A Trial of Spiritual Resolve: Sergey Lavrov’s Speech to the Military Academy of the General Staff

Uncle Volodya says, “Hence that general is skilful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skilful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack..”

“Regimes planted by bayonets do not take root… Our military strength is a prerequisite to peace, but let it be clear we maintain this strength in the hope it will never be used, for the ultimate determinant in the struggle that’s now going on in the world will not be bombs and rockets but a test of wills and ideas, a trial of spiritual resolve, the values we hold, the beliefs we cherish, the ideals to which we are dedicated.”

Ronald Reagan, The Quest for Peace, the Cause of Freedom

Ronald Reagan was at the same time one of American history’s most polarizing and most iconic presidents.  Even his enemies would have to concede he was a hell of a public speaker, and although it was questionable in retrospect how much of what he said he actually understood, he had that “This just makes sense” delivery that caused listeners to cheerfully abandon doubt.

And that would be unwise, because Ronald Reagan loved to use American military power, never mind his blarney about we-hope-we’ll-never-have-to-use-it. He bombed Libya because Gaddafi had the temerity to declare Libyan sovereign territory off-limits and because he was publicly anti-Israel, and Reagan drove American policy vis-a-vis Russia to rollback rather than detente. All that notwithstanding, his quote above might have been written for Russia today, and the crossroads at which it stands.

Truly, Russia has had its resolve tested; spiritual, economic, moral and strategic. Sergey Lavrov has been the Russian Federation’s Foreign Minister since 2004, when he was appointed to the post by Putin. Since that time, he has been the point man for Russian international relations, mostly at the direction and behest of Putin. He must live a pretty upright and above-reproach life, because you never see stories such as “Foreign Minister Lavrov falls off metro train in a drunken stupor”, or “Madcap Sergey Lavrov chases hooker through Manhattan streets, dressed only in his underpants”. And if there was a way to rub his nose in the dirt, you know the western media would do it. Because that’s the way it rolls.

Recently Lavrov delivered a speech to the Senior Officers of the Military Academy of the General Staff in Moscow.  Generally speaking, it reflected Russia’s growing confidence on the world stage despite western attempts to miscast it as a demonic pariah. A signature theme was Russia’s determination to hew to the rule of international law despite its declared opponents’ lip service to the concept, as the west continues to use international law as a flag of convenience.

Mr. Lavrov’s speech is reviewed here by our Aussie colleague, Jennifer Hor – who, it should escape nobody’s notice, might have made quite a Foreign Minister herself. Jen?

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s Speech to Senior Officers of the Military Academy of General Staff, Moscow (23 March 2017)

On 23 March 2017, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov gave a speech to senior officers of the Military Academy of General Staff in Moscow. Lavrov chose to focus on Russia’s role in international politics – a not surprising choice, given his position as foreign minister for such a large and varied nation as Russia is. The entire speech is not long – less than 20 minutes – but it is worth examining as it summarises how Russia has come to have the role it has and how its role fits into the new global political order of the early 21st century.

First Lavrov lays out the very specific and essential values and principles that support and influence the role the Russian state plays in international politics. One factor gives Russia a very solid foundation that most other countries can only dream about: sheer physical size that gives the country a variety of physical environments and climates, abundant natural resources and a unique location straddling and uniting both Europe and Asia. This factor is a result of Russia’s expansion across Siberia and central Asia over the centuries, resulting in many different peoples and cultures residing together, suffering together and working together to build the nation. Such experience gives Russia a unique point of view and paradigm that enable it to encourage dialogue among different nations and to form partnerships among nations, civilisations and religions in which all are considered equal.

Given Russia’s history of different peoples, faiths and societies sharing the same space under one government, we should not be surprised that Lavrov emphasises public respect for the state that encompasses all these peoples and provides them with security, stability and a share in the collective wealth they create. This respect enables the state to be strong enough to pursue domestic and foreign policies beholden to no other country. In other words, respect for and trust in a strong government go hand in hand with a secure economy (financial and productive), a cohesive if not homogeneous national culture encompassing a rich history and traditions, and the state’s ability to safeguard all of these and other elements that help to provide and enforce stability. These factors together provide what might be called “soft power” that Russia can project and model to other nations.

From here, Lavrov discusses Russia’s role in international politics, in particular the country’s role as an economic and political centre to which other countries are drawn. He notes the improvement in Russia’s military capabilities and the nation’s determination to use military power in strict compliance with its own laws and with international laws to defend its own interests and to assist other nations that call on it for help. In this, Lavrov cannot help but notice that other major nations use their military to pursue agendas that violate their own laws and international laws, and that infringe on other countries’ sovereignty and overthrow their governments with the intent to occupy their lands and drain them of their resources while the true owners are displaced, forced to serve their occupiers and to live in poverty or are scattered around the planet.

Lavrov sets considerable importance by historical traditions and trends in helping to determine Russia’s role in world politics since the nation became a major European power under Tsar Peter I (1696 – 1725) after defeating Sweden in the Great Northern War in 1721. He observes that efforts on by other countries to shut out and deny Russia (or the Soviet Union) as a major power have ended badly: one might ask Napoleon I or Adolf Hitler for an opinion in this regard. Nevertheless even today Europe and the United States through the EU and NATO have sought to demonise the country and its leaders by painting Russia as a poor, developing (or deteriorating) nation or making false accusations such as invading Ukraine, forcing people in Crimea to vote for “annexation”, helping to shoot down a civilian passenger jet over Ukrainian territory or infiltrating and hacking other countries’ electronic databases for the purpose of throwing elections. In particular Russian President Vladimir Putin is portrayed as an authoritarian and corrupt despot who salts away large sums of money into offshore investment funds owned by personal associates or in expensive palaces and vineyards.

Surveying the world as it is, Lavrov sees that power is definitely shifting away from the North Atlantic region (the US and western Europe) towards the Asia-Pacific region (in particular China) and Eurasia. In addition Latin America and Africa are taking on more importance as regional power blocs in their own right. A multi-polar world that is not dominated by any one nation or power bloc is inevitable. In such a world, a nation that considers itself exceptional, not bound by the lessons of history, and believes it can force its interpretation of democracy (as a cover for its real agenda) onto others will end up bringing instability, chaos and extreme violence instead. In the long term, that nation will also become weak and become unstable. The changes that are bringing about a multi-headed international order demand that countries work together and cooperate in a spirit of mutual respect and equality, and not to compete against one another.

In this, Russia can set an example by pursuing a pragmatic and consistent foreign policy based on its experience and history as a nation of different peoples and cultures living and working together in diverse environments to achieve common goals in relationships of cooperation and mutual respect.

Lavrov’s speech is significant inasmuch as it supports speeches and interviews given by Vladimir Putin that also stress mutual respect among nations and cooperation based on common interests or desires to solve common problems. The speech also demonstrates very clearly that Russia is aware that its approach and foreign policy, even its very existence, are perceived as threats by the United States and its allies in Europe and elsewhere. Russia is aware that the Americans are following an agenda inimical to Russian interests and to global peace and security. Pressure is on Russia then to pursue its interests and to try to uphold international laws and conventions in ways that don’t ratchet up global tensions and give the US an excuse or an outlet to cause war or create the conditions for them. Surprisingly this is not difficult for Russia to do, given that what currently passes for political leadership in the West is mediocre at best.

After the speech Lavrov took questions from his audience on issues such as global media / information and Internet governance (with respect to cyber-security, combating hacking and dealing with propaganda and false media narratives), rescuing and returning Russian prisoners of war in Syria, limiting strategic arms (nuclear and conventional), the use by the United States of staged and managed chaos across North Africa and western Asia, the split between globalist politicians acting on behalf of transnational corporations and “populist” or “nationalist” politicians claiming to represent the voice of their publics, the changing nature of war to include non-violent means of waging war (through control of the Internet and media, for example), and Russia’s interests in the Balkans. The questions show the audience’s concerns and depth of knowledge about what it considers to be the key issues facing Russia in its neighbourhood. Lavrov’s replies reveal a sharp intellect at work, tremendous historical and geopolitical knowledge and a keen interest in contemporary global affairs.

The speech and the Q&A session that follows can be viewed at The Saker. An English-language transcript follows.

This entry was posted in Economy, Education, Government, Law and Order, Middle East, Military, Politics, Rule of Law, Russia, Strategy, Trade, Western Europe and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1,780 Responses to A Trial of Spiritual Resolve: Sergey Lavrov’s Speech to the Military Academy of the General Staff

  1. Pavlo Svolochenko says:


    Claims that Baghdadi was captured in joint Syrian-Russian operation near the Iraqi border.

    We’ll see.

  2. Warren says:

    Published on 18 Sep 2013
    Original newsreel from 11/1941 with intense battle footage from the eastern front

  3. Warren says:

    Published on 25 Apr 2014
    This documentary film is about what life was like in Russia in the 1980’s near the cities of Luhansk and Moscow.

  4. Lyttenburgh says:

    From the previous page:

    “Ummmm…Mr. Lyttenburgh
    What the fuck is wrong with you ????…I’m not asserting that those allegations are true….I would NOT have thought that something like that would have occurred..I’m like “WTF..They did??””

    Yes you did. On the previous page you wrote:

    “Interesting how some survivors of the siege were treated by their fellow Russians -under Stalin- after the siege was broken…..”

    You later claimed to read the book and, apparently, believed what’s written therein. If you DID NOT read the book or you DID NOT believe the claims within, why did you took an extra effort to clarify what you meant by “how some survivors of the siege were treated by their fellow Russians” with this, posted by you on that very page – just a short distance above?

    “THAT is what I referenced in my coment about how some siege survivors were (mis)treated”

    Are you having trouble communicating coherently NS, or are you contradicting yourself now, trying to present it as if “you always knew this not to be true”, yet earlier you were posting and reposting the excerpts of the articles dealing with that without any shred of doubt or attempt of analysis? Do you take other new information you encounter at the face value as well – or you do possess the ability of doubt, of deduction and thought after all? This will be a good place to tell us a bit about yourself. You see, NS, over years we came to know each other, our backgrounds, education, facts of the bio – what makes us “tick”. Can’t recall a thing about you.

    I have to repeat after Jen – NS, what was the point of your original comment that set off this particular comment thread? IMO, you are employing a troll-baiting tactic here. “Dangling” this or that “bait”, reinforce the “taste” with the “juiciest” quotes, feign a concern with your “oh, gosh darn – how horrible these things!”, but at the slightest rebuke you hide in the bushes and try to deflect it all with your “well, that’s not me, actually – that’s them! Honestly, guven’r”

    Probably, that’s all you style, NS. Multiple exclamation/question marks. Constant use of […] which turns any sentence into a fractured mess. Lack of stylistics. These things – at least, for me – make most of your posts unreadable.

    P.S. You didn’t answer one key question though – did you read the book?

    • Northern Star says:

      “Interesting how some survivors of the siege were treated by their fellow Russians -under Stalin- after the siege was broken…..”

      OK Lyttenburg..I should have written ….”were ALLEGEDLY treated”
      Happy now?

      “apparently, believed what’s written therein. ”
      I put the book on the table for discussion….you don’t know what the fuck I believe…
      don’t try to put words in my mouth….at this point you may wish to zip your full of speculations and non sequitur nonsense trap… at least as far as I’m concerned..

      “”you always knew this not to be true”
      Once again I claimed neither truth nor falsity the different allegations….

