Russian Long range Nuclear declaration

Havockk wrote: »

You could literally transpose Russia for the US in this post and it would make the same salient point.

Both nations inhabited by rabid nationalists who believe they are superior to everyone and now they are having another willy measuring contest.

A Better comparsion would be the brexiteers or more precisely greater england nationalists since they haven't learnt to accept others as equals hence the need to support any movement wanting to supposedly bring the EU down or gain enough leverage to secure favourable deals.

Facts to consider:

There is a full scale cyber war in operation by Russia against Western democracies. (see attached) 20 countries have been attacked, many successfully, including the US and UK. This can more or less be explained by the Gerasimov doctrine. The information Warfare techniques were perfected by Vladislav Surkov against Russia itself.
Surkov himself is in charge of the war (and cyber war) in East Ukraine.

IMO the threat re long range missiles is a stunt to imply Russian renewed power ahead of the Russian elections. Putin fears a low turnout (he is guaranteed to win having disqualified his opponent Navalny).

He fears no retribution from Washington as Donald Trump is a puppet of Putin.

recedite wrote: »

Navalny disqualified himself by having a criminal conviction for embezzlement.
What about all the others?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/08/alexei-navalny-russian-opposition-leader-found-guilty-embezzlement

The trial and retrial were a stitch up. Do you believe the ECHR or the Putin controlled Russian court system?

In a trial widely seen as a means of silencing him, Navalny was convicted of embezzlement from a state timber company in Kirov in 2013, but he was allowed to run for mayor of Moscow while he appealed against the ruling. The 2013 verdict was sent for a retrial by the Russian supreme court after the European court of human rights (ECHR) found procedural violations in it last year.

Navalny’s lawyer, Olga Mikhailova, told journalists that Wednesday’s verdict did not answer the ECHR’s criticisms of the original trial. The verdict was based on the same evidence as in 2013 and assigned the same five- and four-year suspended sentences to Navalny and his former business partner Pyotr Ofitserov.

If you don't want to be found guilty in a Russian court then don't get tried.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/od-russia/andrei-loshak/corruption-complicity-careerism-hydra-of-russian-justice

Once inside the wheels of the Russian legal system, the odds are stacked against you and a guilty verdict is inevitable

The remaining candidates are puppets to give the impression of a fair election.

With no creditable opposition candidate the Russian people may boycott the vote as Navalny suggests. Putin can't put up a genuine candidate because he will lose.
This missile business is tough talk that he knows the US president will not respond to. This gives the false impression of Russian power which he hopes will translate to a quarter respectable turnout.

recedite wrote: »

I don't think the ECHR ever said he was innocent of the embezzlement charges. They objected to the police detaining him during his political campaigning, which he claimed technically he was still allowed to do while waiting for the result of his appeal. In the event, his appeal failed. And that was the end of his campaign.

What about all the other candidates?

From my actual post : "The 2013 verdict was sent for a retrial by the Russian supreme court after the European court of human rights (ECHR) found procedural violations in it last year." Are you really claiming that the judicial system in Russia is not corrupt?

Also from my post: "The remaining candidates are puppets to give the impression of a fair election."

recedite wrote: »

You said "The trial and retrial were a stitch up".

Navalny brothers went to the ECHR with that same claim and it was dismissed. All they found were some minor procedural violations, but the ECHR did not dispute the substance of the case, or disagree with the Russian state position that the embezzlement had occurred, and as a result he would be ineligible to run for public office.

Your sweeping statement that "all other candidates are puppets" is something a muppet might say.

I have quoted several reputable publications which claim that in Russia if you are put on trial (usually in a cage) you are convicted.
Ergo you cannot conclude that Navalny did anything wrong.
There are several documented examples where Russian officials have stitched up people for political reasons. The massive discrepencies with his trial resulting in an actual intervention by the ECHR and a retrial indicate that this was the case here also.
Again if you believe that the Russian justice system is fair and not corrupt please do so: there are any numbers of cases to disavow these points of view.

