Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russia - USA Relations

    Share

    Russian Patriot
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1168
    Points : 2062
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 25
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Russian Patriot on Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:59 pm

    U.S. studying Russia's draft European security treaty - Kelly

    RIA Novosti

    07:29 02/12/2009 WASHINGTON, December 1 (RIA Novosti) - The United States is studying Russia's draft European security treaty, the State Department said Tuesday.

    Russian President Dmitry Medvedev proposed drawing up a new European security pact in June 2008, and Russia published a draft of the treaty on Sunday, sending copies to heads of state and international organizations, including NATO.

    "President Obama received a letter from President Medvedev which contained the draft treaty," State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said.

    "We're studying the proposal carefully, and we consider it to be an important contribution to the ongoing debate on European security, which has been taking place as part of the Corfu Process," he said.

    The 17th Ministerial Council of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) opened in the Greek capital Athens on Tuesday. Its agenda includes discussions of Russia's draft.

    At an informal meeting in June this year, the 56 OSCE member states' foreign ministers agreed to start a discussion on fundamental security issues. The discussions were named the Corfu Process after the Greek island that hosted the meeting.

    "We believe any proposal must build on the existing body of commitments we have developed together over three decades, as well as central structures such as the OSCE and NATO. These commitments and structures have helped to ensure security in Europe," Kelly told a daily press briefing.

    "We continue to embrace a comprehensive approach to security in Europe, which encompasses the political, military, economic, environmental, and human dimensions, and agree entirely with President Medvedev that we need to continue our efforts to adjust to new and emerging threats to European security," he said.

    "We look forward to working with the Russian Federation and our other partners in Europe in the days and months to come to further elaborate an agreed approach on these important issues," the spokesman said.

    Russia's draft security pact says, in particular, that "every Party shall be entitled to consider an armed attack against any other Party an armed attack against itself."

    "In exercising its right of self-defense under Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, it shall be entitled to render the attacked Party, subject to its consent, the necessary assistance, including military," it says.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2009/12/mil-091202-rianovosti05.htm

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Hail To The Thief - The NYT defends Khodorkovsky

    Post  lulldapull on Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:16 am

    Gotta love these thugs in the U.S. Not only do they stand by a convicted thief, but also despise those Governments & countries that don't fleece and fool their own countrymen. Did you guys see that cunt Hillary come on TV to shed a tear for Mr. Khodorkovsky? What a fukkin riot!lol!

    Hail To The Thief - The New York Times Defends Mikhail Khodorkovsky

    By Stephen Lendman
    1-1-11

    On October 25, 2003, Khodorkovsky (below called MK) was arrested for tax evasion and corruption, dating from when the Soviet Union dissolved and state privatizations followed. "Behind every great fortune lies a great crime," explained Honore de Balzac. Billionaire Russian oligarchs, like MK, illegitimately amassed great fortunes, avoiding prosecution during Yeltsin's tenure (1991 - 1999).

    Beginning in 1991, various socio-economic measures were implemented without public discussion or parliamentary approval. Most important were Yeltsin's personal directives, creating a billionaire aristocracy handed the economy's most important, profitable sectors, free of charge - literally a license to loot.

    Changes began slowly under Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev, though not easily. The rot is so widespread and deep. Oligarchs like Boris Berezovsky fled to London, Moscow2, taking with them great fortunes. Others staying behind wish they'd after Medvedev announced during an October 2008 Council to Combat Corruption session that:

    "Corruption in our nation has not simply become wide-scale. It has become a common, everyday phenomenon which characterizes the very life of our society. We are not simply talking about commonplace bribery. We are talking about a severe illness which is corroding the economy and corrupting all society."

    As a result, prosecutions followed. Some 2009 examples against bureaucrats included:

    -- Nevelsk Mayor Vladimir Pak's suspension and charge of embezzling 56 million rubles ($1.5 million);

    -- two Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) Main Directorate officers detained on suspicion of accepting over $100,000 in bribes; and

    -- MVD Lt. Col. Dmitry Luzgin charged with extorting $1 million from Russian Real Estate House management.

    According to MVD figures, annual Russian corruption ranges from $20 - $40 billion. In 2006, Alexander Buksman, deputy general prosecutor first deputy, estimated annual corruption at $240 billion, involving business and bureaucrats. However, a combination of legal loopholes and close private-public alliances lets most offenses go unpunished.

    Major Media Defend MK

    On October 29, (four days after his arrest), a New York Times editorial headlined, "Putin's Old-Style KGB Tactics," saying:

    "After laboring to project the image of a rational, law-abiding statesman, President Vladimir Putin of Russia has reverted to the vengeful violence of his old employer....(Arresting MK) was a serious mistake," citing market plunges "on the fear that the Kremlin was showing its true authoritarian colors."

    An earlier August 13, 2003 Times editorial headlined, "Moscow Machinations," saying:

    "....nobody knows for sure whether President Vladimir Putin is personally behind the sudden crackdown on the giant oil company Yukos....What is clear is that the Kremlin's strong-arm tactics have little to do with battling economic crime and a lot to do with power and the coming elections in Russia."

    An October 28 Washington Post editorial claimed "no one is safe from arbitrary prosecution, or from the political whims of the Kremlin, and the US State Department suggested that MK's arrest involved "selective prosecution," adding that "We are concerned about the rule of law, about maintaining the basic freedom of Russians."

    In fact, MK was summoned for questioning. At the time he headed Yukos and was Russia's richest oligarch, ranking 16th on Forbes billionaires list. Today, he faces years more in prison. More on that below.

    The Times railed about "masked agents" arresting him instead of pursuing him in court. In fact, he defied a court order to appear before prosecutors. Only then did arrest follow. Other allegations suggested Yukos involvement in murders or attempted ones, targeting bureaucrats or business competitors who interfered with company operations. One was committed on MK's birthday, apparently a gift to the boss.

    MK's Background

    He began as a Stalinist bureaucrat. In 1987, he used his Komsomol district committee control to organize Menatep, a commercial enterprise to promote inventions and industrial innovations. It later became one of Russia's largest banks. In the 1990s, through ties with Kremlin bureaucrats, he used funds stolen from the state and unwary investors to amass huge holdings in formerly state-owned enterprises at a fraction of their value. In 1995 he bought Yukos assets for $300 million. In 2003, its market value was $30 billion, a 100-fold ill-gotten gain.