      “This will be a good place to tell us a bit about yourself. You see, NS, over years we came to know each other, our backgrounds, education, facts of the bio – what makes us “tick”. Can’t recall a thing about you.”

      I don’t give a shit about your personal data or life….nor should you about me.
      Some appreciate and respect my posts..some don’t……C’Est la Vie!!!!

      However I will say that I have never spouted off a fusillade of shitass ad hominems-apparently the best you got- to someone here with whom I disagree whilst claiming to speak on behalf of “us”…

      Frankly you come off to me-at this point-as a fuckin’ moron…a Captain Queeg who wants to have me manacled to a table under a spotlight asking me
      “where are the fuckin’ strawberries??”

      • Northern Star says:

        .”PS. You didn’t answer one key question though – did you read the book?”

        According to you Lyttenburg the author is a POS and you re not going to read the book…

        Wunderbar!!!! Don’t read it…..!!!

        However given that….your query about my reading the book has a bit of a dumb shit flavor to it…..After all, you have already shrieked ,ranted ,raved and whined about how I uncritically accepted as true the statements in the book… .so only a silly motherfucker could think i had not read it.!!!! Right???

        “Probably, that’s all you style, NS. Multiple exclamation/question marks. Constant use of […] which turns any sentence into a fractured mess. Lack of stylistics. These things – at least, for me – make most of your posts unreadable.”

        Grammar Nazi…..the first-and only- defense of the intellectual schweihund when confronted with a vastly superor and cultured intellect.

        However your main shortcoming is your lack of a sense of humor but brim with self importance
        Which make you the flip side of fascist motherfuckers in the West..ANYTHING one says that rubs them the wrong way….can and will be used against one…forever…

        I suggest you and I part ways on Mark’s blog on this note: on this note

        • Lyttenburgh says:

          “However given that….your query about my reading the book has a bit of a dumb shit flavor to it…..After all, you have already shrieked ,ranted ,raved and whined about how I uncritically accepted as true the statements in the book… .so only a silly motherfucker could think i had not read it.!!!! Right???”

          This is not an answer. Have you read the book – “Yes” or “No”?

          “Grammar Nazi…..the first-and only- defense of the intellectual schweihund when confronted with a vastly superor and cultured intellect. “

          No, Grammar Nazi deals with – wait for it! – grammar. I’m talking about style. Your senteces might be perfect in the grammar sence and yet – have you seen and compared how you write your comments and how everyone else writes them here? Noticed any differences, some traits that are present more in your messages than in others? Have you? I mean, you write things like:

          “Wunderbar!!!! Don’t read it…..!!! “

          Multiple exclamation marks, absolutely unnecesarry multiple suspension points (often in excess of 3). What is this? A sign that you possess “a vastly superor and cultured intellect or of something else entirely?

          “However your main shortcoming is your lack of a sense of humor but brim with self importance”

          Dear fellow commenters! Your honest opinion – do I lack a sense of humor?

          “Which make you the flip side of fascist motherfuckers in the West..ANYTHING one says that rubs them the wrong way….can and will be used against one…forever…”

          I have to ask you a question – honestly, do you even know what the word “fascist” means?

          • Northern Star says:


            “I have to ask you a question”

            No..you don’t….you’re just incontinent with childish horseshit!! LOL!!

            Go Away…!

      • Lyttenburgh says:

        NS, I’d really appreciate if you, for a moment, would stop wriggling like a still living eel on a frying pan, and answer my questions. Because you didn’t do that.

        I’m not going to do with what you “thought” – I’m not a psychic, so I have to do with your words that you wrote. Should I re-quote you again, how you spent not inconsiderable time 2 pages back defending this point, by providing excerpts from the reviews and synopsis of the book? If you didn’t believe the word of it – why did you persisted? Is this your usual modus operandi?

        “I put the book on the table for discussion….you don’t know what the fuck I believe…”

        So you admit of trolling and baiting. Good.

        “don’t try to put words in my mouth….at this point you may wish to zip your full of speculations and non sequitur nonsense trap… at least as far as I’m concerned..”

        That’s not for you to decide. You can always start your own blog where it would be you who determines whether someone “zips” one’s “nonsense trap”. But not here.

        “Once again I claimed neither truth nor falsity the different allegations….”

        Yes, you did. Stop wriggling. You are a human – not an eel. You wrote:

        “Interesting how some survivors of the siege were treated by their fellow Russians -under Stalin- after the siege was broken…..”

        Then you spent time and effort by providing quotes and links to the articles which would support this claim. Question – if you didn’t believe this why did you dedicate so much effort to defend this position?

        “However I will say that I have never spouted off a fusillade of shitass ad hominems-apparently the best you got- to someone here with whom I disagree whilst claiming to speak on behalf of “us”…”

        Where did I claim to “speak on behalf of” anyone but myself?

        “Frankly you come off to me-at this point-as a fuckin’ moron…a Captain Queeg who wants to have me manacled to a table under a spotlight asking me
        “where are the fuckin’ strawberries??””

        Study of history is a lot like being a detective, I tell you. Requires similar approach and similar methods – interview the witnesses, study the body, do tests on the evidence in the lab, compile and analyze what you gather and draw a conclusion. That kind of mind I have.

        When you are investigating a serial murder and a local junkie turns himself in, confesses of the crime – and then fails to describe correctly victims, the places where they were murdered or the murder weapon, you should not take his words seriously. And after a search of his person and car when you find some ‘shrooms and stuff, you should just kick the idiot out, but not before plastering him with the “obstruction of justice” and “possession of the illegal staff”.

        You, NS, made a claim – do not deny it. And, yes, you were under a spotlight for that.

        • Northern Star says:

          “So you admiSo you admit of trolling and baiting. ”

          No…. little cunt that’s YOUr specios allegation…..and by continuing to fuck with me it is YOU who ar trolling and baiting…..

          “That’s not for you to decide. ”

          That applies to you also…my little cunt!!!!

          “Where did I claim to “speak on behalf of” anyone but myself?”

          C’mon cunt..you have repeatedly referenced other people on this blog in your posts to me. Typical cunt……start something you can’t finish without running to your posse for help!!!

          “That kind of mind I have.”
          Ummm..I think you meant “I have that kind of mind”….LOL!!!

          “You, NS, made a claim – do not deny it. And, yes, you were under a spotlight for that.
          And, yes, you were under a spotlight for that.”

          Cunt..(sigh of exasperation)..it’s a simple concept..to wit: What cunt stooge
          (AKA Lyttenburgh) says about NS….. don’t -make- it -so !!!!

          Your legend crusade against me is indeed a legend..in your little cunt mind!!


          • Lyttenburgh says:

            “No…. little cunt that’s YOUr specios allegation…..and by continuing to fuck with me it is YOU who ar trolling and baiting…..”

            First of all – you even failed to quote me correctly. An easy task, that requires just copy+paste is, apparently, above your abilities.


            – I’m not little

            – I’m not cunt.

            – I’m not fucking with you – that’s impossible and verges on perversion, no matter how much you desires that. Go, and satisfy your inner urges in some other, preferable safe and legal fashion.

            Third – just for you knowledge, defitionion of term “”trolling”:


            a: to antagonize (others) online by deliberately posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content

            … trolls engage in the most outrageous and offensive behaviors possible — all the better to troll you with. — Whitney Phillips

            b : to act as a troll on (a forum, site, etc.)

            … is also notorious, for trolling message boards on the Internet, posting offensive material he himself has written and then suing anyone who responds in agreement. — Mark Hemingway

            “That applies to you also…my little cunt!!!!”

            I can’t be “yours” neither legally, nor by the ties of blood. Looks like you are talking to something – little, I presume, of yours. Does it talk back?

            I know that this applies to me also. But it is you, who wants to shut other people. Me? I’d rather see you keep talking. It’s hilarious.

            “C’mon cunt..you have repeatedly referenced other people on this blog in your posts to me.

            So you can’t provide an actual quote, do you? And where I’m “repeatedly” referencing other people than you? If it’s so often, surely, you can find it.

            “Typical cunt……start something you can’t finish without running to your posse for help!!!””

            I’m not running to anyone. There is only me here talking with you, NS. And yet, even this is too much for such a precious snowflake like you, right? Otherwise, why would you screech and shout “Go Away…!” (c)? Otherwise why would you tell me to “zip” it? Here is just me, and you are already hysterical.

            “Your legend crusade against me is indeed a legend..in your little cunt mind!!


            DEUS is not VULT on this particular issue. So – nope, this is not a crusade. This is just talk. A talk, that cause you to erupt like a fountain of excrement’s from one side and burst in flame with power enough to take you to the stratosphere from another. Shows just how little do one needs to… trigger you.

            • Northern Star says:

              “So you admit of trolling and baiting. Good.”
              “No…. little cunt that’s YOUR specious allegation…..and by continuing to fuck with me it is YOU who are trolling and baiting…..” (OK??) LOL!!!

              “a: to antagonize (others) online by deliberately posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content

              … trolls engage in the most outrageous and offensive behaviors possible — all the better to troll you with. — Whitney Phillips”

              If I come off as the above to YOU cunt….so what!!!!!

              “– I’m not little

              – I’m not cunt.”

              . “But it is you, who wants to shut other people. ”

              Nope….you are….perhaps not literally…but the essence of you is that of a little putrescent simple mind cunt…IMO!!!

              “Here is just me, and you are already hysterical.”

              According to you C..according to you…

              • Northern Star says:

                “But it is you, who wants to shut**other people**. ”

                NO..You are the only POS that I have had a problem with…and there you go again..draggin’ in other people (stooges)…..

                BTW…you wanted other posters to validate that you have a sense of humor..

                Ummm..I didn’t see any takers…You are apparently not a particularly amusing shitass….
                -or little cunt if you prefer…

                The irony is that you are- in a way- amusing….a little cunt in Mordor talking shit about people and lands that you have (probably) never visited much less lived .

                For example did you go fight the nazi Ukraine battalions in DonBass little cunt????
                Ha..Ha..I’m not a real Slavic warrior says LYT…I just run my cunt trap on blogs that eventually ban me !! (see below)

                You talk a lot of shit about America…has your cunt ass ever been here.?? The UK??
                Yes **I** do indeed talk a lot of shit about “murica…but I live here cunt…see the difference??

                Hmmm..I dunno cunt..is it somewhere in Mordor (Russia) from which you post…or maybe Langley Virginia…or MI6 headquarters in London..or GCHQ?

                Going after ‘Murican La-la land TV…??
                You simple motherfucker..talk about going after low hanging fruit!! LOL!!!
                That ‘Murica has devolved into a cultural shithole wrt all cultures and peoples….Well Yeeeaaah….


                • yalensis says:

                  Dear Northern Star:
                  You are getting out of hand here, calling people cunts. And yes, I can validate that Lyt has a sense of humor. Please stop calling him a cunt. You two gentlemen can debate like gentlemen.
                  You have to realize that when you raise issues like Leningrad siege, you are poking a hornet’s nest. You can express your own opinions on the siege, but you must be prepared for strong feelings and polemics in return.
                  And no more calling names, PLEASE!!!!

                • kirill says:


                  Sod off you self-anointed thread police wanker!

                • yalensis says:

                  No, YOU sod off, you insane emigre.
                  I’m not patrolling the thread, I’m defending my friend, Lyttenburgh, when “Stooges” were polled on whether or not he had a sense of humor.
                  Which YOU obviously don’t have yourself, but then you’re clearly an angry old sod.

