 7:42 PM
  9. The Bunsewehr may be expanding, but it is from a low base after a quarter of a century of cutbacks.

    The proportion of Germen GDP spent on defence is a bit over 1% (IIRC).
     
  10. It depends on context obviously. For arguments sake, if you'd said 'Ukraine' rather than 'West Ukraine' I couldn't quibble. It was Ukraine. If you'd said 'allegedly West Ukraine' I'd have asked for you to support your allegation. You didn't even do that, you just stated 'West Ukraine'.

    You could for arguments sake state that all Yorkshire people are tight fisted. It's a well known trait and doesn't apply to all Yorkshiremen, but is well known enough in the UK for it to be accepted in a general context. That is a statement made to the best of your ability and knowledge and can be supported by numerous sources such as the old joke "What's the difference between a Yorkshireman and a Scot? A Yorkshireman is a Scot with all of the generosity squeezed out of them" This is 'funny' in the context that the Scots are (allegedly) also known to be frugal. It isn't true and having been by the grace of God born in Yorkshire I am able to say this. However, it can be said but with exclamations coming from all quarters, particularly from Yorkshiremen and then other counties.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2017 at 7:51 PM
  11. Please don't ever use shit poetry to win an argument here. You massive queef.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. OK. Suppose that during a match between Tottenham and Huddersfield Spurs fans were beaten by someones with big fists that came from Huddersfield fan zone. In this case we could allege that the hooligans are Yorkshiremen. We could be wrong and they could be just Londoners, Liverpudlians, Scots, Welsh or Cornish. But most probably they are Yorkshiremen.
    From the context it is clear that we make an allegation (reasonable one). So word allegation may not be used.
    Most of Karpaty Lvov FC fans live in Lvov, in Galicia, in Western Ukraine or came to other parts of Ukraine from there. So if Nazi flag appeared in Karpaty fan zone then most likely it was made by blokes from West Ukraine.
     
  13. Most fans are likely to come from Yorkshire for Huddersfield I’d agree. That is the nature of their fans.
    Why would you say it was a Yorkshireman that struck you? Such an allegation has no basis in fact unless you’d heard him talk and even then you’d need to know the difference between a Yorkshire accent and a Lancashire accent in this case.
    Source? Or supposition? You follow Ukrainian football?
    Unless you know those who raised the flag years ago were from W Ukraine you can only say Ukrainian. For all I know the Russian football supporters who raise Nazi flags are from Crimea but I wouldn’t be stupid enough to say so, let alone allege. I’d assume they were Russian and not from any part of Russia whether illegally annexed or not.
     
  14. I have an impression that we are discussing very simple, self-evident things. Fans of Zenit Sankt-Peterburg FC live mainly in Sankt-Peterburg or in this region. Fans of Terek Grozny live mainly in Chechnya. It is their FC. Fans of Rubin Kazan live mainly in Tatarstan or are ethnically Tatars. And so on and so forth. Only some Moscow based FCs as CSKA (army FC) have fans across Russia.
    Regional FCs in any country have fan's base in respective regions. It is true in the UK, in Germany, Italy, Spain and in Ukraine.
    Karpaty Lvov is a typical regional FC and naturally has fan's base in Western Ukraine.
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2017 at 2:15 PM