Navalny was the only serious challenger to Putin. If anyone in such a position stands trial it happens or does not happen with the say so of Putin.

recedite wrote: »

A strange and somewhat biased conclusion; "He was convicted of a crime, therefore he must be innocent."

Nice try. You claimed he ruled himself out of the presidential election by committing a crime. I claimed you cannot reach that conclusion because the justice system in Russia is corrupt and controlled by the Putin regime.

Again: do you believe the justice system in Russia is corrupt?

In Russia you have a regime that murders dissenting journalists and politicians (Boris Nemsov). You have a regime that in the last few days openly tried to murder people in Salisbury while hurting many more.

Putin is a kleptocrat. He does not have the support of his own people. The nuclear declarations in the OP and the poisoning are in order to heighten the us against them image in Russia.

I don't know if you are naive or disingeneous. You need to gain a little insight into this man's regime. Yes, western countries have done similar in the past if not on this scale. We need to ensure this does not occur any more. But that should not excuse Putin or his actions.

recedite wrote: »

I feel sorry for the daughter and the policeman, but not for the traitor. He was a guy who shopped the names and safety of his comrades to the enemy for money.
Personally I suspect either his former colleagues were responsible without acting on direct orders from the Kremlin, or else the Kremlin found out that he had recently become active again and decided to eliminate him. If he had become active in some way, he may also have got the daughter involved.

'Comrades'? Do you still believe that Russia is a communist state?
Russia is a kleptocracy: The Russian State, The Russian intelligence services, The Russian mafia, the Russian banking system, The oligarchs, The Russian mafia are de facto all part of an intrenational criminal syndicate. The Russian people have been literally shaken down by their rulers.

I'd be more a fan of the Irish justice and electoral system than the Russian one. But unlike you, I don't assume the Russian versions to be non-existent.

That's not what I asked you. I asked you if you considered the Russian justice system 'Just' or not? Is Justice served by their judiciary?

I believe that people in Russia and China have a different view of politics to us. If things are going reasonably well, they are quite happy to keep the same leader permanently. "Leave well enough alone" is the prevailing mentality.

If Russia wanted Putin then why was nemsov assasinated? Why was Navalny jailed? Why does something always happen to eliminate Putin's rivals?
Now Putin's rival is a low turnout in the election to protest him he creates stories about super nukes and stirs international crises by public spectacular murder in the UK.

Would the Russian people support him if they knew his personal fortune is $200 billion of THEIR MONEY?
That even his daughters have bank accounts to the value of millions stashed in Latvian accounts. Do you deny that Putin has this fortune?

recedite wrote: »

Putin has money and influence. Of course he does.
Nevertheless he rose to prominence in the Yeltzin era when kleptocrats and oligarchs were privatising the wealth of the former USSR and stashing it away in foreign bank accounts. Disgusted by what he saw, he eventually had enough power to reverse that process.
Ordinary Russians recognise that, and respect him for it. Ever since then he has been restoring some pride in what's left of the state.

Do you deny that Putin has amassed a wealth of some $200 billion by defrauding his own country and stashing the money away in foreign banks?

The UK is home to many of these rich but exiled oligarchs, and they have been using it as a base from which to attack their homeland. Its a tradition that goes back to 1917, and the last days of the Tsar.

The biggest Oligarch in the UK is Roman Abramovich right hand man of Putin.

BTW: Putin rose to prominence when several apartments in Moscow were blown up by the FSB. The claim was that it was done by Chechen rebels which vindictated Putin's hawkish stance on Chechnya and prompted Putin's rise to power and a bloody war with Chechnya.
The apartment bombings sparked an investigation when suspsicians arose. E.g a Putin ally in the Duma condemned an attack only to realise the attack had not occurred. Instead FSB explosives were found at the apartment block.
The investigation was stopped when 4 of teh committee were murdered most infamously journalist Anna Politkovskaya.

recedite wrote: »

Sorry for the delay, I had to work for a while there.
AFAIK his business interests mainly lie in the shipping and transportation of oil and LPG, which I believe is a legitimate business. Apparently he is quite interested in the opening up of new routes as the arctic becomes less ice bound. All very shrewd. Maybe not exactly "ethical investing" if there is such a thing, but not dishonest.