            • Lyttenburgh says:

              “If I come off as the above to YOU cunt….so what!!!!!”

              This coupled with your earlier admission of trolling is everything I need. Thank you, NS. Oh, and one more thing:

              “Multiple exclamation marks… are a sure sign of a diseased mind”

              “Five exclamation marks, the sure sign of an insane mind”

              “And all those exclamation marks, you notice? Five? A sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head”

              Sir Terrance Pratchett

              “Nope….you are….perhaps not literally…but”

              Even made-up Chavs are better than you at that, NS

              “According to you C..according to you…”

              Says a person resorting to multiple exclamation marks and big letters at the drop of the hat.

          • marknesop says:

            All right, I have to draw a line here – the cunt word is off the table permanently. I realize we’re all adults here, but I don’t care for that word and never have, and there is no excess of temper which calls for its use. You both are just getting carried away with this argument. My position remains that somebody should throw himself/herself on his/her sword, and read the book, and perhaps review it at JT’s site in accordance with her guidelines. We could pick up the debate there. It is perfectly clear that nobody who is discussing it has actually read it, and while we can extrapolate from the western fondness for smearing Russian institutions with shit, we simply do not know upon what Ms. Peri is basing her assumptions. There’s no need to get all foamy about it, or confrontational or any of that. There is more than one reference which substantiates a western insistence that Leningrad’s wartime leaders were executed by the Soviet state, and plenty of references which label Stalin an evil killer beast alternating with an incompetent dunce as wartime leader, which is almost unprecedented for somebody who won in a global culture that says the victors get to write the history. And the cherry on the top is that you don’t even have to prove these events never happened – in fact, you can’t, because the west has already laid down a carpet of “Soviet revisionism”. Yes, the Soviets removed all evidence that these accusations are absolutely true, so that when they deny it and point to the history books, they’re liars using lying references. Simples.

            If you must throw things at one another, let it be references; do some research and argue your positions like gentlemen.

      • marknesop says:

        All right – am I going to have to turn the fire hose on the two of you?

        You are both wrong to some extent. Lyttenburgh is assuming a personal criticism where I see no sign of one, and Northern Star certainly implied agreement with the author’s allegation that some Russian citizens of Leningrad were badly treated by Soviet authorities after the war was over. This likely stems from the bland statement that Leningrad’s ‘wartime leaders’ were executed.

        On this, Lyttenburgh’s explanation makes sense; there was little opportunity to mete out justice until after the immediate military threat was beaten back. After that, there were accusations, and the crime and punishment process. Some citizens were found guilty of looting, punishable by death in wartime. Some had resorted to cannibalism – I read an anecdote in “The 900 Days; The Siege of Leningrad” about a man who was selling a pair of women’s shoes in the street. He had just the one, as a sample, the story went; if you wanted the pair, you would have to accompany him home to get the other, because he was afraid he would be knocked down and have them stolen if he had both with him. The prospective buyer and teller of the tale accompanied him, but fled when he glimpsed several naked human corpses hanging on hooks in an adjacent room. There is no way to know if this was true or not, as it was a story told to the author and not an historical record.

        By the way, Harrison Salisbury (author of “The 900 Days”) was a journalist for The New York Times, and not an historian. his research material is said in reviews to have come from ‘previously-suppressed accounts of the war’. Well, how did he get them, then? And indeed, this reference also tells readers that the bumbling Soviets shot city administrators after the war to cover up Stalin’s incompetence and that of his cabinet. A common criticism is how unready the Soviets were for war.

        I should mention here that on at least one occasion I have confused “The 900 Days” on this blog with “The City That Would Not Die”; the latter is the story of the bombing of London.

        Anyway, the story of the siege is one that has never been properly told (in English) from the Soviet point of view, and every feted western author supposedly has ‘the untold story’ from ‘previously suppressed material’. All unite to vilify Stalin as an incompetent boob and terrible military commander, yet the Red Army crushed the most powerful and unstoppable military of the day, although it took them quite some time and horrific losses to do it. Doubtless from the perspective of hindsight and the viewpoint of the country that has not known a destructive war on its own soil since 1865, it could have been done better. But western accounts consistently give Stalin equal responsibility with Hitler for the deaths of the citizens of Leningrad and other Russian war casualties.

        Despite how acrimonious the discussion has become, it is the best and most provocative discussion we have had in a long time, and I am grateful to you for introducing it. That said, all our opinions are no more than that until someone has read the book and recounts for us in more detail where Peri obtained the information she relies upon for her insights. It is significant, reflected in criticism’s of Salisbury’s work, that he over-relied on the accounts of the group America can never get enough of – the intelligentsia; the artists and theatre crowd who have always felt they should have run Russia. It will be interesting to see if Peri did the same.

        • Norther Star says:

          Fair enough Mark..


          “Northern Star certainly **implied agreement** with the author’s allegation that some Russian citizens of Leningrad were badly treated by Soviet authorities after the war was over. ”

          NO!!..I was very very surprised at the statement ..I thought that when the siege was broken..Russkies from the South would be overjoyed at the prospect of being in touch with their fellow Russians in Leningrad…I will not walk on semantical eggs on this Blog..
          I write what I mean and mean what I write…..AND I copiously use links as sorta footnotes that one would find in a book..intended to amplify,document and illustrate my main point in a comment. Sometimes one is simply misunderstood..it happens.
          This is a blog..not a Ph.D disssertation or a paper intended to be submitted to a refereed journal.
          Hence I would not be prone to taking Peri’s claim about the Leningrad executions as true without her giving cites. The FIRST thing I would ask her in an interview would be to provide documentation for the (her) Leningrad execution
          At the risk of stirring the pot..I just read in Bullock’s book that Stalin NEVER visited Leningrad either during or after the siege. Well..I dunno…But putting that out there doesn’t make one a Russia hater or tool of the West…etc….blah..blah

          If one can’t bring up possibly controversial and contentious issues…the exactly what the fuck is the point of your blog..or any blog that purports to explore geopolitical issues which are de facto highly volatile and subject to distinctly different points of view.

          “That said, all our opinions are no more than that until someone has read the book and recounts for us in more detail where Peri obtained the information she relies upon for her insights”

          Agreed..I’ll double check…maybe she did give cites to the alleged Leningrad executions thin that I overlooked….

          Anyway IMO..you need to have a policy whereupon if stooge X tells stooge Y to fuck off…further discussion on the dispute between us is pointless..then that should be respected. I TRIED to gracefully sever contact with Lyttenburg…but he kept up with the barrage of ad hominems….he-IMO- is an annoying cunt whose intellect I do not respect.
          No doubt the feeling is mutual.
          Apparently your comment to which I am replying went in one Lyttenburg ear and out the other since he continues with his nonsense AFTER your post on the matter!!!

          The solution is simple:
          I don’t fuck with him

          He does not fuck with me

          Problem solved…

          One more thing..(Following Colombo):
          “the Red Army crushed the most powerful and unstoppable military of the day, although it took them quite some time and horrific losses to do it. ”
          Ummmm..I think that I have on more than one occasion sung the praises of the Russkies’ breaking the back of the fascist monsters on the Eastern front…Funny thing is ..they were white men who probably wouldn’t be particularly enamored of NS!!!!
          Oh Well ! :O)
          Nevertheless.their steadfast determination to annihilate their oppressors was (is) an
          inspiration to all humanity..

      • Lyttenburgh says:

        “NO..You are the only POS that I have had a problem with…”

        Okay. So? This is your problem.

        “and there you go again..draggin’ in other people (stooges)…..”

        Once. Again. Quotes, real evidence. Whom am I “dragging” here? Names, actual words, please.

        “BTW…you wanted other posters to validate that you have a sense of humor..”

        How else? You claim that I have none. If I should say that this is not true this is just my word against yours. Clearly, to determine truth here we need some other people to act as judges. Or do you have other suggestions?

        “Ummm..I didn’t see any takers…You are apparently not a particularly amusing shitass….”

        Maybe because I’m not a shitass in the first place?

        “The irony is that you are- in a way- amusing….a little cunt in Mordor talking shit about people and lands that you have (probably) never visited much less lived .”

        Thank you. Now you are really talking.

        You see, NS, people who are using the term “Mordor” as pertaining to Russia are of two types. They are either Russophobes, who really mean it, or they are Russophiles, who use it ironically to mock the Russophobes.

        So far you failed all possible tests to verify as Russophile. Thank you for coming out of the closet, Northern Star.

        tl;dr – Mordor is “our word”. Only we can use it. You don’t have the “R-word privilege”.

        “For example did you go fight the nazi Ukraine battalions in DonBass little cunt????”

        No I didn’t. As I’m sure pretty much enormous number of people in Russia, judging by the relative meager amount of those who indeed participated as volunteers in the fights on the side of the People Republics.

        Oh, and using multiple question marks is equally unhealthy.

        “Ha..Ha..I’m not a real Slavic warrior says LYT…I just run my cunt trap on blogs that eventually ban me !! (see below)”

        I assure you that I’ve never said anything like that. And what should I see below?

        “You talk a lot of shit about America…has your cunt ass ever been here.?? The UK??”

        1) Examples of me talking “a lot of shit about America” would be appreciated. I really mean it.

        2) No, I wasn’t in either US or UK. Foreign countries that I’ve been to are: Byelarus, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Turkey, Czechia.

        3) How does (1) and (2) have anything to do with what I’m posting?

        “Yes **I** do indeed talk a lot of shit about “murica…but I live here cunt…see the difference??”

        Somehow, I’m not surprised that you are American. Not even in the slightest. The only question remaining is your age – experience and your lack of computer skills tells me that you are pretty elderly, but the general tone and raw hysterics imply 13-15 teen. So which?

        “Hmmm..I dunno cunt..is it somewhere in Mordor (Russia) from which you post…or maybe Langley Virginia…or MI6 headquarters in London..or GCHQ?”

        You forgot to mention other options:

        – Basement of Byelorussian KGB HQ in Minsk

        – The Great Khan’s Tomb

        – An alien ship orbiting Nibiru.

        “You simple motherfucker..talk about going after low hanging fruit!! LOL!!!
        That ‘Murica has devolved into a cultural shithole wrt all cultures and peoples….Well Yeeeaaah….”

        I honestly can’t understand what are you talking about here. Congrats – you outdid yourself in the incoherency, NS! How about topping yourself next time? For this I suggest printing your messages by jumping ass-first on a keyboard. Go ahead. This surely will be some improvement.

  5. Moscow Exile says:

    США подняли истребители на перехват российских Ту-95 у берегов Аляски

    The USA scrambled fighters to intercept a Russian Tu-95 off the Alaska coast

    100 nautical miles (185,2 km) from U.S. shores

    Phew, that was close!

    Go USA, go!

    • marknesop says:

      If they don’t react as if Russian patrol aircraft in international airspace are a threat, how is the general public going to learn what a threat Russia presents to Mom and apple pie?

  6. Moscow Exile says:

    Raging Black Sea storm splits cargo ship in half

    Bulk carrier “Heroes of Arsenal”, Panama registered, Turkish owned, split in two and capsized near the Kerch Strait.

    And I am always kidding Mrs. Exile about the Black Sea only being a big lake with hardly any tide.

