Tête-à-Tête

Might be something wrong with my eyes, Sean?

But what I see on the picture is crystal clear. Putin (as the leader of undemocratic Russia and almost a dictator himself) is viewed much better than Bush (the leader of country number one in terms of democracy and almost a peacemaker all over the world).

And you must admit that expecting Putin to me trusted more than Bush in US would be really-really strange.
Well Italy is also unhappy about Putin – I gues because he never drives Bush in Lada-Fiat.

This is for sure just a result of Russian secret psycho-rays weapon. Otherwise I can not explain how people could have even o.5% trust in Putin after everything he has done – gas blackmail, opposition execution, polonium spread all over Europe etc. And now after targeting missiles to poor Poland (and threatening all others with Cold War )…..

PS. I guess Putin just asked (or ordered) Abramovich and other loyal oligarchs to pay for this so called survey. I’m 99.99% believe that Pew Reasearch Center in fact run by Pavlovskiy )))

This past evening’s PBS NewHour had on Kohut to explain the Hew poll.

Typical propaganda. That feature didn’t highlight how Putin does better than Bush in most other countries. Or how much more popular Putin is in his country when compared to the popularity of other leaders in their own respective country. The PBS NewsHour feature suggested both leaders being equally unpopular.

Among the listed countries on the chart, Bush did better than Putin in Japan. Perhaps that’s Kurile Islands realted.

Meant to say Pew and not Hew.

In any event, it was quite a PBS NewsHour feature in terms of spin.

Having the data posted with clear realities as the discussion went away from what those numbers indicated.

What’s really interesting is how sharp Putin’s drop was in countries like Germany and France. Most amazing however is that in Russia both trends are the reverse of everywhere else. Talk about populace that lives in a fantasy world where threatening to target missiles at others or shut off oil and gas supplies is considered good foreign policy initiatives.

Talk about populace that lives in a fantasy world where threatening to target missiles at others or shut off oil and gas supplies is considered good foreign policy initiatives.

As pushed around and talked down to by Western Powers as Russia was in the 1990s, it is hardly surprising that aggressive foreign policies would be met with approval today. Combined with increasing domestic economic success, it hardly requires Russian citizens to be living in a “fantasy world”. Such zero-sum thinking is rather prevalent in the US as well.

As a case in point, the arrogant Bush administration stand on Kosovo, which on the whole doesn’t make much sense.

Russia didn’t intitiate the proposal to increase missile related systems in Europe. Like the US doesn’t attempt to economically strangle nations it has disagreed with.

Actually, neither Bush nor Putin really exist. They are both sockpuppets of Mike Averko.

Chris Doss isn’t?

Not that I need him to appear up to snuff.

Talk about populace that lives in a fantasy world where threatening to target missiles at others or shut off oil and gas supplies is considered good foreign policy initiatives.

This has occurred to me as well, Cyrill. One of the few similarities I’ve started to notice between Russia and the Middle Eastern countries where I lived before is that the population has started to believe their own bullshit. I’m still wondering whether this might not apply to the leadership as well. After all, it’s not like such a mindset in Russia is without precedent.

Nothing can be more full of bullshit than the belief of such nonsense as the above.

Supposedly living in Russia, knowing Russian and having a Russian wife isn’t the end all to understanding that country’s general perspective.

Mike, the article you posted is here.

Please do the right thing and delete your post.

When will you do the right thing by not carrying on like a hypocritically nitpicking ***?

Do you’ve anything worthy to the actual discussion itself (asked with some trepidation)?

Regarding that article by George Friedman:

It’s not bad when considering some of Strafor’s earlier material on Russia and Serbia by Peter Zeihan.

As per Friedman’s article, Russia isn’t at all concerned with Kosovo independence having a bearing on Chechnya. The independence mood in Chechnya isn’t so great because of what happened on two different occasions during the last decade when that republic was pretty much independent. Increased mayhem with dubious leadership. Slowly but surely, Chechnya is stabilizing. Whatever happens to Kosovo will not affect Chechnya.

Friedman does raise a noteworthy point about how Russia needs to show its worth as an ally and not some diplomatic back stabber, or outright panzy. The latter having been evident during the Yeltsin era, when Russia would bark with little bite. This is a good time for it to show its worth. Kosovo independence isn’t a primary Western interest.

Thanks for doing the right thing.

