Topic: Is the West gearing up to invade Russia once again? - page 23. (Read 58230 times)

Things are not that simple. For example, companies which are based in the US will have to obey the orders from the American authorities. If the Americans order them reduce their investment in Russia, then they are liable to do that.

what are you referring to?

Scamming , max keiser.... I will not resist to watch 24 minutes of this idiot but..
Since he talks about how the evil guys manipulate the markets does he remember about his own manipulation with his tweets?

very recent video of current scamming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO_zgECoYmk

That's not quite right. There are many variations of capitalism... Mercantilism, Protectionism, State capitalism, Free Market capitalism, Rhine capitalism, Corporate capitalism, Crony capitalism and so on.

If they are big enough they will just steal what they want with the brute force of the US Military Industrial Complex.

But you do not understand the concept of mutant capitalism aka crony capitalism. These 'too big to jail' firms can do whatever in the hell that they want, knowing that Federal tax dollars will bail them out. When the markets crashed in 2008 and Paulson used his fear tactics to get them all bailed out for their fraud, Obama joined in and made it even better for them.

Max Keiser has labeled them Financial Terrorists and that they are. These giant parasites have done more damage to humanity that 100 Bin Ladens could.  They are the reason for global unrest, war, arms races, etc. They would eat themselves if they could make a buck at it.

Loyalty will never feed you nor it will give money to sustain your family.
Why should people on the other side of the globe care about a country when it's their wealth at stake?

If the people in charge in that company structure don't make the best investments and return they will be the ones without a job

Corporations are created for making profits. Moral cannot be applied to them as such. Any capitalism works this way (otherwise it is not capitalism)... 

Because they are not loyal to a nation. They are loyal to profit by any means. That is how mutant capitalism works.

See how big firms and corporations are gaining from the Ukrainian conflict.

Pimco Using Ukraine Turmoil to Buy Cheap Russian Stocks

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-05/pimco-using-ukraine-turmoil-to-buy-cheap-russian-stocks.html

‘Bon appétit,’ Putin tells G7 leaders dishing the dirt on Russia in Brussels
http://rt.com/news/163988-putin-summit-g7-obama/

It's mostly all the usual stuff. Russia is bad, Russia must do what we say, etc. etc.


What rattled me the most was this coming from Obama:


Yes. In 1944. And Soviet Union contribution of 25 million is not even mentioned in a by-sentence...

A couple of reader comments:

I'm not familiar with this story, so can't tell for myself, but nevertheless I still reckon that Medvedev was not free and independent in his decisions and actions (read Putin was behind them), save for some insignificant acts indeed that were primarily aimed at hiding Putin's guiding hand or taking blame off him...

May I tell that it is you who doesn't see the forest behind the trees?

It's not seen as a failure in Norway.
Besides, not the whole disputed territory was given away, it was divided 50-50. In my view the dispute was rather silly to begin with.
On the plus side, both countries can finally start prospecting the area, improvement in border cooperation, trade, and visa-free movement across border for people living there.

Of course, because I know how these things are working. This is the reason why it's vitally important for Putin to have strong presence of his party in the parliament.

You don't see a forest behind the trees. Time zones change was just a veil to drive public's attention from a real epic failure. Medvedev had agreed to sign a treaty with Norway, giving a disputed territory to their jurisdiction. He had thrown more than 4 years of MFA work into the trash can, and more than $30 billion were lost.

The reason why I started this thread, was to remind people of some historic events and the surge of russophobia that usually came before military action against Russia. (Those who didn't, please, read the OP post.) I think we should beware of such signals and not forget them. Those who forget the history are destined to step on the same rakes.

---

Now, on to another small historical tour. This time to 1854, when the Crimean War began with the invasion by French and British troops. The following is a translation from http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D1%80%D1%8B%D0%BC%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D0%B0#.D0.92.D0.BE.D0.B9.D0.BD.D0.B0_.D0.B8_.D0.BF.D1.80.D0.BE.D0.BF.D0.B0.D0.B3.D0.B0.D0.BD.D0.B4.D0.B0

A few years before the Crimean War (in 1848), Karl Marx, who himself actively published own works in Western press, wrote that for a German newspaper to save liberal reputation, it was necessary to "timely to show hatred for all Russian".

Engels in several articles in the British press published in the March-April 1853, accused Russia of an intention to capture Constantinople, although it was well known that the Russian ultimatum of February 1853 contained no territorial claims against Turkey. In another article (April 1853), Marx and Engels blamed Serbs for not wanting to read books printed with Latin letters in their own language in the West, and read only the books in the Cyrillic alphabet, printed in Russia; and rejoiced that an "anti-Russian Progressive Party" finally appeared in Serbia.

[ It is ironic (or maybe not, given Lenin's own hatred for all that is Russian, that Marx' and Engels' works became the cornerstone books for the Soviet Union' communism - what better way to bestow harm on Russian people.) ]

In the same 1853 the British liberal newspaper Daily News, assured its readers that Christians in the Ottoman Empire enjoyed greater religious freedom than in the Russian Orthodox and Catholic Austria.

In 1854 the London "Times" wrote: "It would be good to bring Russia back to the ploughing of internal land, to drive the Muscovites deep into the forests and steppes." In the same year D.Rassel, leader of the House of Commons and the head of the Liberal Party, said: "We have to pry the bear's teeth ... While his fleet and naval arsenal on the Black Sea is not destroyed, Constantinople will not be safe and there will not be any peace in Europe"

[ Sounds familiar, eh? ]

Russian poet Fyodor Tyutchev wrote the following as a response to all this:



And just a thought...
1854 - Fierce battles to keep Crimea.
1944, 90 years later - fierce battles to free Crimea from German occupation.
1954, 10 years later - Khrusjov just hands Crimea over without asking Russia.
2014, 60 years later, Crimea is returned, without battles this time (unless NATO is planning something).

Do you really believe in what you say?

Medvedev did actually take strange steps during his presidency (like changing time zones), but they were just not important. I know you could say about the war with Georgia in 2008, but the coming warfare had not been a secret, and I guess the decision to send troops to Georgia after an attack on Russian peace-keepers had been taken long before this attack actually happened...

This, anyone that thinks differently should refrain from speaking about anything.  You cannot invade a nuclear power, you just cannot.

That's not quite right. Medvedev have made some really strange or even foolish decisions during his presidential term, so he's definetely not a puppet.

RF is a mixed republic. Unlike presidential republic like USA, prime minister, president and the parliament have additional set of privileges to control each other.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-presidential_system

Although Dmitry Medvedev was the president, Putin was more or less heading the state. Officially he was the Prime Minister, but still he had more powers than Medvedev. So this does not surprise me by much.