    Daft name for a vessel, though.

    It would not have capsized if it had had a proper name such as “Stretford Ender” or something similar.

  7. Moscow Exile says:

    Compare and contrast with:

    Well read, Madam!

    • Northern Star says:

      Nikki Haley Threatens UN Member Nations “We are Taking NAMES ” at United Nations

      The essence of diplomacy….threats and ultimatums to sovereign nations

      • Fern says:

        I’m starting to look back on Mother Theresa Power’s tenure at the UN as some sort of golden age.

        • marknesop says:

          Interestingly, Obama had a similar pseudo-restorative effect on the insane and greedy policies of the Bush administration. Which would suggest America’s leaders are an order of magnitude worse, sequentially. Hard to maintain a trend like that and keep a functioning country.

      • marknesop says:

        Yawn. You’re with us, or you’re with the terr’rists. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.

  8. davidt says:

    I wonder why Russia has released this information about the country’s electronic warfare capability. One might think that they are trying to warn off any potential aggressor- if so, let’s hope that it works.

    • marknesop says:

      Well, they don’t really tell you anything about it, except that it’s really great and cutting-edge. It’s actually a bit of a misnomer, as Electronic Warfare (EW) is the big tent which takes in measures which are strictly passive (meaning they emit nothing, they are receivers only), and the jammers, which are really Electronic Countermeasures (ECM). The discussion is actually all about the jamming side of the house.

      The USA has been developing jamming systems which are getting closer all the time to ‘thinking’; they can sample a signal and tell immediately if they’ve seen it before, and use a memory to instantly devise a jamming mode to block or deceive it. But if they haven’t seen it before, the systems can make certain guesses based on signal characteristics, and put together a defense based on what the system’s ‘brain’ suggests is most likely to work.

      And Russia is ahead of them. So you can imagine what these new Russian developments are like.

      • et Al says:

        I just hope the stuff Russia is using in Syria is old but effective tech, several generations old. I assume so.

  9. Warren says:

  10. Warren says:

  11. Warren says:

  12. Warren says:

    Published on 16 May 2015
    When Brits woke up the day after the general election, they learned they would have another 5 years of Conservative party rule. And the news didn’t go down so well with everybody. Tens of thousands of people from North England have signed a petition – with a wink and a nudge to Star Trek – asking Scotties to beam them up from London. RT’s Harry Fear found out what’s so alluring north of the border.

    • Moscow Exile says:

      Yeah, and give us our old shires back!

      Bollocks to “Cumbria”, “Merseyside”, “Greater Manchester”, “Tyne & Wear” etc.

      Give us back the old Cumberland, Westmorland, Lancashire and the three Yorkshire Ridings.

      Home Rule for the old kingdom of Northumbria!

      Waes hael!

  13. Warren says:

    Published on 18 Apr 2017
    May’s decision to call a snap election is an opportunistic move, she also has an eye on the electoral arenas in France and Germany says Prof. Leo Panitch co-editor of the 2016 Socialist Register titled “The Politics of the Right”

  14. Warren says:

    Published on 17 Apr 2017
    Subscribe to Vesti News https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCa8M
    The joke of the week came, of course, from Putin, “It’s boring, girls.” It came with a reference to the authors, Ilf and Petrov. In the book, Ostap Bender visited a local chess club in Vasyuki, he offered the fans of the ancient Indian game to take on a brighter name, for example, “The Red Endgame.” Because “Chess Club” sounded rather unoriginal and sad. “It’s boring, girls.” There were no girls in the “Chess Club,” by the way. But the saying, which has multiple meanings, worked anyway. Obviously, Putin wasn’t addressing girls during Tuesday’s press conference, which took place after his meeting with the Italian President. In a comparison, Putin said that America’s behavior in Syria is the same as it was at the beginning of the war in Iraq.

  15. Warren says:

  16. Warren says:

    Published on 19 Apr 2017
    Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan says he’s hoping for stronger ties between Turkey and the US under the administration of Donald Trump.

    In an interview with Al Jazeera, the Turkish leader said former US President Barack Obama had deceived him over an agreement between the two to fight what he described as “terrorist groups” operating in Turkey.

    • marknesop says:

      And he evidently hopes Trump will be more receptive to his ‘fighting terrorism in Syria’ the way he would prefer to do it. Well, you can bet the neocons will be totally on board with any initiative which looks likely to pry Erdogan back into the NATO camp and get him away from Putin.

  17. Moscow Exile says:

    Porky the Pig’s in Town Tonight!

    Ukrainian president says ‘Russia has an attitude problem’ as he urges Theresa May to stand firm on sanctions

    “Don’t believe those who say sanctions don’t do anything. Sanctions are the only reason Russia is at the negotiating table. Sanctions and the resistance of the Ukrainian army are the only reason Russian tanks are not much further into Europe” said Porky.

    Thank God for the Ukraine and its defence of Western civilization against the Asiatic hordes!

    So what’s new?

    No! Therefore CDU

    The leader of the CDU is Angela Merkel.

    • Lyttenburgh says:

      “Sanctions and the resistance of the Ukrainian army are the only reason Russian tanks are not much further into Europe” said Porky.”

      NO, true reason why Russian tanks are not much furtherin the Europe are Gorby and Yeltsin.

    • Moscow Exile says:

      Украина на Донбассе защищает мир в европейских домах, – Порошенко

      In the Donbass, the Ukraine is protecting peace in European homes — Poroshenko

      Poroshenko’s Speech at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London


      Let me begin with words of gratitude.

      It is a real honour for me to speak today at the Royal Institute of international Affairs.
      I want to thank the noble audience for your sincere interest in Ukraine.
      But most of all I am grateful for your support and solidarity with our government.
      It is not only our fight against Russian aggression and “intentional appropriation of territory”. This is our common struggle for the future of Europe.

      This is the future of the Free World – a world which believes that freedom is a real thing and not a ploy to keep others under control; a world which is based on the “force of law” and not the “law of force”; a world which helped us to live in peace for decades. Until recently, unfortunately.

      Dear friends, we are all aware of the complexity of the challenges facing us. The world has fallen onto hard times. So many problems have challenged us: there is both terrorism and growing radicalism, xenophobia and migration, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and climate change.

      Autocratic leaders feel free to violate human rights and international law. They show a complete disregard for our requirements and calls for peace. It is therefore not surprising that many are offended.

      We are tempted to choose between values and so-called “pragmatism”, between respect for international law and peace. Many believe that it is only a matter of time when things will get better and there is a return to normal life like nothing ever happened. I am afraid that this will not happen….

      In January 1942, Churchill said: “Everyone hopes if he feeds a crocodile, the crocodile will eat him later than everyone else”. There’s a place where these words are especially up-to-date, and it’s Ukraine. And under such circumstances, Russia is the crocodile. They hope that if Russia is fed up[sic], it will not be spreading any of its influence any further. But I’d like to make you all change your minds; Russia will not be fed up [sic]. It does not believe in democracy and human rights – only in domination over the world; it just doesn’t play by the rules…

      Sanctions against Russia should remain in place, so that we can proceed in our way of improving things. Do not believe anyone telling you there’s no need for sanctions. We’re fighting for our territorial integrity with our own weapons. Over the last three years, we received no weaponry from abroad; however, we had fantastic trainings [sic] with British, Canadian, American and European soldiers. It was a unique exchange of experience. If it was [sic] not for sanctions, Russian tanks would be now much further in Europe than they are now. Putin stopped where he is because of the sanctions and Ukrainians struggling [sic]

      Russia has been breaching thousands of its commitments these days. As a member of Minsk process [sic], I have met Putin many times, and we had a lot of discussions, together with Francois Hollande and Angela Merkel. Endless promises by Putin, and – nothing happened. No effective ceasefire, no withdrawal of heavy weaponry, and no releasing of prisoners illegally held in the occupied territories of Ukraine and in Russia. There’s no peace in Ukraine because Russia is not interested in peace.

      In Russia there is no problem with hunger. She has a philosophical problem. She doesn’t believe in things like democracy and human rights. She believes in things like “world domination” and “zone of influence”.

      She’s not playing by the rules. She only believes in one rule: “Russia wins. Always. In spite of everything.”

      You see it in politics. You see it in sports. You see it in reality and the fake news she is trying to impose on our world.

      The famous British writer and TV producer Peter Pomerantsev said it best: “Nothing is true and everything is possible”. This is, in fact ,their ideology.

      Not surprisingly, instead of giving an answer to pressing challenges that are undermining the global order, Russia will use them in her own interests.

      That’s what we call a “hybrid war”. She is a hybrid, because she knows no borders and has many faces. Misinformation, aggressive propaganda, intentional hacking and lying are only a small part of it. Moscow is not so much rejecting the world order, she is trying to build an alternative reality based on alternative values: tyranny instead of democracy; intolerance instead of respect. A zero result is win-win.

      She has violated the Budapest Memorandum, a party of which is the United Kingdom.

      She has violated all that is possible in our bilateral agreements in which Russia has recognized and guaranteed the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.

      She violates her countless promises today in the framework of the Minsk process: no effective ceasefire; no release of hostages and illegally detained persons; no access for international humanitarian organizations…

      She continues to send to Ukraine Russian troops, heavy weapons and ammunition. She has turned the Crimea into the world’s largest military base. She remains deaf to the demands and arguments about peace.

      We have no peace because of one reason only: the Russians are not interested in achieving peace: they are interested in gaining control.

      I felt it again on Monday, when together with Chancellor Merkel and President Hollande , I had a telephone conversation with President Putin.

      It was another manifestation of the empty promises of Moscow.

      It was another manifestation of their relationship: “If you want peace, you can have it: but only on our terms”.

      No compromises. Just the right to have power.

      This confirms that we have no other choice but to seek peace through strength, not appeasement.

      Dear friends, sometimes I hear people ask: why should we worry about Ukraine?

      To be clear: I don’t mean Secretary of state Tillerson, with whom I had a wonderful phone conversation last week before his meeting with Putin. I believe that politically and diplomatically America has a clear vision regarding the role of Ukraine.

      Russian propaganda states that Russia “simply wants to be herself.”

      She also argues about the “clash of civilizations where the West has gone too far”.

      First, there is no “clash of civilizations” but a clash over a world of rules and a world of brute force.

      We Ukrainians have made a choice in favour of a world with rules – and we are being punished for this choice.

      Winning or losing this battle will set a precedent that will tip the scales in one direction or another.

      Secondly, Ukraine is an investment in the safety of all. Including Russia.

      Ukraine cannot be defeated.

      But it can become successful only with the help of its allies.

      A prosperous and stable Ukraine is a prosperous and stable region.

      Third, Ukraine is a test of whether the West is in decline (according to Russia).

      In Ukraine, they reply not to the “Ukrainian question” but to the “European question”.

      Fourth, Ukraine is an invaluable asset in the field of nuclear non-proliferation.

      If the guarantees of the Budapest Memorandum for Ukraine are forgotten, what kind of lesson will that be for a developing nation that is thinking of becoming nuclear?

      And finally, Ukraine is a fighter.

      If You want someone who is guided by principles and not by fear, then take a look at Ukraine.

      Annually on defense, we spend 5% of our GDP – more than some NATO members.

      Today the Ukrainian army occupies 8th place in Europe.

      This is the only army that is not only faced with Russian aggression, but also able to effectively deter it.

      Thanks to her, You can feel safe.