Now, how about “doing the right thing” on your end, by not carrying on like such a hypocritically nitpicking *** (again asked with some trepidation)?

Regarding db’s linked George Friedman piece in Stratfor, here’s what someone sent me in private:

“Didn’t read it yet, but Friedman is a bastard who has relied on official State Department leaks,
and followed the party line for years. He accepts no correction, nor replies to them.
Cheers,”

****

In other words, perhaps the Bush admin. might back pedal. I think Friedman is a bit far fetched with Russia hypothetically violating the airspace of other countries. I argued for that to happen back in ‘99. In such a scenario, you’d have any combo. of Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria complaining to the UN with Russia saying: who was brutally violating another nation’s airspace for the past two plus months? As weak as Russia was back then, it could’ve pulled that off. Despite its enhanced economic growth since ‘99, I don’t see this situation happening. Russia’s greater economic clout hasn’t yet had a significant enough of a bearing on its armed forces. “Putinism” is more prudent than “Yeltsinism”. Russia probably won’t get involved in such an instance, unless there’s an agreement with the West and the Albanians.

Supposedly living in Russia, knowing Russian and having a Russian wife isn’t the end all to understanding that country’s general perspective.

I’d 7 NYT letters published within a 2 year span in the pre-internet era. That JRL posted LR’s interview and not mine is proof positive of JRL’s bias. TTT is telling it like it is on Trans-Dniester. Again, their portrayal of the overall situation there appears considerably less biased than Socor’s. My last Serbianna column might just have the most detailed interpretation of UN Security Council Resolution 1244. White Russians are generally well respected among other Russians, including the mainstream ones born and bred during the Soviet era. Points which David Johnson and some others don’t like discussing. At a slighlty higher level of intelligence, that kind of thinking no doubt exists among some of the high priced policy wonks and media hacks. That report is bogus in relation to the detailed material I’d posted.

roflmaoVery funny, Mr. Newman. I almost pissed myself laughing. Do you do any other impressions?

side note: I actually do a great impression of Vladimir Putin walking. It’s basically the same as George Jefferson walking, except you only swing one arm and keep the other still by your side.

I understand your point about the Middle East “believing their own bullshit”. However, it isn’t bullshit to those people. And stubborn, irrational behavior in political or foreign policy matters is hardly the exclusive characteristics of Russia or Middle Eastern countries. I could cite several hundred years of British policies towards … oh, Ireland, for example … as a nation believing its own bullshit. Such examples are endless and obvious to outsiders.

That isn’t to say that I agree with some of Putin’s foreign or domestic policies. But I won’t insult Russians for believing he is doing the right thing, even when the evidence (as I see it) is to the contrary.

Anyway, I know you are far too stubborn to consider any point of view outside of your preconceived neo-conservative vantage point. Ironically, that makes you just as guilty as those peoples you are faulting.

Before I head out, Newman’s ongoing idiocy is highlighted by his slecetive cut and paste “thinking” (if it can worded as such).

I could cite several hundred years of British policies towards … oh, Ireland, for example … as a nation believing its own bullshit.

Sure, we used to. Now can you cite an example of more than 70% of the entire country being united behind the government on anything since WWII?

Anyway, I know you are far too stubborn to consider any point of view outside of your preconceived neo-conservative vantage point.

Sorry? And on what issues do you consider my vantage point, preconcieved or otherwise, to be neo-conservative? Pray tell.

Before I head out, Newman’s ongoing idiocy is highlighted by his slecetive cut and paste “thinking” (if it can worded as such).

No thinking involved. It’s automated.

“This has occurred to me as well, Cyrill. One of the few similarities I’ve started to notice between Russia and the Middle Eastern countries where I lived before is that the population has started to believe their own bullshit.”

I frankly always thought there were huge similarities between Russia and Middle East. Mostly because economically and socially they have been theocracies for a while. Theocracies tend to limit critical thinking ability. I just came back from an interpretation trip and it is so revealing to hear Russians repeat the most ridiculous accusations their TV is constantly repeating: coloured revolutions are bad and are all a plot of the West against Russia. Building radars somehow become equivalent to targeting missiles. Expecting a higher rate of return when negotiating deals with unstable Russia in 1990-s is now an excuse to break promises and start blackmailing neighbors. Of course, the West has nothing else to do but to push Russia down on its knees.