'His' money is hidden by other Oligarchs in their name in bank acounts outside Russia. His deal with these Oligarchs after he caged Khordovosky was 50% of profits for impunity and protection by the Russian State apparatus. Most of this money is laundered criminal assets and taxes stolen from the Russian State.

Does this sound legitimate to you?

recedite wrote: »

So your Russian guy says its €40B. Then later he decides "No its probably more like €70B".
Meanwhile Forbes magazine says there is no evidence for any of that nonsense.

Any more links to "evidence"?

Here is how Putin funnels money through his 'friends': https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/panama-papers-money-hidden-offshore

Here is the wealth of one of his daughters (2 billion) got wealth as above:
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-russia-capitalism-shamalov-specialrep/special-report-the-man-who-married-putins-daughter-and-then-made-a-fortune-idUKKBN0U02SC20151217

Link to accounts of Ptins daughters secret back accounts in Russia:
https://thinkprogress.org/putin-family-bank-accounts-dad3dd3f8e16/

Bill Browder puts in at $200 billion
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/02/07/ahead-of-russian-elections-putin-releases-official-details-of-wealth-and-income/?utm_term=.8e5e82783a0c

“I believe that [Putin is worth] $200 billion," Browder said. "After 14 years in power of Russia, and the amount of money that the country has made, and the amount of money that hasn't been spent on schools and roads and hospitals and so on, all that money is in property, bank, Swiss bank accounts, shares, hedge funds, managed for Putin and his cronies.”

Putin's inner circle hold enormous wealth: $24 billion. Many cannot explain how they amassed it or what the companies they control do.
https://www.rferl.org/a/putin-opccrp-report-inner-circle-wealth/28814462.html

Can you show honesty and integrity by addressing these issues?
Officially his earnings are $119,000 dollars. Do you believe that this represents his total earnings?

listermint wrote: »

So Putin has come out with a Speech indicating they have developed an unstoppable long range nuclear missile that can reach anywhere on earth and cannot be stopped by anti missile systems.

Having spent the last decade with subterfuge via the Internet and now strong arming via Arms threats.

What is their to gain from this, who is the audience?

Have we reverted back to the mid 20th century with the rise in Facist views even in Europe.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/01/putin-new-russia-missile-nuclear.html

I'm sure if the village idiot, George W, hadn't withdrawn from the ABM Treaty in 2002 then this wouldn't have ever happened nor would countries feel the need to have such weapons.

Trump and a few psychopaths, namely Bolton, want to rip up the Iran nuclear pact. Go ahead and see if the billions that Europe has invested in the country will simply be forgotten.

Paris Climate Agreement? Ripped up yet they need the Dutch to pump out their flooded cities.

Nobody gives a **** about America anymore. It's just a loudmouth with a rusting shotgun.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The USA remains by far the world's most powerful military and economic power. I assure you every country in the world cares what America's policies are on every single issue.

Kermit,

By what yardstick are you using to make these claims?

Economic power? What does that mean? Debt? Financial security? You have a better chance of working your way out of poverty in Albania than in the US.

The life expectancy in DC is lower by 5 years than any other "industrialised" country.
And if you want to try to fizz about that that's because of the brown man living in the "hood" I would call that an excuse for a capital city that is falling to bits.

Nobody gives a shit about America's massive groaning aircraft carriers and their billion dollar planes that only work when it's not raining.

America can't beat a few committed men and women with bravery and some booby traps. Stealth bombers and satellites haven't done a thing against that since the 1960's.

So tell me, how is the US economically superior? 40% of Americans are one pay cheque away from potential homelessness. They might fight it out for a few weeks. Is that an economic power?
Wages in the US have stagnated since 1980. If you look at the end of month non-farm payroll job numbers, they are usually around the 200,000 mark. The US needs 450,000 to 600,000 new jobs per month just to keep up with population growth.

Kermit, just have a look at the numbers, the charts, the statistics and then take a deep breath and a sip of your tea.

America is FINISHED. It is now a bunch of billionaires dumping their cash elsewhere or fleecing out the last saps who kiss a flag.