      It keeps aggression away from your homes…

      It should also be understood that the Kremlin is obsessed with its imperialist past. The Russian desire for hegemony will not stop in Ukraine.

      Yesterday it was Transnistria and Georgia.

      Today, it is Ukraine and Syria.

      Who is next?

      Let me repeat: this is not a problem of hunger, but of a worldview.

      The world-outlook of Russia distinctive not only from ours, but also from the Soviet one.

      The Soviet Union thought along the lines “we good: they bad”.

      But the leaders of the Kremlin think differently.

      Their line is: “If they are bad, then we are allowed to be bad.”

      Take this into consideration. Think about the consequences.

      Dear friends, my call is very simple.

      We need three things:

      we must be strong;

      we should be uniform;

      we must be strong and united permanently.

      This is our winning formula, the antidote to aggression.

      What we still need is your reliable support of reforms in Ukraine.

      It is not easy to transform the country during a war and against Russian attempts to destabilize Ukraine.

      However, we are doing our job and doing it effectively. For us the challenge of the last three years has to become a better country.

      To follow this path, it is also important to maintain sanctions against Russia.

      Don’t believe those who say that sanctions have yielded nothing.

      Most importantly, they mean fewer dead Ukrainians, and that is no small thing.

      Second, if there were no sanctions and a newly born Ukrainian army, the Russian tanks would be standing much further inside Europe.

      Putin started his campaign in the Ukraine with a sense of impunity.

      Owing to sanctions and the readiness of Ukraine to fight back, he began to waver.

      And there ought to be a feeling of inevitability, the inevitability of a general response of the West.

      All the aggressors of the world must know that they will answer for their crimes.

      Ukraine fulfills its part and struggles with the war.

      Be strong, united and support Ukraine!

      And please remember the wise words of Margaret Thatcher:

      “The cause of wars is not an accumulation of arms.

      They happen when an aggressor believes he can achieve its goals for a reasonable price.”

      Thank you!

      What a wonderfully loquacious liar!

      He forget to mention the collection box at the back of the hall.

      • Lyttenburgh says:

        Poroshenko also had a unique opportunity to become handshakbale with Bojo!

        Ooooops! Wrong pic:

      • Warren says:

        • Moscow Exile says:

          And another IMF loan will shortly wing its sweet way to Kiev….if the retirement age is increased.

          Just shows you that the “Revolution of Dignity” was not for nothing, you sad Yukie f*ckers!

          You are going to be worked into the grave .. if you can find any work, that is.

          See: МВФ назвал условие получения Украиной нового кредита

          The IMF has approved the granting to the Ukraine of a new loan

          The International Monetary Fund has put forward a condition to Kiev in order that it obtain a new loan: the country needs to carry out pension reform. This has been stated by the the IMF European Department director, Paul Thomsen.

          According to him, the Ukraine has serious problems with the pension system. “I think it is the second largest pension fund deficit in the world”, reports RIA Novosti, quoting the representative of that organization. To remedy the situation, the retirement age has to be raised.

          “This is an issue about which discussions are taking place in the context of the next revision of the IMF and the Ukraine cooperation programme. This is critically important”, said Thomsen. According to him, pension reform has been postponed several times and pensions in the Ukraine are now “very very low”.

          • marknesop says:

            A not unreasonable measure, really, if you look at the numbers; they are probably hoping (cynically, and not for public consumption, surely) that more people will die before starting to collect their pensions. But looking, as I said, at the numbers, the intent is to increase the working age for men to 62 from the present 60, and for women to 60 from the present 57. By comparison, hard-ass Brussels has a firm civil-servant retirement age of 60 minimum, possible 65 depending on your situation. Your pension is calculated based on your years of contribution and your final job. If they did it like the Canadian Forces, it would be an average of your best three years, which are usually but not necessarily your last three. But an obvious loophole here would be to demote those approaching pension age in their final years and reduce their salary.

            Look at the retirement age in the Shining City On A Hill: 66 for both genders, with a planned increase to 67 by 2027, whereas in the Pearl of Empire, it will be ratcheted up to 68 by 2026. The British never did tolerate being shown up for pikers by the Yanks.

            Of course, those who write the rules tend to rig them in favour of themselves; nothing surprising about the everlasting shittiness of human nature at the privileged-class level. A Member of Parliament in the UK, for example, elected at the age of 25 could retire aged 38 with a pension of nearly £20,000 a year after working for just 13 years, the average working life for MP’s at the time of writing according to the article. An average working-clod constituent of these grifters would have to work for 62 years – until the age of 87 – to build up the same kitty.

            • Moscow Exile says:

              My retirement age when I last worked in the UK was 65. When I fled to the Fatherland, my Fritz friends thought I was mistaken when I told them this: they could not believe that men in the UK could still be employed underground at 65. They retired much earlier in Germany then.

              My grandfather was 62 when he died in 1961. His death was caused by a “fall of ground” at the coal face where he was working.

      • marknesop says:

        Autocratic leaders feel free to violate human rights and international law. They show a complete disregard for our requirements and calls for peace. It is therefore not surprising that many are offended.

        Says the autocratic human-rights violator who continues to pursue a military campaign against his own people, while selling it as his country’s ‘calls for peace’.

        As Lily Tomlin was once credited with saying, no matter how cynical you get, you can never keep up.

  18. Northern Star says:


    : ” the omission of one or more words that are ***obviously understood*** but that must be supplied to make a construction grammatically complete”

    But nevertheless present a challenge to …morons

  19. Northern Star says:

    They had enough to indict Hitler and other key Nazis by 1942 at the latest….
    I think the atrocities started almost as soon as Barbarossa got underway


  20. Northern Star says:

    Any of you have an update on this situation:

    Here’s the Ukrainian take on it:

    “Russia wants to destroy Ukraine’s traditional relations with neighboring countries, which during the centuries have been built between the European and Asian parts of the world.”
    ….Hilarious..coming from Kiev!!!
    Hmmm..Does the ‘clean hands’ doctrine apply to Ukraine-and her Western backers- when it comes to the WTO trade Court????

    • marknesop says:

      “Economy Ministry says Ukraine has tried to resolve the transit dispute within the WTO, but to no avail as “Russia was not ready to settle the dispute and has not taken measures to abolish illegal, discriminatory and economically unreasonable transit restrictions.”

      When was the last time the WTO declined to provide a ruling on an allegedly illegal restriction because the alleged violator was not ready to settle the dispute? If the behavior is actually illegal, I’m pretty confident the WTO will so rule. Which suggests to me that it is in fact not illegal.

    • Northern Star says:

      • Ilya says:

        The spiral to civil war will start once a few people are killed at one of these rucks.

      • yalensis says:

        So, I wikied this tool to see if he had any political opinions beyond the Ukrainian khokhol hair-do.
        Not much substance:
        “Richard Bertrand Spencer (born May 11, 1978) is an American white supremacist.[1] He is president of the National Policy Institute, a white nationalist think tank, as well as Washington Summit Publishers. Spencer has stated that he rejects the label of white supremacist, and prefers to describe himself as an identitarian.[2][3][4] He advocates for a white homeland for a “dispossessed white race” and calls for “peaceful ethnic cleansing” to halt the “deconstruction” of European culture.[5]”

        I’d be curious to know where Dick proposes the “white race” move to, as a “white homeland”. Does he have a place in mind? Also, do “whites” include Hispanics? Italians? What about Russians of mixed DNA types?
        Also be curious to know what kind of DNA test to determine “whiteness”, in the case of disputed identity.

        • Ilya says:

          Given that as few as 50 random SNPs can reliably determine continent of origin (i.e., coarsely differentiate), and modern DNA tests use 300k to 700k SNPs, illuminating ancestry has never been easier.

          • yalensis says:

            The issue is not the DNA per se, it’s the political platform.
            White supremacists need to explain exactly, and in clear language, how they propose to define “whiteness” and what they intend to do with these definitions.
            No vague talk, no ambiguities, just lay it out! Exact numbers and percentages.

            • Ilya says:

              Exact numbers and percentages without reference to DNA?

              • yalensis says:

                No, you are being deliberately obtuse, ThatJ.
                What I am asking is that, in your white-supremacist political platform, you lay out the specific metrics of DNA markers, to decide, who is WHITE, etc.
                Since you regard whiteness as a measurable property.

                And also to lay out what you and your co-thinkers POLITICALLY intend to do with those metrics. In terms of resettling people, etc.
                LIke I said, it’s not about the DNA, the DNA is a factual thing.
                It’s about what you intend to do, politically, with the DNA.
                Am I clear now?

                • yalensis says:

                  (…) Crickets (….)
                  We still have not been blessed with Ilya/ThatJ’s vision of how he and his political heroes means to partition and resettle human beings based on their DNA markers.

  21. Warren says:

    Published on 19 Apr 2017
    This pending trillion-dollar oil deal is probably the reason Rex Tillerson was chosen Secretary of State. Install Tillerson, end sanctions on Russia, and cash in. Cenk Uygur, John Iadarola, and David Sirota, hosts of The Young Turks, discuss. Tell us what you think in the comment section below. http://tytnetwork.com/go

  22. Moscow Exile says:

    “Putin is a murderer” O’Reilly has been dismissed by Fox.

    Fox News Just Fired Bill O’Reilly. Here’s What To Know About His Harassment Scandal.

    Sic semper gobshite!

  23. Moscow Exile says:

    Info Trader Buzz

    Navalny’s “black cash”
    We have a very interesting “leak” about financial flows within the “Fund For the Struggle Against Corruption” (FSC). The hidden stuff amounts to millions he has in his pocket — and all of it untaxed.

    Director FSC Roman Rubanov (he is pictured left and yes, he is the director of FSC) has ten accounts at Alfa-Bank, into which receives large sums, and they are undeclared.

    Cash flow description

    Rubanov’s official income for 2014-2015 goes from FSC is 1 005 000 rubles. This salary is deposited in only one of his accounts at Alfa-Bank. But his salary is not limited to this.

    The most interesting thing is that into his account he received in total 12,30,036.80 rubles for 2014 and 13,643,985.55 rubles for 2015. Moreover, there is a system of deposits and recyling. That is to say, some unknown (third parties) transfer money to him through ATMs.. It is curious that Rubanov has three separate accounts for euros and dollars, which also receive funds from unknown third parties.

    Rubanov has sent from his accounts money to known oppositionists: George Alborov, Alexei Navalny, Leonid Volkov, Lyubova Sobol, Anna Veduta and Vladislav Naganov. In addition, the well-known opposition cartoonist Sergei Elkin is included amongst them and the producer of the “Dozhd TV” channel, Alexander Perepelov. And, of course, some money went to employees of the FSC

    Further details follow.

    It is always this [one] account [shown above in the linked article] that Navalny always refers to when calls are made to his supporters to make money transfers to the FSC….

    But Rubanov has as many as 10 such accounts and to them come a lot of money transfers, which are probably impossible to track. It is possible to assume that they do this in order to hide something. For example, help from friends, oligarchs from abroad….

    Such is twice convicted for embezzlement Navalny’s “transparency”.

    • Lyttenburgh says:

      “Such is twice convicted for embezzlement Navalny’s “transparency”.”

      Oleg Lurie published his investigation on Navalny’s “Black Funds”, managed by his right-hand man Volkov, but officially on FBK’s director Rubanov’s accounts. All in all – $500 000, which were used to pay for individuals in his team (Alburov, Baronova, etc) plus for some people in Do\\\D’ TV.