Now Russia is no longer a theocracy and it has less common with the Middle East, but a lot in common with Latin America several decades ago. Same propensity to believe BS.

“I’m still wondering whether this might not apply to the leadership as well. After all, it’s not like such a mindset in Russia is without precedent.”

I have followed the Russian ban on medical exports at my blog and it seems that the mindset spreads all the way up. Or rather it spread all the way from the top. It really can’t be otherwise. It is a common myth or a misconception that when information exchange is stifled, those that perform stifling are somehow exempt. Brainwashing starts with brainwashers.

Like getting genuine Havana cigars in the US.

Russia has been a “theocracy” in recent history? Pre-1917, it wasn’t noticeably more theocratic than other leading Euro nations of that era. Heck, Peter liberalized the ROC.

On the other point, many Americans have their own idiotic notions of the world at large. Another example of how some hold Russia to higher standards, while saying that it isn’t as advanced.

I frankly always thought there were huge similarities between Russia and Middle East.

I never thought there were many similarities, especially from a societal sense, but there were a few political similarities.

The belief in a supreme leader who should make all the decisions himself and is automatically entitled to respect from all and sundry by virtue of his position alone (were that courtesy extended to US presidents!) is one such similarity. Another is the ability to attribute all success stories to the supreme leader, but insist that all failures are the sole fault of those around him. A third is tendency to believe that they are just a year or two away from making the US sit up and take notice of them.

I have followed the Russian ban on medical exports at my blog…

Didn’t know you had a blog! Shame, I’d have been reading earlier. I must go and take a look.

Overly simplistic. Definite material for a certain blog.

On the other hand, I know a Finn (among other non-Russian born non-Russians) who finds Russia to be a refreshing relief from his native country, when it comes to an overall openness.

Cyril,

I just read that post on your blog about biosample exports. Like Tim, I didnt realise you had a blog. I have to say, Putin’s remark about the worth of sending biosamples abroad has got to be one of the dumbest, most ignorant statements I have ever heard from a leader of a country. If it had came from Idi Amin, I might have understood, but does he not understand anything about science or medicine? Its a shocker.

“Russia has been a “theocracy” in recent history?”

USSR was a theocracy. Communism was a religion and the communist clergy was in full control of all social, economic and political aspects of life.

“Putin’s remark about the worth of sending biosamples abroad has got to be one of the dumbest, most ignorant statements I have ever heard from a leader of a country.”

That’s why I created a special tag: ??????????. Putin’s statement shows he had no concern that he might be over his head on this issue. The first time I realized that Putin and most likely the majority of the Kremlin top might have detached themselves from any concern they could be ridiculed for their statements was when he commented on rape accusations against Israeli president.

As for ?????????? it is so pervasive and hilarious in Russia when the newly found religiosity gets mixed up with shamanistic paganism, beliefs in healing stones, etc. And of course with mystical uniqueness of Russia.

Plenty of Bushisms out there which fare well.

Some intepreters of the American political system could be regarded as theocrats as well.

Pardon the misspell.

Plenty of Bushisms out there which fare well.

The difference being that at least 55% of Americans doubt their president’s ability to do the right thing against a mere 16% of Russians when asked the same question.

Is there not good reason for that comparative reality, which has nothing to do with being brain washed, or some inherently subservient ill defined historical DNA?

Specifically, Putin hasn’t ****** up as much as Bush.

Is there not good reason for that comparative reality, which has nothing to do with being brain washed, or some inherently subservient ill defined historical DNA?

Then why make the comparison with Bush at all by saying:

Plenty of Bushisms out there which fare well.

in response to Putin making daft statements which call his judgement into question?

In reply to the point you make about how Russians tend to be in greater agreement with their president.

I seem to recall that towards the end of his presidency, many Russians were disenchanted with Yeltsin.

Reasons enough to be in disagreement with the idea of slavish Russians following their leaders like sheep.

The events of 1917 can also be cited. What happened in the late 19 twenties til around the end of the USSR could be a counterpoint argument. Since then, Russians show themselves no more dumber on political affairs than their American counterparts. Not that they were necessarily dumber during the Brezhnev years.

In reply to the point you make about how Russians tend to be in greater agreement with their president.

Eh? No, you made that comment before I made the point about how 84% of Russians believe their president to be capable of doing the right thing.