    Why MK Was Targeted

    Besides corruption and tax evasion, political motives were also in play. Allegedly he was bankrolling opposition parties, breaking an unwritten agreement to stay out of politics in return for the state keeping quiet about illicitly gotten riches.

    Key also were deals he was negotiating with ExxonMobil and Chevron for up to a 50% stake in Yukos, violating Kremlin policy to keep Russian control of state resources in government or home-grown private hands. In addition, MK had White House political ties. For example, before becoming Bush's National Security Advisor and Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice was a Chevron board member for 10 years and had a tanker named in her honor. It was then quietly renamed the "Altair Voyager."

    Another factor was public hostility toward oligarchs, so pervasive that prosecuting them is politically popular. US anger is a combination of geopolitics and defending predatory capitalism's rapaciousness, notably because of America's own criminal class. For decades, a Washington-corporate cabal shifted trillions of public wealth to private hands, especially to omnipotent Wall Street. At issue is shielding them at all costs so corrupt practices can continue until everything worth owning is stolen.

    Before MK's arrest, Yukos was privately held. Afterwards, company assets were bought by state-controlled Rosneft. Then, the majority state-owned Gazprom (the world's largest natural gas company) bought oil giant Sibneft. In 2006, Putin decided against further nationalizations, but continued oil/gas industry control by having industry giants like Lukoil maintain close government connections.

    Moreover, to stay in charge, state-owned Transneft controls pipeline transportation. In fact, it's the largest Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) shareholder. Russia wants its production leveraged to control transport and refining to maintain power over EU and neighboring state customers.

    As a result, the idea of selling large Yukos or other major resource company assets to foreign buyers is anathema, especially to Big Oil giants. MK also wanted Russia's pipeline monopoly broken with a private one to shift the flow of oil. It was like declaring war on the state and got him incarcerated.

    On May 31, 2005, he was convicted of fraud and tax evasion and sentenced to nine years in prison, later reduced to eight years. In March 2009, he and Platon Lebedev (billionaire, former Group Menatep CEO and close MK associate) were tried for embezzlement and money laundering. On December 27, 2010, both men were convicted, and on December 30 sentenced to 14 years imprisonment, including time served. Lebedev also was convicted in 2005.

    Rallying Round the Thief

    Again, The New York Times came to MK's defense in a December 28 editorial headlined, "What Rule of Law," saying:

    President Dmitri Medvedev can prove his "rule of law" credentials "by using his pardon power to ensure that (MK) faces no additional prison time after being convicted on trumped-up embezzlement charges this week. (He's) already served seven years as a result of Mr. Putin's judicial vendetta against him."

    Fairness and truth were never NYT long suits, editorially defending a world-class criminal, guilty of predatory rapaciousness. On December 28, the White House said:

    "We are deeply concerned that a Russian judge today has indicated that for the second time (MK) and Platon Lebedev will be convicted. We are troubled by the allegations of serious due process violations, and what appears to be an abusive use of the legal system for improper ends."

    No nation more egregiously violates rule of law principles than America at home and abroad. No other more heinously spurns human rights, civil liberties, due process, judicial fairness, and democratic values. None also are more unjustifiably self-righteous.

    No broadsheet is more hypocritical than The Times, tainted by decades of supporting wealth, corporate interests, and imperial wars. Daily, its agenda is visible, arrogantly supporting power over popular interests, even mega-criminals deserving condemnation. Indeed, truth and fairness were never NYT long suits. Nor America's.

    Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

    http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:23 am

    The funniest thing is that they are claiming his treatment is all political and are asking for Putin or Medvedev to intervene...

    They want political intervention in Russias justice system.

    Now if they believe the crap they believe this guy is already in prison because he is a political threat to Putin and Medvedev so why would they help him now?

    I really get annoyed at my own government when someone with a NZ passport gets caught in Asia somewhere with a big pile of drugs on them and my government feels the need to try to get them off the death penalty or out of jail time just because that country has harsher penalties for drugs than we do. They all did it for easy money but when it comes time to face up to what they were doing... well the tune is very different.

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  lulldapull on Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:41 am

    Garry, when Putin gave to Mr Khodorkovsky a donkeyKong in the ass.......that's when Mr Khodorkovsky admitted being on the CIA payroll....... lol!

    Even that dumb ass Chess player whatever his fukkin name is another buffoon recruited by the CIA/ NSA to sow discontent and cause trouble for the Russian Government.

    All these bastards including these Wahabbi's, AL-CIAda operatives, Chechen rebels, Sunni tribal leaders in Iraq etc. do actually work for the U.S. Government. They are paid for their services via Saudi petrodollars.

    Behind every terrorist incident is either the U.S. Government or its two favourite proxies....(Israel & Saudi Haramia).

    This is an established fact of life now. Nothing else makes any sense.

    P.S. I bet you a million bucks that the latest blast in Egypt is another disgusting and cowardly act sponsored by U.S/ Israel, and paid for by the Saudi's.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 04, 2011 12:11 pm

    I can't say you are wrong, though I would hope most American citizens would want to believe their government wouldn't do that sort of thing...


    Glad to see in the news that in Egypt both Christian leaders and Muslim leaders went on TV to agree that this is not the way muslims and christians should be acting and that this attack was probably from an external source... personally I think if it wasn't Saudi Arabia then Pakistan could be another source.

    The US and Israel benefit from Israels neighbours fighting and in turmoil.

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  lulldapull on Tue Jan 04, 2011 12:31 pm

    This thing that the U.S. & Israel did in Egypt a couple of days ago is a fine example of what the UK used to do in India........pit one against the other by deliberate provocations including terrorism and then sit down on the side walk and enjoy the popcorn while the two fools go at each other.....That's how the UK controlled India for a hundred years until the Indians woke up.

    The U.S. and Israel did the same shit in Lebanon for well over 20 years until they destroyed that country.

    Now they have been doing this same thing in Iraq and Afghanistan for the last decade....and you see the results.

    Where ever these bastards go they deliberately cause civil wars, terrorism and instability. That is the game Garry......human rights, democracy and freedom is all rubbish.