      A list of handshakable media sources (some of which were recipients of said money) that are silent about this fact. Why so?

      Indeed, as Lyosha said – “Не Врать и Не Воровать!

      • Moscow Exile says:

        Navalny has always struck me as a being a “spiv”, an outmoded term that was still in use in my childhood, when post WWII rationing of foodstuff was still in force. Spivs were black marketeers, mainly, but turned their hand to any shady deal and were always on the make and planning their next scam.

        The Navalnys have been doing that since the end of the USSR.

  24. Moscow Exile says:

    Time to vote
    NAVALNY 20!8


    On prison wall poster:

    [next to picture of Khodorkovskiy] We are waiting for you, Mickey! [next to picture of Navalny] And you!

    • yalensis says:

      Yeah, it’s been known for years that Khodorkovsky is Navalny’s main cash cow.

      • karl1haushofer says:


        • kirill says:

          And history repeats as a farce!

        • yalensis says:

          Your usual bullshit, Karl. Not to mention a-historical, a-political and devoid of any real analysis.
          Navalny = supports capitalism.
          Lenin = supports communism.

          Khodorkovsky = supports capitalism.
          Trotsky = supports communism.

          Karl1haushofer = supports fascism and racism.

          • yalensis says:

            According to Karl and his co-insane person, Kirill, everbody = everybody.
            Obama = Shirley Temple.
            Hamlet = Hecuba.

            And a million other equivalences.

            • kirill says:

              Take a valium.

              You are a certifiable nutjob denier regarding Trotsky’s bloody hands. He is clearly your idol that you worship 24/7. But your fantasies and fetishes do not make Russian history. The question of communism is a total canard when the question of Trotsky and his butchery is raised. Trotsky was a western capitalist stooge hiding under the guise of a revolutionary idealist. A fake just like the phony “democracies” that backed him and Lenin to take down the Russian government.

              The same western players are trying to foist another Bolshevik revolution on Russia using 3rd rate clowns because they are convinced that Russians are bydlo.

              • yalensis says:

                Yeah, but what you’re talking about is an analogy, not an equation. It’s one thing to say something like, “Just as Lenin attempted to overthrow the Tsar, so too does Navalny attempt to overthrow the Putin government.” But that’s a far cry from “Lenin is just like Navalny”, or “Putin is exactly like the Tsar”.
                That’s the fallacy that people like you and Kirill fall into.
                And the reason why people fall into this logical fallacy is because they have no concept of politics, or political parties, of class relationships, or how societies are actually put together.
                Lenin represented the proletariat, Navalny represents the bourgeois oligarchy.
                Lenin was the leader of the Communist Party, Navalny is the leader of Parnas (or whatever).
                Is that not something quite different?

                It would be like saying “A dolphin is exactly the same thing as a fish, because it has fins and swims in the water.”
                Only children reason like this.

              • yalensis says:

                Argg, sorry, forgot to close my bold HTML tag. Only the word “analogy” was supposed to be bolded.

                • marknesop says:

                  No, you did it correctly, but for some reason it didn’t ‘take’. I fixed it. When I select ‘bold’ from the toolbar, the default coding for it is open brackets “strong” close brackets “strong”.

            • yalensis says:

              You can rant all you like, Kirill. But you have zero facts at your disposal.
              Your loud-mouthed assertions have already been debunked factually many times, with historical citations.
              But you continue to assert unhistorical bullshit, just louder than before, and with increasingly violent rhetoric.
              You are the nutjob here.
              And I have already stated (numerous times) that I don’t worship Trotsky, even at all, let alone 24/7.
              While not at all liking Trotsky’s egotistical personality, I respect him as a comrade and co-thinker of Lenin, that’s not the same as worshipping.
              If I have to defend Trotsky, it’s because very few people do. Jew-haters like you hate him simply because he was Jewish, that’s the dog-whistle in your comparison with Khodorkovsky. Jewishness is literally the only possible thing that these two men have in common.
              Anti-communists hate Trotsky because he was an effective communist, at least in his early years.

              History has been distorted by Westies not only in regard to the October Revolution, but also what came next, and the various political infighting among the Bolsheviks themselves, especially after Lenin’s death. I have posted numerous pieces about these issues on my blog, and intelligent people have discussed these historical processes in an intelligent and mature manner.

              Not only do you not have your own blog, all you do is spit out brief doses of poison, like a rabid dog, on somebod else’s blog. The only time you even sound sane is when you are posting comments about quantum physics. The rest of the time you just come off like a violent criminal and sexual deviant. From the clear deviancy of some of your postings, I suspect that you were sexually abused as a child, and if that is the case, then I do feel some compassion for you as a human being, but most of the time you just need to keep your venom to yourself. If you are having issues dealing with your early victimization, then you need to take them up with a psychiatrist.

      • marknesop says:

        Easy to see why – think of the comeback Khodorkovsky could mount under a President Navalny.

    • kirill says:

      Seems to be a legitimate critic of criminal links to the municipal government. Not the usual anti-Putin paid 5th column whore. I hope the perps are caught and do hard time in Siberia. Maybe some of the other inmates should relieve them of their testicles.

  25. yalensis says:

    My latest fan fiction episode featuring Anatole Karlin. Per special request from Mark, here is my cover for:
    The Mayor of Casterbridge by Thomas Hardy.

    Ronald Unzfrae, whose friends called him just Unz, arrived in Casterbridge on his way to California, to seek his fortune in the gold mines.
    Casterbridge was, a typical old English town in the Wessex countryside described here with complete historical accuracy.
    When Unz arrived in Wessex, he learned that regional elections were taking place, as per schedule.

    To earn a few extra shillings, Unz signed up as an election observer.
    On his way to the first polling booth, Unz witnessed caravans (literally, caravans) of voters driven there for the specific purpose of voting for the incumbent Mayor, Mr. Pootler.
    Pootler’s ruling party, “United Wessex” ran Casterbridge like a Mafia town, stocking all the good jobs with his crime-boss cronies.

    To the left of the polling place sprawled a large country green, also completely historically accurate. The male-only voters rode carousels (literally, carousels) while the womenfolk danced
    around a large maypole singing authentic English country songs, including: “Hey nonny, hey nonny, ooooh!”
    Unzfrae admired the dancers: “Not bad, but I would have preferred to see Morris dancing.”

    “Morris is off today,” one of the womenfolk admonished him. “He had to pass out flyers for Mayor Pootler.”
    “This is all so undemocratic,” thought Unzfrae indignantly. “Why, I should run for office myself!” it came to him in an epiphany. “I could clean up this town and introduce real democracy at the point of a bayonet!”

    Walking along further, Unzfrae suddenly noticed a raggedy disheveled man standing by the roadside holding up a sign that read: “Will sell my family for beer.”
    Alongside the man stood a sad looking woman holding a mewling baby.

    “Get a job!” Unzfrae reprimanded the bum. But then, after walking a few paces, musing, he stopped and turned around. “Zounds,” thought he, “If I am to be a politician, then I need a family. And here is one ready made.”
    And so, Dear Readers, he purchased the bum’s family with his few remaining shillings!

    A number of years went by. After sailing the 7 seas, Unz and his family returned to Casterbridge. To find that everything had changed: Pootler had been driven out of office in the so-called “Pollen Revolution”, and the entire political system of Wessex was up for grabs. Unzfrae hastily register his candidacy for the new election cycle.
    Imagine his surprise when Unz discovered that his opponent in this campaign was that very same raggedy man, whose name turned out to be Anatole Karl Henchard. Anatole’s friends jokily called him “the Henchman” because of his numerous criminal activities. Or sometimes just “Hench”.
    Hench had recently been cleaned up by his handlers, he now wore a suit and tie, and managed to remain sober at least until noon.

    “Why, I could defeat this bounder with one hand tied behind my back!” Unz bragged to Susan. “All I need do is leak to the voters how he sold you and our dear little Lizzy for a pint of rum!”
    “But Dear Step-Daddy!” pouted the little girl, a real charmer with golden ringlets like Shirley Temple, “must we move into that dreary Mayor’s Mansion?”
    “I’m afraid so, Little Chicklet. It comes with the job.”

    Once the campaign started in earnest, Unz found that he had so much dirt against Hench that he barely even knew where to begin. Not only was Hench a drunkard and wife-seller,
    he also had a criminal record and was a serial adulterer. Recently the local townspeople had tarred and feathered this cad, then drove him out of town on a rail.
    It took Anatole an entire week to clean all the feathers off his skin. Upon which he quietly returned to town in the dead of night and resumed his life of debauchery, while putting together a top-notch Mayoral campaign staff.
    A few weeks later, and Hench was ahead in the polls, due to his campaign slogan: “Kill all the Morris Dancers!”
    This was a popular slogan, because, secretly, in Wessex, everybody hated Morris dancers.

    Meanwhile, Unz discovered one day, to his horror, that his adopted daughter was stealthily undermining him, by leaking information to the Hench campaign.
    When confronted, Lizzy sobbed: “But he’s my REAL daddy, you see! And I must stand with him on the podium come election night, gazing up at his grog-drenched whiskers!”
    “Aha! That’s where you’re wrong, Chicklet,” Unz reprimanded her. “The babe that he sold to me actually fell overboard on the ship. Your mom and me covered up the dreadful accident and bought you as a replacement from a different family once we landed in California.”
    “Ah, what a relief!” she gushed. “Okay, screw Hench he’s a loser.”
    The very next day Unz launched a new campaign ad, entitled: “I created this monster and now I will kill him.”

    [to be continued]

  26. Moscow Exile says:

    and how it really is

  27. Moscow Exile says:


    Putin Quietly Detaches Ukraine’s Rebel Zones as U.S. Waffles
    April 20, 2017, 5:00 AM GMT+3 April 20, 2017, 12:47 PM GMT+3

    Vladimir Putin is seizing on mixed signals from the U.S. to quietly tighten Russia’s grip on two rebel regions of Ukraine, burying hopes for a European-brokered peace deal and relief from sanctions anytime soon.

    While the Kremlin continues to publicly back the accord that Germany and France oversaw in 2015, Putin’s real strategy in Ukraine is to fully separate the two border areas known as the Donbas through incremental integration with Russia, three people close to the leadership in Moscow said. He has no plans to recognize or annex the territories, they said.

    Wicked, wicked Putin!

    • Lyttenburgh says:

      “Putin Quietly Detaches Ukraine’s Rebel Zones as U.S. Waffles”

      Ladies and gentelmen – the US WAFFLES!

      ^Becaus using “salami tactics” experssion is trite and un-American as per Donald Trump’s recent “Buy America, Hire America” initiative!

    • Northern Star says:

      “The Kremlin is also considering making it easier for the 2 million residents of the regions to become Russian citizens, which would dramatically complicate any attempt by Kiev to reassert control.”

      If and when this happens ..it’s game over….any further ATO attacks would obviously be a casus belli…

      • kirill says:

        Clearly Bloomberg thinks that human rights for ethnic Russians don’t apply. Russia is fully entitled to grant any ethnic Russian on the planet citizenship regardless of their geographic location. The issue in the case of the Donbass is that Bloomberg and the rest of NATzO want to ignore the rights of the local Russian majority. They would rather see the Banderite Nazis in Kiev ethnically cleanse the Donbass (as the Croats did to the Serbs in the Krajina as well as East and West Salvonia) than to have the 6 million Russians there live in peace, unharassed by the Kiev regime. The Kiev Banderites are the most important thing for Bloomberg and NATzO.

