What do you mean? Sakaashvilli served out his full democratic elected term despite ordering the military assault on South Ossetia.
Do you have evidence that Putin had journalists murdered? Please cite it.
Eeexcellent . . . they’ll never see it coming . . . heh-heh-heh
:rolleyes:
On edit–huh, our rolleyes smilie is now rendering differently. Or is that just on my machine?
Putin killed the old one.
Seems an odd coincidence, that reporters critical of Putin are routinely murdered and their killings are generally unsolved.
Maybe you’re right.
But I get the distinct impression that a lot of Westerners are anti-Russian whenever Russia seeks to expand its influence - even if this happens with the consent of the citizens of the countries and/or territories it is trying to influence.
See: South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and, in the case of Ukraine, Crimea.
Were a plebiscite to be held in Crimea, where a clear majority of its people - let’s say north of 80% - voted in favour of union with Russia, I’m sure a lot of Westerners would find fault even with that.
The problem is that the present Russian government is, by the measure of many Westerners, somewhat paranoid and hateful - for example, this latest anti-gay crusade, beating and killing journalists critical of the government, reflexive-seeming blaming of everything bad on the West, etc.
Thanks for the link. I read the summary.
It blames the Kremlin for not doing enough to solve a series of murders of prominent journalists.
It also blames the Kremlin for “marginalizing critical journalists, effectively barring them from state-controlled national television, and obstructing their work through politicized regulations and bureaucratic harassment.”
It does not, however, accuse Putin of having journalists murdered. And it certainly doesn’t present evidence, which is what NotfooledbyW asked for.
Like I said, though, I’ve only read the summary. Will dig deeper tomorrow.
Such absolute proof is, in its nature, impossible to obtain. A leader who has the judiciary and police forces under his control is never, in the nature of things, going to be subjected to anything approaching a trial (unless he falls from power). If he is having people killed, there will be no conclusive evidence of it - other than circumstantial.
Moreover, it is very unlikely that a document such as this, which is intended to create change within Russia itself, would come right out and accuse “J’accuse style” the leadership of murder.
The circumstantial evidence in this case, as outlined in the report cited, is pretty compelling. It is as follows:
(1) Many, many journalists have been assaulted and killed.
(2) These journalists have been exactly those critical of the government.
(3) The killings go unsolved.
(4) The killings are unsolved in numbers greater than statistically probable, judging by killings in the same country unrelated to journalism.
(5) The government has done nothing about said killings, even though they make it look bad.
(6) There is evidence that police investigations into these killings are interfered with from ‘higher authorities’, in the direction of not solving them.
In light of this evidence, all of which is in fact provable, it is a reasonable supposition that the killings are the work of those associated with the government - and whether Putin personally orders them or not, it is likely he is approving of the situation.
Not “proof” in the sense that would stand up in court, but as remarked, that is unlikely to exist until/unless the government falls.
I’m all for gay rights. On that point, I’m as “fuck Putin” as the next guy.
As for the “reflexive-seeming blaming of everything bad on the West,” and the constant scheming, and the endless provocations back and forth - yeah, that happens, but I don’t really see how Russia is more to blame for that than the West is.
Kerry playing footsie with Georgia.
McCain speechifying on Kiev’s Independence Square.
Again, Russia isn’t innocent in all this. But their paranoia isn’t quite unfounded, either.
Is there a particular case in that ‘link to links to links’ where reporters who were critical of Putin? Are there any reporters who are critical of Putin that are not killed?
I don’t see any of that as remotely equivalent to Russia blaming the West for the evils of the world, or as justification for paranoia.
Ukraine and Georgia are now independant countries. Competing for trade agreements and the like is what independant countries do. Russia has no automatic veto over (say) an independant Ukraine joining the EU, and taking efforts in that direction - let alone warnings not to oppose it by force - as a ‘provocation’ that justifies anti-Western paranoia is irrational, and just the sort of thing that leads reasonable people to dislike the current Russian leadership.
Come now. Nowhere did I claim that Russia should have an “automatic veto over (say) an independant [sic] Ukraine joining the EU.”
But competing over influence - that is what “independant [sic] countries do.” Western countries do it, with carrots and with sticks. And Russia does it, with carrots and with sticks.
You made a comparison - that Russian governmental paranoia was a reasonable response to the West’s encouragement of Ukraine to joint the EU, or warning Russia not to invade.
The West’s ‘carrots and sticks’ in dealing with enticing these countries tend to be rhetorical and financial only. Russia is threatening invasion. That “stick” is not the equivalent of anything the West is contemplating, or has contemplated.
No, I wrote that the Russian “governmental paranoia” is understandable given the West’s constant provocations, of which the threat to go to war over Ukraine is only the latest in a long, long line - including, but not restricted to, the three examples I listed.
And NATO didn’t warn Russia “not to invade.” As the Bloomberg article states, it specifically emphasized the “principle of inviolability of frontiers.” That doesn’t simply mean “do not invade.” That means “you’re not getting Crimea.” An unnecessary provocation, not to mention an extremely hypocritical stance.
No, that’s not true. The West - the U.S., specially - very often invades countries it doesn’t like. Or else, bombs them back to the Stone Age, without actually invading. Happens all the time. The Russians know this. They have seen it happen countless times. Hence, again, their acute paranoia.
Russian paranoia was never unfounded, in light of their history; but it often has had a sadly self-reinforcing – and self-fulfilling – effect.
Carnalk stated as if it were a fact that Putin ‘had journalists murdered’. You have very well distanced yourself from that. Saying it is 'likely that he is approving the situation is so close to saying it is unlikely that he approves of it there’s not much difference. But your message should be that Carnalk’s choice of words was not appropriate.
In the absence of absolute proof against Putin in a nation as vast as Russia over a nine year period - I think it is important to understand the investigations that all murdered journalists were involved with.
Could you find one or two’ maybe three on this list from that link where Putin would me motivated to protect the assassins or killers?
In reaching some conclusion about tying Putin to these murders I would start trying to find out if there is a connection to the journalists work and being harmful to any of Putin’s allies and friends.
Here’s from that link:
“Anastasiya Baburova, a freelancer for Novaya Gazeta, who covered the activities of neo-fascist groups”. Come on people. Neo-fascist groups?
Valery Ivanov and Aleksei Sidorov, consecutive editors of the independent newspaper Tolyattinskoye Obozreniye, who exposed organized crime and government corruption in the car-manufacturing city of Togliatti. Organized crime and corrupt city officials ? Come on? Putin?
Ok. No need for the massive quote dumps. I’ll admit that maybe the ex head of the KGB and current absolute ruler is merely fortunate in which journalists are victims of unsolved murders. Further discussion could probably use it’s own thread.