    The United states Government is a terrorist entity. They are the hidden hand, and most people around the world know this, but wont admit to it. Wink

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 04, 2011 1:39 pm

    Standard practise of a colonial power is to go in and find a victim minority group and put them in charge of the masses.

    You have their loyalty because you put them in power and once in power and controlling police and the armed forces the majority have little choice but to do as they are told.

    Sometimes that falls over like in Asia just after WWII when there were not enough colonial forces to maintain the empires... often the French and British used Japanese soldiers to ensure colonial power was maintained till the colonial powers could recover and send their own forces to maintain order.

    Of course in the Middle East it is even more pathetic... there are civilisations thousands of years old like the Persians, the Egyptians, the Babylonians etc etc, yet it was Germany and France and Britain that went in there and drew lines on maps and created royal families... the Saudi Royal family can cast its history back as far... as the early 20th century AD. Not very impressive is it?
    The lines on the maps that create the various countries appeared after WWI because France and Britain were dividing the known oil fields between them. If divided on ethnic lines Kurdistan would exist, but it is drawn on oil reserves not people.
    If there was oil in Israel then Palestine would have appeared on the map to be replaced in 1948 with Israel.

    It is the map makers with the power and it was Europe that stole land at the stroke of a pen. Ask the countries in Africa, or the natives of Australia for that matter.

    Problem is that those who benefit from the way things are don't want it to change because that would effect them in a bad way.
    Those that don't benefit can see the problem but are not in a position to do anything about it.

    Human rights, democracy, freedom of speech... these are the whips for the backs of our opponents... we have very high morals and high ideals but we only apply these to our rivals. The fact that they come up short is no surprise because we never judge ourselves by such standards so we never have to worry about it.

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  lulldapull on Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:00 pm

    Yeah no kidding Garry......that's pretty much right on the money.

    Having talked to a few Iraqi shia's recently I was fukking appalled at what the 'Coalition' has been doing in Iraq.....just killing innocent people for the hell of it.

    A lot of these suicide bombings, car and truck bombings and other terrorist attacks are directly attributable to the CIA. The Iraqi Shia militia members have caught people red handed trying to carry out suicide attacks or truck bombings, and after interrogations the truth comes out! The case of the UK special forces around Basra is a famous example of being busted in the act.

    Time and again........the Saudi's send in their kids to blow themselves up inside Iraq, with a blessing of course from Uncle Sam. Or when a truck driver is scurrying away after parking his explosives laden truck, and gets caught he also spills the beans about who plans what. Wink

    After all Garry.......it is the West that is the only party that benefits from this chaos.....certainly not the naked hungry and voiceless/ powerless peasants that get slaughtered by the dozens every time.

    Also after the Mumbai attack.....I was blaming Pakistan and its rogue agencies and blah blah.....but now I believe that the U.S. and Israel directed and orchestrated that attack via their proxies, including the very convenient Mr David Headley (a known DEA/ NSA agent). Beleaguered Pakistan had nothing to gain from that attack except earn further wrath of the world....It's pretty obvious who was the party to gain the most out of the Mumbai disaster.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:54 pm

    I am pretty sure Pakistan had a significant hand in the Mumbai attacks.

    I mean this is a country that basically created and supported the Taleban in Afghanistan.

    It was Saudi and US money that the ISI used in Afghanistan and they could have supported any faction they wanted. They chose the Taleban... who admittedly brought order, but at a price... especially for the women.

    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 559
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  nightcrawler on Wed Jan 05, 2011 5:48 am

    GarryB wrote:I am pretty sure Pakistan had a significant hand in the Mumbai attacks.

    I mean this is a country that basically created and supported the Taleban in Afghanistan.

    It was Saudi and US money that the ISI used in Afghanistan and they could have supported any faction they wanted. They chose the Taleban... who admittedly brought order, but at a price... especially for the women.

    you are right Twisted Evil

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  lulldapull on Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:49 pm

    The U.S. Govt is a liar, and worst it is a fukking terrorist entity.

    WikiLeaks' Most Terrifying Revelation: Just How Much Our Government Lies to Us


    Wikileaks has shown that our government and military form a 'vast lying machine' that perpetrates mass murder in our name.
    January 3, 2011


    "Try as I may I can not escape the sound of suffering. Perhaps as an old man I will accept suffering with insouciance. But not now; men in their prime, if they have convictions are tasked to act on them."

    -- Julian Assange, 2007 blog entry

    Do you believe that it is in Americans' interest to allow a small group of U.S. leaders to unilaterally murder, maim, imprison and/or torture anyone they choose anywhere in the world, without the knowledge let alone oversight of their citizens or the international community? And, despite their proven record of failure to protect America -- from Indochina to Iran to Iraq -- do you believe they should be permitted to clandestinely expand their war-making without informed public debate? If so, you are betraying the principles upon which America was founded, endangering your nation, and displaying a distinctly "unamerican" subservience to unaccountable authority. But if you oppose autocratic power, you are called to support Wikileaks and others trying to limit U.S. Executive Branch mass murder abroad and failure to protect Americans at home.

    These two issues became officially linked for the first time when former U.S. Afghan commander General Stanley McChrystal explicitly stated that the murder of civilians increases rather than decreases the numbers of those committed to killing Americans, and actually implemented policies -- since reversed by General Petraeus -- to reduce U.S. murder of civilians. McChrystal said that “for every innocent person you kill, you create 10 new enemies." By so doing he made it clear that killing civilians is not only a moral and war crimes issue, but -- in today's interdependent world -- also threatens U.S. national security.

    As important as is the issue of free speech, it is the question of whether the U.S. Executive is in fact protecting the American people through its mass murder abroad that really lies at the heart of the Wikileaks controversy. Executive Branch officials justify persecuting and threatening to murder Assange on the grounds that he has damaged U.S. "national security." If McChrystal is right, however, it is the past decade of U.S. Executive mass murder in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, now revealed beyond any doubt by Wikileaks, that is the real threat to U.S. national security.