      • Northern Star says:

        I guess I should have said “any further attacks by Ukraine on what she has designated as the ATO would obviously be a casus bellii for Russia “

    • kirill says:

      So Minsk I and II are “European” as opposed to Russian brokered. Why should the rest of this revisionist drivel have any credibility? A whopping lie right off the bat to set up the rest of the crud. And Kiev’s behaviour doesn’t count? Where is Kiev demonstrating ***any*** commitment to following the Minsk agreements? Zero on the federation structure. Zero on the ceasefire line where Kiev is engaged in gross violations day in and day out. But it is all “Putin, Putin, Putin, Putin”.

      Does Bloomberg think that NATzO should start WWIII to deny the Donbass citizens their rights as established by the ICJ ruling on Kosovo? What legal basis for action against Russia does NATzO have? NATzO’s anti-Russian bile and hate does not constitute justified cause.

      • Moscow Exile says:

        Fillon looks as if he is after the UN brokering a Ukraine settlement just to make the unilateral declaration of self-determination in parts of East Ukraine all legal and above board.

        Western Demands for Russia to Leave Crimea ‘Futile’ – Fillon

        “It is futile to demand that Russia should leave Crimea, it will never happen…. Nobody can deny that from historic, cultural and linguistic points of view Crimea is Russian,” Fillon said.

        Only problem is that the UN is the USA-N and those USA lick-spittle nations in the UN are scared shitless of having their “friendly” relations with the USA being put into jeopardy, especially after their having been told by the permanent US representive to the UN that “names are being taken”.

    • marknesop says:

      Thank you, Stas Belkovsky, Masha Lippman and Gleb Pavlovsky, ‘Kremlin insiders’. Probably not them, but cut from the same cloth; it is no longer important to identify your sources, you just have to take the journalists’ word that somebody said it. And they can always find somebody to say it.

  28. Moscow Exile says:

    Elvis Poroshenko

    Well, it’s one for the money,
    Two for the show,
    Three to get ready,
    Now go, cat, go.

    But don’t you step on my blue suede shoes.
    You can do anything but lay off of my Blue suede shoes….

    However, nobody drank his liquor from an old fruit jar, it seems.

  29. Special_sauce says:

    Awesome twitter account I found https://twitter.com/sovietvisuals Keep scrolling, lotsa goodies! Art, posters, movie clips, products, images, ballet…Stuff I never would have imagined was there. Only the insane jealousy of the West could have kept off our screens.

  30. Northern Star says:

    “Don’t touch me I’m a real punk ass bitch chicken hawk live wire”


    “Pence warned: “We will defeat any attack and meet any use of conventional or nuclear weapons with an overwhelming and effective American response… All options are on the table. History will attest the soldier does not bear the sword in vain.”

    “The references to the US cruise missile attack on Syria and the US use of its huge Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) bomb in Afghanistan only underline the fact that US imperialism is for war, not peace, with North Korea. After a quarter century of military interventions and wars of aggression in the Middle East, Central Asia, the Balkans and North Africa, the US, in its striving for global hegemony, is on the brink of conflict that could precipitate a war involving nuclear-armed powers.”

    • Northern Star says:

      Compare Pemce’s rabid bellicose maniacal logorrhea with the subject of this thread….Lavrov’s reasoned, erudite and sophisticated delivery to his audience.

    • Fern says:

      “History will attest the soldier does not bear the sword in vain”. Impressive coming from the country that has not won any of its wars since Eisenhower crossed the Elbe.

  31. Northern Star says:

    Paging Aryan Wunderkinder ThatJ and Karl:


    • Lyttenburgh says:

      No, the quizz should be re-named “How much of the school program you, typical American, still remember?” in the Who wants to be a millioner? style. It doesn’t show how “smart” you are – just how well-round erudtie you are. I scored 39 out of 50, and they wrote “You are a master with that Master’s degree”. I have neligible previous knowledge on America-specific questions (like who founded an Environment Protection Agency), and some mistakes in the fields out of my speciality (i.e. how many insect species there currently in the world).

      As a test it shows exactly nothing.

    • Jen says:

      I tried the quiz and scored 45 out of 50. The question about which famous US person was assassinated on such-n-such date in 1968 seemed like a trick question because Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy died in the same year. I guessed the answers to a number of US-specific questions and got most of them right (like who founded the Environment Protection Agency) probably because my general knowledge is wide enough (if not especially deep) that my intuition made the right connection.

      With the EPA question, if you know the period from 1965 to 1980 was generally a period when the US made a lot of progress in the social / cultural / environmental arena, and you know who were the presidents during that period, you can make educated guesses and you recognise if they go against any stereotypes you may have. Everyone remembers Richard Nixon as corrupt and unprincipled but the other side of this coin is that he had his own survival paramount and knew he had to “go with the flow” to some extent to do that – and so he passed laws and orders that these days would be considered very “leftist”.

      • Cortes says:

        I got 45 but was wrong with LBJ for the EPA, having read somewhere that Ladybird was always pushing for environmental protection.

    • marknesop says:

      Maxine Waters is just a self-satisfied fool. She is mostly just harmless entertainment. But the statement that the Congressional Black Caucus has moved public opinion closer to the position that conflict with Russia is not only inevitable, but justified, is chilling. The only explanation I can think of is that a lot of Americans want to do it. Because America now decides what it wants to do and then stage-manages a pretext so it can appear to be acting out of necessity. And if people go along with it, it’s because they don’t mind being fooled if it lets them be the center of attention.

  32. Northern Star says:


    We-you- have a problem on the blog…..Any thoughts…you have my email

    If someone doesn’t know when to leave well enough the fuck alone…
    then YOU need to tell them as much…

  33. Cortes says:

    WADA takes a pasting at the hands of UEFA following the Sakho (Liverpool FC) case:


    • marknesop says:

      I love to see them step on their dicks. And really, come on; it’s been banned since 2004 but it was only expressly named in 2017? You don’t think prohibited drugs have to be spelt out? Or should customers at the pharmacy check out ask, “Ummm….are there any B-agonists in this”? And who is authorized to determine if there are? The clerk?

  34. Pavlo Svolochenko says:

    Fit your Ukrainian with one of these, and he’ll never burrow out of the pen again.

    • kirill says:

      These tards really think the trizub is some sort of national symbol when it is just a Kiev Rus rune. One of many other runes. It is also grotesque how this rune of the ancestors of Russians has been appropriated by a collection of Polishified, Slovakified, Lithuanized, Romanianized, Tatarified and even mixed with Spanish fleeing the Inquisition collection of ex-Slavs with fucked up identity. The Ukr are obsessed with ludicrous ancient history (Ukraine existed 40,000 years ago) and ethnic purity (Russians are not Slavs but Mongols and Ugrians) because they don’t have either characteristic.

      • kirill says:

        Nonsense. The original Kievan Rus principalities did not have any ethnic Ukrainians because no such ethnicity existed. The claim that in 988 Christianity was adopted by “Ukraine” is utter revisionist fantasy.

    • Cortes says:

      Unless he’s called Kolarov.

      I’ll get me coat.

  35. Warren says:

    Putin Quietly Detaches Ukraine’s Rebel Zones as U.S. Waffles

    Vladimir Putin is seizing on mixed signals from the U.S. to quietly tighten Russia’s grip on two rebel regions of Ukraine, burying hopes for a European-brokered peace deal and relief from sanctions anytime soon.

    While the Kremlin continues to publicly back the accord that Germany and France oversaw in 2015, Putin’s real strategy in Ukraine is to fully separate the two border areas known as the Donbas through incremental integration with Russia, three people close to the leadership in Moscow said. He has no plans to recognize or annex the territories, they said.

    Russia has been moving gradually, using a blockade by Ukrainian activists as political cover to take over key economic links with the separatist zones. Last week, Russian Railways slashed rates for shipping coal and iron ore to points near the rebel areas, where the metals industry provides most jobs. That will allow Russia to replace Ukrainian supplies halted by Kiev and ensure that steel plants continue to function, according to two people in the industry.

    “A step has been taken toward detaching Donbas — there’s no doubt about that,” a senior lawmaker in the ruling United Russia party, Konstantin Zatulin, said by phone from Moscow. Like other officials, Zatulin blamed Ukraine for forcing Moscow’s hand through the blockade, an allegation Kiev rejects.


    • Moscow Exile says:

      Do you never read what has been posted earlier?


      • Moscow Exile says:

        Only kidding, Warren, old bean!

        It is 06:20 here now in sunny Moskva and I have been reading through the postings that have appeared since I went to bed at around midnight.

        I do that every morning: first I check the Yandex news ticker-tape thingummyjig, glance through the Russian rags, then take a deep breath before taking a peek at the UK Telegraph and Lebedev’s UK Independent, and then I hit the Stooge.

        It’s bloody minus 2°C (28.4°F) as I write an’ all!

        It’ll soon be May though and holiday time again here.


    • marknesop says:

      I see. Ukraine uses high unemployment as a further economic weapon to squeeze the easterners into submission, and Russia provides jobs; those eeevil Russians!!! You only have to imagine if Russia was doing all the things to the east that Ukraine is, in an attempt to force the east to integrate with Russia, to think how the international press would squeal with fury: Putin has the east under economic blockade, Putin is making it difficult for eastern Ukrainians to collect their pensions, Russia banned the Ukrainian Eurovision entrant because she had performed in Crimea, Putin blew up power pylons and plunged the east into darkness in winter, and so on. But since it is Ukraine doing it, the western position is that these are all legitimate tactics used by the capital to exercise dominion over its provinces.

      I have always said the best outcome for Russia is a frozen conflict, similar to the situation which obtains with Abkhazia and South Ossetia within Georgia, in which the separatist entities rely on Russia for support but remain nominally within their parent nations, with a de facto unrecognized border. Decisions made by these states’ regulatory bodies appear to be expressions of national will, whether or not they are influenced by Russia, while Russia can selectively contribute to a rise in these states’ standard of living without nourishing its enemies as well, and power of example will promote continued unrest and discontent in Ukraine proper.

  36. Northern Star says:

    Check out this comment following the linked article infra:
    HAMDAOUI wpsinni • a day ago
    “Trump has turned out to be a weak president beneath his ostensible bravado. He is just another Saudi’s White Houseboy doing what Saudi Arabia and the wealthy Middle East nations of Islam (that have wisely chosen to carry out their conquest of the West by guile and not by strength) want done which includes taking out North Korea, a regime that is an ally of their archenemy Iran. Islam funded Obama and Clinton shadow government deep-state controlled media working behind the scene is surreptitiously running the show. Business is basically as per usual. Trump has been conned into barking up the wrong tree (arbitrarily bombing Syria) when the British and the Saudi Arabia Governments are clearly responsible for the sneak chemical gas attack in Syria. Theresa May in her recent visit (to secure sales of British weapons including Challenger2 tanks, Typhoon jets and cluster bombs) to Riyadh assured the Crown Prince that she would implement their long overdue “Plan B” which is to re-ignite the civil war in Syria so as to recreate the refugee outflow to the West and to take down President Assad. In order to do so deceitfully, as is her wont, and to inveigle President Trump to be her partner in crime, Britain would need an ‘excuse’. Saudi’s secret service agents provided the ‘excuse’ by carrying out the sneak chemical gas attack with tacit approval of Theresa May’s British government well versed in spinning false facts and well prepared media packaged web of lies. This is a deadly frame-up most foul and psychopathic, and Donald Trump (the imbecile that he sadly is) has fallen for it hook, line and sinker and therefore quite impetuously with malice aforethought, is aiding and abetting her (war) crime”


    Now….check this:

    Well she certainly had the motive ,means and opportunity

    • marknesop says:

      It sounds plausible, but the instantaneous American reaction, before there could have been time for any kind of investigation at all, suggests America was part of the deception. If not Trump, influential people in his organization who convinced him it was the right thing to do when every instinct in a thinking person should have argued against it. It is not possible that Trump is so naive and ignorant that he did not understand the likely consequences of precipitate action.