Using the simple expedient of reading the thread, it appears that you made the comment in response to something Cyrill wrote which had nothing to do with the US president. My comment came after, hence does not servce as a valid reason why you brought Bush into the discussion.

Try again. Cyrill stated a view which I countered. You in turn agreed with Cyrill in a way that saw no disagreement with his views.

The point about Bush is of couse valid. Russians have ample reasons (other than the suggested subservient dupes) to be more suppportive of Putin in relation to how Bush is viewed by Americans.

Cyrill stated a view which I countered.

Yes, by making a comparison with Bush which you then went onto say is nothing to do with the subject in hand.

When I asked you why you if that was the case why make the comparison, you said you made it in response to me. Now you say you made it in response to Cyrill.

”Cyrill stated a view which I countered.”

You didnt counter it at all. I made a remark regarding an astoundingly stupid comment by Putin and Cyrill agreed. You, in your role as unpaid Kremlin spokesman, made the usual dumb response that Bush is worse, blah blah blah. As usual, you are unable to discuss things on there own merit, and, as usual, unlike most adults, you find yourself unable to resist saying something, however worthless it is. A wise man knows when to shut up Mike.

By the way you didnt answer my questions elsewhere regarding you sending poisonous emails to media people ‘pissing on others work’. Is that true Mike?

You didn’t disagree with what he said. On the other hand, you took issue with some of what I said. I addressed the points raised by Cyrill and yourself.

I did bring up Bush for comparative reasons.

If Putin ****** up as much as Bush has, the former wouldn’t be as popular with his people.

In answer to some idiotically presented comments: no it’s not true as how it’s stated.

Once again, I did counter his view.

”In answer to some idiotically presented comments: no it’s not true as how it’s stated.”

OK, I’ll put it another way. Have you been sending emails to people criticising the work of others? If so, why? Surely that’s bad form.

You didnt counter anything. Putin’s statement was ridiculous, end of story, and no amount of introducing Bush or anyone else will counter that. It may counter it in your mind, but not in mine and anyone elses I daresay.

I answered that question at the other thread where it was presented. Go back and read it.

It’s “bad form” to continuously not grasp what has been clearly communicated to you.

I did counter what was said. You’re no valid judge to legitimately claim differently.

Mike,

When someone questions the value and use of sending biosamples abroad, you can be sure I know its the one of the dumbest statements I have ever heard. No amount of ‘Bush is worse’ will change that. Grow up and stop being an asshole.

No, you didnt address my question, so I’ll assume its true, you do send emails like that to people. Which says it all really.

Yes I did address your question at that other thread. If you really don’t think so, then you’ve a severe disability which relates to your severe misunderstanding of a number of FSU and no doubt other issues.

I wasn’t specificially addressing that particular example you gave.

Mike,

you didnt address it at all. I’m not nitpicking. You launched into a rant about Peter Lavelle and Untimely Thoughts, but didnt asnwer when I asked you whether you were sending these emails around or not. Are you? Answer directly please. If you dont, then I can assume that you have been doing this and the readers can make up their own minds. Mike, I dont have any severe disability at all, save for smoking cigarettes. And cheap jibes like that do not answer what I’ve asked.

”I wasn’t specificially addressing that particular example you gave.”
Fair enough, but why dont you have the decency to admit it was stupid statement from Putin, instead of the same tired line ‘Bush is worse’?

Take your pick: you’re either stupid, or a flat out demagogue, or a combination of both.

I said that I write media critiques. I then mentioned where some of them have appeared, in addition to noting the difference between a media critique and a so called “personal attack”.

You do the latter by constantly distorting what I’d in fact stated.

On the other point, I was correctly putting into perspective why Russians view Putin more positively when compared to how Americans view Putin.

”Take your pick: you’re either stupid, or a flat out demagogue, or a combination of both.”

Insults as usual, the refuge of the beaten. There are people who would say that sending poisonous emails continuously is the work of someone with psychiatric problems.

As for your Putin point, once again it has nothing to do with what I spoke to Cyrill about. But as long as you’re happy Mike, thats the main thing.

You were the one who initiated insults, only to disingenuously play innocent.

Reference your calling me something along the lines of an unpaid Kremlin spokesperson. There’s a lenghty list of such troll like manner from you.

You cary on like you suffered massive head injuries.

If you dish it out, then expect to get it rightfully shoved back at you.

Pardon the misspell.