    The chilling fact is this: whether you believe that September 11, 2001 was due to incomprehensible fanaticism or genuine grievances, it seems likely that U.S. leaders’ murder of countless Muslims since 2001 will cause the next 9/11 should, God forbid, it occur, The recent suicide-bomber in Sweden who came perilously close to succeeding taped a message saying "so will your children, daughters, brothers, and sisters die, like our brothers, sisters, and children die." Similar sentiments were voiced by the Times Square bomber, and it is likely that those responsible for future American deaths will also be motivated by revenge for the hundreds of thousands of Muslims for whose deaths U.S. leaders are responsible since 2001.

    This is not, of course, to justify such attacks. Any attacks on civilians, whether by the Taliban or General Petraeus, are totally unjustified and crimes of war. But if the issue is how best to enhance U.S. national security, it is critical to rationally discuss the most prudent and sensible means of preventing further attacks -- which in this case is to stop creating huge numbers of people who want to kill Americans. If General McChrystal is correct, every American should tremble at the long-term danger to America caused by the last decade of U.S. war-making in the Muslim world. If only 1/100th of 1% of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims are moved to want to attack America because of America's post-9/11 killing of Muslim civilians, for example, the U.S. Executive will have created a pool of 160,000 Muslims devoted to murdering Americans.

    Nothing is more emblematic of the service Assange is doing Americans than the July 25 N.Y. Times headline announcing its publication of the Wikileaks "Afghan War Logs": "View Is Bleaker Than Official Portrayal Of War In Afghanistan."

    The N.Y. Times thus not only acknowledged that Wikileaks had supplied Americans with vital information about the war that its own government was denying them, but that this information had not been provided by the U.S. mass media. If it had been doing its job, after all, America’s “newspaper of record” not Wikileaks would have long ago revealed that the Afghan war was "bleaker than official portrayal of the war." The Guardian newspaper's headline on the same day drove the point home: "Massive Leak Of Secret Files Exposes Truth Of Occupation," i.e. the truth as opposed to U.S. Executive lies.

    These "Afghan War Logs", like the Iraqi war logs after them, and much material in Wikileaks' recent release of diplomatic cables, reveal above all that U.S. Executive war-making is marked by massive deception of the American people -- particularly lying about (1) the enormous civilian casualties the U.S. is causing and (2) its claim to be pursuing a "counter-insurgency strategy" designed to install a democratic Afghan government. The Times and Guardian stories describe how these official U.S. documents reveal constant U.S. Executive Branch lying to the American people.

    -- U.S. MURDER OF CIVILIANS: "A huge cache of secret US military files today provides a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan, revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents," (Guardian) "Incident by incident, the reports resemble a police blotter of the myriad ways Afghan civilians were killed -- not just in airstrikes but in ones and twos -- in shootings on the roads or in the villages, in misunderstandings or in a cross-fire, or in chaotic moments when Afghan drivers ventured too close to convoys and checkpoints". (N.Y. Times) "The Nato coalition in Afghanistan has been using an undisclosed "black" unit of special forces, Task Force 373, to hunt down targets for death or detention without trial ... The logs reveal that TF 373 has also killed civilian men, women and children and even Afghan police officers who have strayed into its path." (Guardian)

    -- REGULAR COVERUPS OF U.S. CIVILIAN MURDER: "The dead, the reports repeatedly indicate, were not suicide bombers or insurgents, and many of the cases were not reported to the public at the time." (N.Y. Times) "War logs show how marines gave cleaned up accounts of an incident in which they killed 19 civilians ... There would be no punishment." (Guardian) "The logs detail how US special forces dropped six 2,000 lb bombs on a compound where they believed a `high-value individual' was hiding, after `ensuring there were no innocent Afghans in the surrounding area'. A senior US commander reported that 150 Taliban had been killed. Locals, however, reported that up to 300 civilians had died." (Guardian)

    -- U.S. AND A CORRUPT AFGHAN GOVERNMENT ARE ALIENATING AFGHAN CIVILIANS AND LOSING THE WAR: "The documents illustrate in mosaic detail why, after the United States has spent almost $300 billion on the war in Afghanistan, the Taliban are stronger than at any time since 2001 ... The reports paint a disheartening picture of the Afghan police (who) are often described as distrusted, even loathed, by Afghan civilians. The reports recount episodes of police brutality, corruption petty and large, extortion and kidnapping ... The toll of the war -- reflected in mounting civilian casualties -- left the Americans seeking cooperation and support from an Afghan population that grew steadily more exhausted, resentful, fearful and alienated ... The expanding (U.S.) special operations have stoked particular resentment among Afghans -- for their lack of coordination with local forces, the civilian casualties they frequently inflicted and the lack of the accountability." (N.Y. Times)

    When the Iraqi war logs were published 3 months later, they revealed even more shocking information -- particularly that U.S. soldiers had handed over Iraqi civilians to Iraqi police, knowing they would be hideously tortured employing electric drills, acid and other devices before being savagely murdered. Ellen Knickmeyer, the Washington Post Bureau chief in Baghdad in 2006, wrote that these revelations meant that U.S. officials had been lying daily to the U.S. media

    -- and American people -- by saying they were not aware of this mass murder. U. S. leaders also lied constantly in claiming they were not tracking civilian casualties, when in fact they were. Since international law made U.S. leaders responsible for providing law and order in occupied Iraq, these Wiklileaks cables thus also revealed that U.S. leaders bear a major responsibility for these warcrimes, among the worst since the end of WWII.

    Both the Wikileaks Iraqi and Afghan War Logs, in short, have revealed that the entire U.S. Executive is a "vast lying machine", as journalist David Halberstam described the U.S. military in his affadavit for the CBS vs. Westmoreland trial. It must be understood that “truth” vs. “lies” is not even an operational category within the Executive Branch or military. The purpose of communicating with the public is not to provide them with truthful information but rather to advance “the mission”. People who communicate with the public obtain their jobs and are promoted on the basis of their ability to mislead, deceive, “spin” and lie. There is no recorded case where Executive Branch officials have been rewarded for telling the truth to the American people, and many where they have been punished or lost their jobs for doing so. And nothing so epitomizes the degradation of democracy in America that the fact the public expects Executive Branch officials to lie to them, and that mass media journalists even betray their profession by defending Executive secrecy and excoriating those who reveal their lies like Julian Assange.