  37. Pavlo Svolochenko says:

  38. Moscow Exile says:

    МИД Украины направил России ноту протеста из-за Ялтинского форума
    21:0120.04.2017 (обновлено: 21:53 20.04.2017)

    The Ukrainian foreign Ministry has sent Russia a note of protest because of a Yalta forum

    KIEV, April 20 — RIA Novosti. The Ukraine Ministry of Foreign Affairs has sent Russia a note of protest in connection with the Yalta International Economic Forum (YaMEF that is being undertaken in the Crimea at Yalta, it was reported on Thursday on a Ministry page.

    The Yalta International Economic forum is being held on the south coast of the Crimea from the 20th to the 22nd of April. More than 220 participants from 46 countries are attending it.

    “A strong protest has been expressed by the Ukraine Ministry of foreign Affairs by means of a note to the Russian Federation in connection with the April 20-22, 2017 so-called “Yalta International Economic Forum”, it was stated in the message.

    Or, as the now resident in Florida, USA, former Prime Minister of Banderastan, Yatsenyuk, once whined in Kiev:

    It is our Crimea! It is our territory ! It is our sea!

    Well boo-hoo, arseholes!

    Now fuck off and die!

    • marknesop says:

      Interesting – Serjej is still a Russian by association although he was born in Germany of ethnic-Russian parents, but Maria Sharapova is American because she lives in Florida and learned all her tennis skills in the USA. Oh, except when she uses banned drugs – then she’s a Russian again.

  39. Warren says:

    Published on 21 Apr 2017
    The Russian parliament has backed plans to knock down thousands of Soviet-era apartment blocks. The government says they are shabby and that they will move people to new apartments. But many of those affected are prepared to fight for their homes.
    For a related story, go to: http://www.dw.com/en/a-look-at-pyongy

    There is a great amount of infrastructure dating back from the 1950s and 1960s that needs to be replaced in Russia. Not just flats/apartment blocks, but also hospitals, schools, bridges, power stations (nuclear and hydroelectric), etc. I think people are beginning to realise the magnitude of the Soviet legacy in Russia and elsewhere.

    • Moscow Exile says:

      The ones that everyone wants to see the last of are Khrushchyovki, 5-floor blocks of 2-room flats with a tiny kitchen and bathroom/toilet.

      My wife and I lived in one from 1997 until 2001. She had lived in the same flat since having been a young child — with her mother, father and grandfather — before we met after her folks had all died and got wed. She lived with two cats when I moved in: they bloody hated me!.

      We still own the little flat and will be compensated or given another, modern flat in its place.

      Luzhkov said he would have them all destroyed during his watch: they were not.

      Sobyanin has been promising the same since he was elected mayor.

      Good riddance!

      • Jen says:

        Alec Luhn has posted an article at The Guardian on these khrushchyovka flats.

        As usual with Guardian pieces on Life In Mordor, the writer wrings out every opportunity to criticise Putin as if he personally dreamt up the idea of these large-scale demolition projects and signed it into law just to spite the people still living in them. Luhn also doesn’t bother asking why these flats are being demolished: couldn’t the reason be something as basic as demolition and rebuilding being a cheaper and better option than trying to upgrade them long past their liveability?

        • Jen says:

          Sorry I read the Luhn article more carefully and he did address the issue of demolition versus renewal – but he still manages to spin it into a screed against Sobyanin’s administration. Is Moscow’s treatment of pensioners and other families living in khrushchyvoka units any worse than how such people are treated in the West when their homes stand in the way of redevelopment projects or highway by-passes?

          The examples of successful renovations of khrushchvyoka flats in eastern Europe given in the article don’t seem convincing either. The eastern German example quoted is a 1970s-era building and mass housing built in that period across eastern Europe and the USSR could have been built to much higher standards and been of much better quality than the projects done in previous decades.

          • kirill says:

            This article is pure lie factory agit-prop. There is zero analogue with western redevelopment where private companies acquire cheap flats and demolish them to make way for expensive condos putting the tenants out on the street. The demolition project in Moscow involves flat upgrades for the affected. Of course humans being sentimental animals do not want to lose their old homes to which they are attached. This creates opportunities for western liars to smear Russia.

            These 5 story flats are: 1) Crappy for actual living and 2) Unsafe since they are crappy and falling apart. They need to be demolished for public safety.

            • Moscow Exile says:

              Mrs. Exile is very sad about our old khrushchyovka block being scheduled for demolishment at the end of this summer at the earliest and by the end of next spring at the latest.

              So is my son, because he had ideas of moving in there after his 18th birthday this summer. It was going to be his shagging pit, I reckon.

              The khrushchyovka that we lived in is just around the corner from the 11-floor, 1970s-built block in which we have been living since we moved from that place in 2001.

              My wife will either receive compensation for the khrushchyovka flat, which she received ownership of during the early “Roaring Nineties”, or a new flat in or close to this area of Moscow, Taganka, which is in the Moscow Central Administrative District.

              The khrushchyovka flats are extremely cramped and crappy, that’s a fact! No lifts either, which is pretty bad if you are bobbing on and live on the top floor.

              My theory why the kitchens in them are so ludicrously tiny is that they were made so small because, according to the Soviet planners, workers did not need to prepare food in their flats as there was always a basic Soviet eatery, a stolovaya, nearby — which was very true, about the state canteens, that is..

              I ate in them regularly: some were fine; others were so-so, but if you like grechka and kotlyety, borshch and shchi, sok and kefir followed by various sweets — semolina, rice, tarts, ice-cream cakes etc., they were fine — and very cheap.

              Typical stolovaya grub.

              Alright with me, but I remember how, when I was a student in the USSR, nicely-brought-up-in-good-middle-class-families English girls used to be horrified at what they were presented with to eat.

              Idiots! They used to leave almost everything.

              1930’s stolovaya: the happy workers pictured above very likely lived in communal apartments or “workers’ barracks”.

              • Moscow Exile says:

                Oh yeah! And the Mongol-Tatar-Ugric Untermenschen absolutely never eat a full meal without soup!

                And it is real, home-made soup, not crappy Heinz or Campbell’s canned stuff full of all kinds of chemical shite.

            • marknesop says:

              I would disagree only with the latter criticism – that they are falling apart. Not structurally, because they are built with an outmoded technique using large preformed concrete slabs. While technology has improved concrete itself in many ways, still no building material on earth which is practical to use is as strong as rod-reinforced concrete. Steel is stronger, of course, but it would not be practical to construct a building of solid steel for any number of reasons. These flats – structurally – will last forever unless a natural or man-made force knocks them down. But for various reasons it would be impractical to renovate them – the floor plan for room dimensions and placement is out of date and impractical to change, they are poorly insulated or not insulated, electrical and water service to them frequently cannot stand up to modern demands and so on, making it more practical to knock them down and start again.

              They might look like they are falling down because of the often deplorably-shabby state of the outside of the building, combined with the Soviet custom of using the tiny balconies as an extra living space, sometimes putting an astonishing variety of things on them from washing machines to small items of furniture screened by plastic or tarps.

              You make an excellent point that in western examples of razing old buildings in favour of spanking modern replacements, the rents or purchase price of the new quarters is frequently well beyond the means of the prior residents. Yet the western model is offered as the way to ‘do it right’, as usual.

      • marknesop says:

        My wife’s parents lived in one until they sold it before they moved here. I forget what floor it was on, I think the 5th but it was the top floor or next to the top, it’s so long since I was there, but there was no elevator and one was not designed in. It was quite a climb when you were carrying something heavy. The flat we lived in temporarily in Churkin was on the 9th floor, and the building had an elevator but it was broken, so that was a walk-up the whole time as well. The bathroom at my in-laws’ was tiny, for some reason a wall separated the toilet and the tub and sink, so that all that was in the former was the toilet and it was so small your elbows almost touched the walls, while the tub and sink were next door in a slightly larger room. For all of that it seemed very homey and romantic – since it remains a memory of my courting years – although a bit cramped for two adults and two children, as would have been there when Sveta and her sister, Marina, were still at home. And a one-bathroom home for a family in which three out of four are women is a recipe for disaster. Perhaps that’s why the toilet and bathroom were separated, I never thought of that before now.

  40. Pingback: Sakhnin Recants (Sort of) – Part III | Awful Avalanche

  41. Warren says:

    Published on 21 Apr 2017
    Earlier this month, police in India arrested three Hindus suspected of beating to death a Muslim man they accused of slaughtering cows. Hindus consider cows sacred and some groups say they are prepared to use violence in their defense.

  42. Warren says:

    So much for freedom of speech!

  43. Norther Star says:

    “Dear Northern Star:
    You are getting out of hand here, calling people cunts. And yes, I can validate that Lyt has a sense of humor. (In YOUR opinion)Please stop calling him a cunt.(Sow the wind….)
    You two gentlemen can debate like gentlemen. (I DO NOT want to debate him..I want nothing to do with him..OK???)
    You have to realize that when you raise issues like Leningrad siege, you are poking a hornet’s nest. You can express your own opinions on the siege (Actually I did no..I merely place a fuckin’ book out there for discussion…I was trying to brin something useful to the table)
    , but you must be prepared for strong feelings and polemics in return.(But not a shitload of ad hominems)
    And no more calling names, PLEASE!!!! (Two way street…he should hang with his ‘homies…and I’m content to … Ramble On..!! ) :O)

    • yalensis says:

      Dear Northern Star: Well, I got upset too. The Leningrad siege is a very sore point with most Russians, including myself. It’s permissible to disagree, but such issues must be handled “very delicately” and with tact, like that green witch said:

      Also, on blogs, as I have discovered, you don’t always get to pick your friends, let alone your enemies. You post a comment, and people are going to respond, whether you like it or not. It’s fruitless to tell people: “This thread is closed,” or “I don’t want to talk to you any more.” Once people get going, there’s no stopping them until the thread just peters out on its own. Mark runs a “freedom of speech” forum, and he won’t censor anybody nor remove any comments, except for Averko’s.

      I personally enjoy polemics, that’s one of the reasons why I got into blogging. I like the fighting and the jousting, because it’s all intellectual, and no real blood is spilt. When it comes to polemics and debate, I have developed my own personal code of conduct, over and above what the blog host mandates. My own code (I won’t go into detail here) is basically the Kwai Chang Caine philosophy of proportional and symmetrical violence.

      I do try to live by this “Kung Fu Fighting” code of conduct, but, alas, sometimes I fail and lose my temper. For that I apologize, in advance, and to everyone whom I have offended, or will offend in the future.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s