    It is thus impossible to overstate the importance of the Wikileaks documentation of these lies to the American people. When a journalist reports a U.S. government misdeed, government officials automatically deny it and many Americans are unsure whom to believe. But Wikileaks has revealed official government documents that prove U.S. leaders’ lying and commission of crimes of war. The fact that the U.S. has covered up its mass murder of civilians, and that this is contributing to its losing the war, is thus no longer open to serious question. The callous and careerist politicians and journalists who daily ignore U.S. mass murder, while calling for Assange's arrest or execution, shame themselves, their children, and their profession by their indifference to non-American human suffering and obsequious toadying to illegitimate Executive power.

    And the Wikileaks documents reveal something even more important: the entirely bogus nature of U.S. claims that Assange has damaged U.S. "national security", e.g. by revealing information that could help the “enemy.” It is obvious that the "enemy" knows whether those murdered by the U.S. are civilians. The U.S. Executive clearly claims it is only killing “insurgents” to keep its murder of civilians a secret from the American people, fearing it would face protests that could tie its hands if it became known.

    The Wikileaks documents, though they date from 2009 and before, also shed important light on what is occurring today under General David Petraeus.

    It is important to remember, after all, that the Wikileaks controversy is not primarily about the past or abstract legal issues, but what is happening to actual human beings today. As you read these words countless Afghan and Pakistani villagers are huddling in their homes, terrorized by U.S. war-making, as General Petraeus's brutal offensive into southern Afghanistan, met by an increase in the Taliban's resort to roadside bombs and assassination, has caused the Red Cross to issue an unusual alarm saying that conditions are at their worst for Afghan civilians in 30 years, i.e. as bad as during the Russian invasion. A Canadian press report indicates that Kandahar's main hospital is overflowing with civilian casualties, and that "on some days, the floor is red with blood".

    Petraeus has tripled air strikes, brought in 9,000 U.S. assassins who are conducting round-the-clock murder, and introduced an unprecedented number of night-time raids recalling Nazi movies from the 1940s -- as screaming U.S. soldiers break into people's homes, terrorize women and children, and kill, wound, torture or imprison men indefinitely without a trial or any chance to prove their innocence. Even the U.S.-installed Afghan President Hamid Karzai is so appalled that he has begged the U.S. to curtail its airstrikes and night raids, saying, “the raiding homes at night. Terrible. Terrible. A serious cause of the Afghan people's disenchantment with NATO and with the Afghan government … How can you measure the consequences of it in terms of the loss of life of children and women because you have captured Talib A. And who is this Talib A? Is he so important to have 10 more people killed, civilians? Who determines that?”

    Petraeus has firmly refused to end what this Afghan leader describes as the General’s responsibility for civilian murder, making a further mockery of his claim to be bringing “democracy” to Afghanistan.

    Particularly significant are the many first-person reports in the Wikileaks "Afghan War Logs" of U.S. murder of innocent civilians at U.S. checkpoints -- which flesh out McChrystal's March 2010 admission that "we have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none has ever proven to be a threat."

    For this raises a basic question about Petraeus's vast escalation of U.S. airstrikes. If U.S. forces have murdered countless innocent civilians at checkpoints, where they can at least see those they are killing face-to-face, how many more innocent civilians is Petraeus killing from from the air, in bombing raids where those below can barely be seen?

    And these Wikileaks documents also shed important light on how Petraeus's massive escalation into both southern Afghanistan and Pakistan, where he has dramatically escalated both U.S. drone and ground assassination, is weakening rather than strengthening long-term U.S. national security. Just as the Taliban is far stronger today after the U.S. has wasted $300 billion and thousands of American lives over the last 10 years, Petraeus's tactics are strengthening not weakening America's enemies over the long run. If he murders enough people in southern Afghanistan, the General may be able to claim some short-term successes there. But there is no serious question that his tactics are sowing a long-term whirlwind which not only threatens the stability of the Afghan and Pakistani governments, but pose a long-term threat to Americans at home.

    A U.N. map just published by the Wall Street Journal has revealed that the Taliban, using classic guerrilla tactics, has moved into northern and western Afghanistan as Petraeus has moved south, giving them control of more territory than ever. “Internal United Nations maps show a marked deterioration of the security situation in Afghanistan during this year's fighting season, countering the Obama administration's optimistic assessments of military progress since the surge of additional American forces began a year ago”, the Journal reported.

    The N.Y. Times has reported how various insurgent groups in Pakistan have responded to Petraeus's tactics by coordinating and cooperating for the first time, vastly increasing the threat they pose to the Pakistani state. It is also obvious that Petraeus cannot possible]y kill more "insurgents" than he is creating if he continues to provoke the 41 million Pashtuns on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border to want to fight America. The population of North and South Vietnam combined during the Vietnam war was only 31 million, after all, and provided a manpower pool large enough to outlast 500,000 Americans.

    In the end, however, the most profound questions for Americans raised by the Wikileaks documents go far beyond the Muslim world. If we can free our minds of a lifetime of official propaganda identifying the U.S. Executive with the American people, the evidence is overwhelming that in foreign and military policy the U.S. Executive Branch is an undemocratic institution that does not represent its own citizens. It operates largely independent of Congress, the Judiciary or a mass media which has largely become an arm of Executive power, broadcasting its lies far more often than it exposes them.

    A few months before President Obama's December 2009 decision to send 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, for example, only 24% of Americans wanted to send more and 43% wanted to decrease the number. Their wishes were ignored, as are the opinions of Americans today who, by a margin of 63 to 32, oppose U.S. war-making in Afghanistan. And, Bob Woodward’s Obama’s Wars revealed, even the President is largely a figurehead when it comes to Executive war-making. Woodward documents how the military thwarted Obama’s clear desire to begin a major pullout from Afghanistan in the summer of 2011. Last month, Obama was humiliated by being forced to endorse a hypothetical 2014 pullout date.

    Most Americans would agree with the statement in the Declaration of Independence that governments derive "their just powers from the consent of the governed." But the governed can only give their consent if they are informed as to what they are agreeing to. This is obvious in our daily life. I cannot be said to have "consented" to buy your laptop if you deceived me by not telling me it was broken. One of our most basic legal principles is that a contract is null and void if it was obtained under false pretenses. By revealing massive U.S. Executive deceit Wikileaks has thus revealed that it does not legitimately represent the American people.

    These Wikileaks documents thus raise the most fundamental question citizens can ask themselves: to what extent to citizens of a democracy owe their allegiance to autocratic leaders who obtain the consent of their citizens through massive duplicity? And to what extent can they trust either their judgement or their decency?

    Americans may find themselves increasingly pondering such questions in coming years, as economic decline and future terrorist attacks cause U.S. elites to bring home the authoritarian mindset that has caused so much damage abroad. It seems certain that American democracy will face greater challenges than at any time since the country's founding.

    But that is a long-term question. The key question now is whether Americans can hear the sound of suffering their leaders are causing abroad, as at this very moment innocent men, women and children are being murdered and maimed in what the Red Cross describes as the greatest civilian carnage since the Russians invaded 30 years ago.

    Julian Assange should be applauded not persecuted for hearing the sound of their suffering.

    Do we?
    Fred Branfman exposed the U.S. Executive's Secret Air War in Laos, which illegally and savagely murdered tens of thousands of innocent Laotian peasants. He has written frequently on Executive war-making for Alternet in recent years. See www.trulyalive.org for more information on his activities.

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Vladimir Putin 'to be targeted by EU sanctions'

    Post  lulldapull on Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:16 pm

    Well, these bastards wont stop sucking the zionist dick for lunch, specially this bitch from Estonia!

    Putin needs to stop sucking the zionist dick too....its getting pretty fukking pathetic that Russia tries to suck dick at every corner.....Rolling Eyes

    Vladimir Putin, the Russian prime minister, could be personally targeted by EU sanctions being drawn up to punish the Kremlin for the controversial conviction of Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

    Vladimir Putin: Senior Kremlin officials have dismissed the sanctions move as an unfair ploy to put pressure on Russia Photo: AP
    By Andrew Osborn, Moscow 3:21PM GMT 17 Jan 2011

    The sanctions, which are being considered by the European Parliament, would ban officials involved with the case from entering the EU and freeze any bank accounts they have inside the 27-nation bloc.

    At the end of last year, Mr Khodorkovsky, once Russia's richest man, was sentenced to a further six years in jail on top of an existing eight-year prison term that he has been serving out since 2003 on fraud charges many in the West believe are politically-motivated.

    Russian magazine The New Times reported on Monday that the list of officials being drawn up by the European Parliament in retaliation was likely to include Mr Putin, Igor Sechin, a deputy prime minister, as well as state investigators, prosecutors and judges.

    The sanctions are being pushed by Kristiina Ojuland, an Estonian MEP.

    "Europe will stop at nothing for human rights to be observed in Russia," she told the magazine.

    The European Parliament cannot introduce the sanctions on its own but has the power to vote through a detailed resolution recommending that member states implement the sanctions.

    Senior Kremlin officials have dismissed the sanctions move as an unfair ploy to put pressure on Russia, predicting it will come to nothing.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:32 am

    Russia is not part of the WTO so it is pretty much free to do what it likes regarding trade.

    I suspect any EU country trying to impose these EU sanctions will suffer sanctions in kind.

    Considering the economic situation the last thing any country needs is economic sanctions imposed on it.

    The huge irony is that the EU continuously accuses the Russians of using their energy monopoly as leverage in relations with the EU... perhaps they should be shown what the world would be like if Russia actually did that sort of thing... even if just for a year or so.

    Once that was over you wouldn't hear that argument again, or if you did you could suggest going back to those sorts of relations.

    NATO does it all the time... look at Kosovo, they appeared to promise a partnership with Russia in dealing with the issue and when Russia suggested to the Serbs that it was time to sign crap NATO stiffed Russia.

    I think Russia needs to realise that despite all their talk of morals and fair play the West is as dark and underhanded as any country in the Middle East or anywhere else for that matter.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:53 am

    I wonder why the EU is so fixated with Khodorkovsky (did you notice the guys name has Dork in the middle of it?) when countries that the US says are shining lights of democracy like Georgia are ignored?

    Read this:

    Georgia Accused of Human Rights Violations As 'Show Trial' Begins

    TBILISI, Georgia, Jan. 12, 2011 /PR Newswire/ -- Georgian authorities are proceeding with the trial of Israeli businessman Rony Fuchs, who has been held without bail in Tbilisi, the capital of the republic of Georgia, since Georgian authorities arrested him on October 14. Mr. Fuchs is little better than a hostage; he has been told he can only be released if he waives a $100 million arbitration award issued by an independent international arbitration panel in favor of Mr. Fuchs and his business partner and against Georgia, says Pinhas Rubin, a senior lawyer at Gornitzky & Co, the Israeli firm representing Mr. Fuchs and his family.
    Mr. Fuchs has been in prison since October when he was arrested in Georgia after being invited to the country by a letter from the Prime Minister. Georgian officials have charged Mr. Fuchs with bribery. His trial opened briefly last week and resumed yesterday (January 11, 2011). It is, says Rubin, no more than an attempt at state-sponsored extortion.
    Renowned human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson has signed an emergency Petition filed with the European Court of Human Rights which accuses Georgia of violating European human rights laws and seeks Mr. Fuchs's immediate release on bail. The petition demonstrates that Georgia's entrapment of Mr. Fuchs and the use of illegally obtained evidence deprives him of any hope of a fair trial. The petition asserts that, if Georgia is able to retaliate against successful claimants by setting out to trap them in trumped-up bribery schemes, others will be afraid to challenge Georgia for fear of suffering the same consequences.
    The entrapment and trial come as Georgia touts itself to international investors as the world's "Number One Reformer" and a safe haven for international investment. In fact, property protections are weak in the face of a legal system where 99.9 percent of all criminal defendants are convicted when tried in Georgia, according to statistics and analysis by independent and respected anti-corruption watchdog Transparency International.
    Mr. Fuchs, a prominent Israeli investor in major international projects, put funds into Georgia's energy infrastructure in the early 1990s. Those investments, it has been ruled, were unlawfully expropriated by the Georgian government in the mid-1990s. On March 3, 2010, Mr. Fuchs and his business partner Yannis Kardassopoulos won a major case from the an arbitration panel appointed under the auspices of the World Bank, and are now due over $100 million from the government of Georgia.
    After Georgia sought to annul the award, Georgian officials asked Mr. Fuchs to engage in in-person "settlement talks" for the supposed purpose of agreeing to discounted terms on which Georgia would drop the annulment proceedings and pay the award. The talks were a ruse arranged by Georgia for the sole purpose of secretly and illegally recording conversations with Mr. Fuchs, in which Georgian officials pressed Mr. Fuchs to pay back a portion of his funds to senior Georgian officials to speed the Georgian government's payment.
    Georgian officials set-up and covertly recorded a meeting with Mr. Fuchs in Turkey, prepared a secret arrest warrant against Mr. Fuchs and his business partner, and invited him, members of his family, his lawyers, and business colleagues to travel to Batumi, Georgia on October 14 to sign settlement papers and speak to the press about investing in Georgia. Before any signing ceremony took place, Georgian authorities secretly taped Mr. Fuchs, seized him while his lawyers waited in another room, charged him on previously prepared charges of bribery, threw him in jail, and refused him bail. Immediately after his arrest, they communicated an offer to the Israeli ambassador that Mr. Fuchs would be freed from jail as soon as he agreed to give up his own rights -- and the rights of third parties not involved in the Georgian sting operation -- to the arbitration award.
    Mr. Fuchs adamantly denies the charges, and his supporters characterize the case as classic Soviet-style abuse by law enforcement authorities in violation of international legal standards and Georgia's obligations under applicable European legal conventions.
    Despite substantial multi-year assistance programs from the United States and the European Union to strengthen rule of law in the country, Georgia's human rights record remains weak. Last year, Freedom House found Georgia's judiciary "continues to suffer from significant corruption and pressure from the executive branch," and "the payment of bribes to judges is reportedly common." In its most recent report on human rights in Georgia, the U.S. Department of State found Georgia suffers from a wide range of abuses, including "politically motivated kidnappings and assaults, poor prison conditions, abuse of prisoners, including juveniles, arbitrary arrest and detention, politically motivated imprisonment, excessive use of force to disperse demonstrations, pressure that appeared politically motivated on owners of property, lack of due process, government pressure on the judiciary, and senior-level corruption in the government."

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Republ...41085.html?x=0

    Imagine if Russia ever tried this sort of thing!!!

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russia angered by speech of suspected militant in top U.S. university

    Post  GarryB on Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:21 am

    Russia angered by speech of suspected militant in top U.S. university

    Russia is outraged after a top U.S. university invited a suspected
    Russian militant, who is on an international wanted list, as a guest
    speaker for a panel discussion, a spokesman for the Russian Foreign
    Ministry, Alexander Lukashevich, said on Thursday.
    Ilyas Akhmadov, who according to Russia served as an aide for
    notorious Chechen terrorist Shamil Basayev, participated on Monday in
    the Crisis in the North Caucasus: Any Way Out? panel discussion at the
    John Hopkins University in Maryland.
    "We are bewildered and outraged that the well-known John Hopkins
    University gave the floor to a former militant, who served as an aide
    for the international terrorist Basayev. Moreover, we are talking about a
    criminal who is on the international wanted list. Unfortunately, this
    person is still registered in the United States as a refugee,"
    Lukashevich said.
    Basayev, who was behind some of the most gruesome terrorist attacks
    on Russian soil, including the September 2004 Beslan school siege, was
    killed by federal troops in July 2006.
    Such events, he said, as at the John Hopkins University "play into the hands of terrorists and their allies."
    The diplomat also called on the United States to remove its
    objections in regard to Russia's proposal to include its suspected
    militant Doku Umarov on the UN Security Council list of the most dangerous wanted terrorists.
    Russia submitted this proposal last November with the UN Security
    Council commission 1267, which deals with sanctions against the Taliban
    movement, al-Qaeda and other organizations linked to them. Russia claims
    that Umarov and his movement, the Caucasus Emirate, are closely linked
    to al-Qaeda.
    "Russia's arguments and evidence submitted with the 1267 committee
    have conclusively proven that Umarov and his so-called Caucasus Emirate
    are closely linked with al-Qaeda and the Taliban movement. However, the
    committee decided to stay its decision on our application after the
    United States objected," Lukashevich said.
    The United States claims that Russia provided insufficient proof that
    Umarov and his movement were linked to Al-Qaeda, he said, adding
    however that last year the U.S. Department of State included Umarov in
    the national list of the most dangerous international terrorists.
    MOSCOW, February 17 (RIA Novosti)

    http://en.rian.ru/world/20110217/162652199.html

    The US asks for Russian support in the war on terror and does this sort of thing?

    Funny... does the US obey the international laws of political asylum all the time?

    How did Victor Bout get to US Soil?

    They will put kids under the age of 16 in Guantanimo for years but will protect someone who assisted in the planning of the attack in Beslan that killed how many children?

    If America was a democracy and was really over the cold war these sort of guys would be treated like the trash they are, but the cold war is only over when NATO needs to expand east, or it is time to sign some arms agreement.

    Clearly Russia needs to follow Americas lead and try some extraordinary rendition of their own... or better still some wet ops.

    Top US university my @$$ I am surprised they don't have a Fox News affiliation badge on their website.

    Serbia Forever 2
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 20
    Points : 30
    Join date : 2009-12-09
    Age : 23
    Location : God-forsken place

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Serbia Forever 2 on Sat Feb 26, 2011 7:35 pm

    This sickens me. America's war on terror isn't really a war on terror since it just picks the groups that are against American interest. I don't really see why the Russian government would support America on Afghanistan, e.g. allow NATO to use Russian territory to send supplies to Afghanistan, when they do stuff like this and it wasn't too long ago American weapons were used to kill Soviet troops in Afghanistan. I guess maybe Russia thinks helping NATO in Afghanistan will make them tackle the drug problem in Afghanistan that effects Russia to this day?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:06 am

    Most countries will do what is in their own interests... it is just that they don't call themselves the worlds policeman, or leader of the free world, or worlds greatest democracy.
    It doesn't bother me how they act... they are very predictable... but the preaching to others about right and wrong and pretending everything they do is for the good of the world gets annoying.

    Pervius
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 259
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2011-03-08

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Pervius on Fri Jul 29, 2011 10:05 pm

    The United States is NOT a Democracy. It's a Republic.

    The Electoral College picks the President, not the people.

    Almost all US Presidents have been found to be related, a royal bloodline.


    Not even America's Union workers can pick their Union Stewards...the Union President has "Executive Powers" to pick who they want to be their Union Stewards.


    US President given authority to kill Americans without a trial.
    Patriot Act ended US rights.

    United States is NOT a Democracy. Never has been. When Russia put its entire Atlantic and Pacific Naval Fleets in American ports to support the North....it ended the Confederates attempt to have a Democracy during the US Civil War.

    RUSSIA helped keep America from becoming a Democracy. Study your history.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:48 am

    RUSSIA helped keep America from becoming a Democracy. Study your history.

    Why should it?

    It wasn't a democracy then either.

    mike3121
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 3
    Points : 7
    Join date : 2010-01-14

    New Guy Here please note: Russian tanker to carry fuel to Nome

    Post  mike3121 on Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:09 am

    This was an interesting article about how a Russian oil freighter will deliver much needed fuel to Nome Alaska. Because of bad weather Nome never received their fuel to ride out the severe winter. A Russian ship will come to the rescue and deliver the fuel. You should all read the favorable and nice comments people have made at the bottom of the article thanking Russia for this.

    I tend to like Russian military equipment. Someday I'd like to get a restored GAZ 69, they look sharp.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 06, 2011 5:21 am

    You forgot to post a link to the story... Smile

    Also it is a forum rule that you introduce yourself before posting so everyone knows who you are.

    If you look on the Home page, in the "Welcome to the Russian Military Forum" section there is a forum for "Member Introductions and Rules".

    Please create a new thread in that forum and introduce yourself and perhaps tell us a bit about yourself.

    You don't need to delete any existing posts to make this new post your first, though it might be a good idea to give the rules a quick read.

    I would say welcome to the forum here, but then what will I say on your new thread in the Member introductions and Rules section... Smile

    I must say your first post reminds me of a situation a few years back when a large pod of whales just off the coast of Alaska or the US got trapped in the ice. The sea froze around them and they had a small hole in the ice to breath, but it was hundreds of miles to the open sea... even if they got the direction perfect they couldn't make it, so a couple of Russian nuclear powered icebreakers went and helped out... it is sad that such stories of cooperation are not the focus of the media in both countries instead of stories of confrontation or hard headedness on one side or the other.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/27/us/path-cleared-in-ice-whales-swim-free.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

    TheRealist
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 79
    Points : 113
    Join date : 2012-08-20

    USAID mission in Russia to close following Moscow decision

    Post  TheRealist on Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:26 am

    USAID mission in Russia to close following Moscow decision
    By Arshad Mohammed

    WASHINGTON, Sept 18 (Reuters) - The U.S. government said on Tuesday that it would shut its aid mission in Russia at Moscow's insistence, a step analysts attributed to Russian misgivings about foreign-funded pro-democracy groups.

    The U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, has spent more than $2.6 billion in Russia over the past two decades to help combat infectious diseases, protect the environment, develop a stronger civil society, and modernize the economy.

    While President Barack Obama came into office seeking a "reset" in relations with Russia that bore some fruit, including a 2010 arms-control treaty, the two nations disagree on issues from Syria and Iran to U.S. missile defense and the Arab Spring.

    In announcing the decision to close down the USAID operation in Russia, the State Department suggested the Russian government - which is earning high levels of oil revenues - felt that it should no longer be the recipient of such foreign aid.

    Analysts also suggested a political motive: reducing foreign support for Russian groups that promote democracy and the rule of law but that are viewed with deep suspicion by the Kremlin.

    Vladimir Putin, who served eight years as Russia's president until 2008 and then four years as prime minister until May, took office this year for a third term as president following an election that sparked protests against his rule.

    "Russian authorities have made clear for the better part of a decade that they see Russia as a great power and a provider of assistance, not a recipient," said Matthew Rojansky of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    "Add to that tension over the pre- and post-election protests, which the Kremlin alleges were orchestrated by U.S.-funded NGOs (non-governmental organizations), plus the deep disagreement over U.S. democracy-promotion activities in the Middle East, and you can see why Russia may have taken this decision now," he added.

    In announcing the decision, the State Department said USAID will continue to try to promote democracy and civil society despite no longer having an office in Russia.

    "The United States recently received the Russian government's decision to end USAID activities in the Russian Federation," department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said in a written statement. She later told reporters that Russia had informed the United States of its decision last Wednesday.

    "While USAID's physical presence in Russia will come to an end, we remain committed to supporting democracy, human rights, and the development of a more robust civil society in Russia and look forward to continuing our cooperation with Russian non-governmental organizations," Nuland added.

    Steven Pifer, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine who is now at the Brookings Institution think tank, said he believed the decision reflected some reluctance by the Russian government to see foreign support for pro-democracy efforts in the country.

    "They see AID's efforts in Russia as being a prime funder of the NGOs that are concerned about their elections and concerned about the regression of democracy in Russia," Pifer said.

    He said the Russian government may also be "trying to make it more difficult" for the outside world to support pro-democracy NGOs in Russia.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/18/usa-russia-aid-idUSL1E8KICUD20120918

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5629
    Points : 6282
    Join date : 2009-08-26
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Viktor on Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:22 pm

    2.6 billion $ in 20 years. There is serious money in it.

    USAID budget for 2012 war around 50min but I guess in election years is grown by at least ten times.

    It was about time.

    SOC
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 595
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 38
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  SOC on Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:20 am

    Well, good for Russia for getting them out if they weren't wanted. And yeah, I'll say it, good on USAID for doing what the Russians are telling them to.

    TheRealist
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 79
    Points : 113
    Join date : 2012-08-20

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  TheRealist on Thu Sep 20, 2012 5:28 am

    I would like to congratulate the Russian Federation for these positive and effective action, I just hope my nation will do the same in the future.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 5:30 pm


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 05, 2016 5:30 pm