DescentBB

You know, when I commanded a platoon at a secret facility once been a serious emergency. To our guests arrived representatives of counterintelligence. I was questioned, as well as all my subordinates. But is not the point. The essence is that of counter-intelligence, I learned that there is actually the world's elite, which can raise and dismiss the president. And I can believe it. In fact, we are with you no matter what can not influence. This kitchen conversations to scratch tongue. Despite the fact that our Issues certainly readable and takes note, this is not enough. I can long curse of ordinary Americans who have no relation to the stupidity of the American administration, and at the same time, Americans may in turn as many Russian curse, after reading the newspapers, but if you really look at things, we'll have no relation to the elite of our countries, and we can not influence them. Of course I do not mean like the government of the Ivory Coast (or Côte d'Ivoire) (I do not want to offend anyone). I mean the government larger countries.

Both of our countries have a history of the people removing the elites. It can happen again but there first would need to be a more compelling reason than the ones we have now.
And if that came again, for either or both of our peoples, the same corruption the old leaders surrendered to could grow in the new leaders that replace them. Because they are people too.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

I miss shoe pounding Nikita.

Will Robinson wrote:Both of our countries have a history of the people removing the elites. It can happen again but there first would need to be a more compelling reason than the ones we have now.
And if that came again, for either or both of our peoples, the same corruption the old leaders surrendered to could grow in the new leaders that replace them. Because they are people too.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

I'm not sure, in either case, whether the 'people' would ever get the wherewithall to do remove their elites. I'm starting to very much doubt it, in recent years.

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Both of our countries have a history of the people removing the elites. It can happen again but there first would need to be a more compelling reason than the ones we have now.
And if that came again, for either or both of our peoples, the same corruption the old leaders surrendered to could grow in the new leaders that replace them. Because they are people too.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

I'm not sure, in either case, whether the 'people' would ever get the wherewithall to do remove their elites. I'm starting to very much doubt it, in recent years.

The elites have learned from the mistakes of their predecessors for sure. They turn the heat up more gradually now to keep the frogs from jumping out of the pot. And, here at least, they get the people dependent on government so they are conflicted with desire to keep that government check coming in.

that, Will, and thanks to the same modern technology which we use to amuse ourselves, the government(read-elites) can essentially overwhelm the masses, and in terms of lethal force differential, this just isn't 1918 Russia, nor 1776 North America.

Superior technology does not dictate the outcome. You can never bomb your population into complacent submission. Technology only takes you so far when fighting an internal 'threat'. History shows that to be the case.

If, as the elite leadership, you find yourself outnumbered and isolated from a general population that is in outright rebellion then only winning their hearts and minds will save you and the elites from history that found themselves in that situation always end up swinging from a lamp post or impaled on a pike...their superior weapons laying at their feet...or else, if they are lucky enough, in exile.

callmeslick wrote:that, Will, and thanks to the same modern technology which we use to amuse ourselves, the government(read-elites) can essentially overwhelm the masses, and in terms of lethal force differential, this just isn't 1918 Russia, nor 1776 North America.

How well did that work in Vietnam, Afghanistan?

This is the superior tech that they will use to try and protect themselves from a revolt.
It is why I strongly urge people to abandon the one party (read:elites) disguised as two.

Will Robinson wrote:Superior technology does not dictate the outcome. You can never bomb your population into complacent submission. Technology only takes you so far when fighting an internal 'threat'. History shows that to be the case.

dude, they have already lulled the population into wasting their focus altogether. What makes you think that 'they' can't completely dictate the outcome, before anything comes close to happening?

If, as the elite leadership, you find yourself outnumbered and isolated from a general population that is in outright rebellion then only winning their hearts and minds will save you and the elites from history that found themselves in that situation always end up swinging from a lamp post or impaled on a pike...their superior weapons laying at their feet...or else, if they are lucky enough, in exile.

if you think this works when the elite has adequate sway to gather even a moderate, hi-tech fighting and surveillance force to do its bidding, god bless you. I'm a bit more skeptical.

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Superior technology does not dictate the outcome. You can never bomb your population into complacent submission. Technology only takes you so far when fighting an internal 'threat'. History shows that to be the case.

dude, they have already lulled the population into wasting their focus altogether. What makes you think that 'they' can't completely dictate the outcome, before anything comes close to happening?

I didn't say they can't win with the non violent control just saying all the high tech military in the arsenal can't eliminate the rebels if it came to an uprising.

We are dangerously close to the tipping point where the voting majority is being bribed by government subsidies. So the non-violent takeover is a much more likely scenario than a new revolution. Although our current leader has turned that burner up a bit higher than the pot full of frogs is accustomed to tolerating. Too much more and he may cause some push back that will undo a lot of what he thinks are good changes....so the elites aren't the only ones who can gain ground in a non violent way. At least here it can work. Not so sure about Russia where push back gets you killed straight up.

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:If, as the elite leadership, you find yourself outnumbered and isolated from a general population that is in outright rebellion then only winning their hearts and minds will save you and the elites from history that found themselves in that situation always end up swinging from a lamp post or impaled on a pike...their superior weapons laying at their feet...or else, if they are lucky enough, in exile.

if you think this works when the elite has adequate sway to gather even a moderate, hi-tech fighting and surveillance force to do its bidding, god bless you. I'm a bit more skeptical.

'Adequate' quickly becomes suicidal when it changes from stomping out a riot to trying to take the whole population under control. Hell even a small riot was too much for the current administration more than once.
The federal troops you think are there for the elites would get real thin real quick if they tried to order a civilian massacre or two to stop an uprising. Then the numbers of armed and dangerous civilians would multiply and become overwhelming if they start down that road.

Our military is more connected by far to the general population than they are to the asshat elites. And when a Colonel or even a lowly Lieutenant in the field decides to disobey that unlawful order to open fire on a small town that looks way too much like one he loves he isn't going to just drop his weapons and his command and walk away... he is going to turn his men around to face the 'real enemy' and it is game over.

We are many many generations away from a US military going along with that kind of oppression. Maybe in another 200 years of undoing the education that created proud Americans....replacing that mindset with government dependant tools.

like I said, Will, bless you. Go ahead and think those things. The Obama stuff is flat-out delusional, the rest strikes me as wishful thinking. Also, it seems that I lumped Russia and the US together based on certain commonalities, white you seem to focus on the US, and not only that, the US at the current time. If you think a revolt of any significance is either imminent, or likely, I'd laugh in your face were you standing in front of me. Your view of the unanimity within the military seems at odds with the complete disparity between voting patterns of enlisted men vs officer corps. When I was working the Obama campaigns, we tried to extract every enlisted vote we could locate. They went over 2-1 for Obama. The officer corps is reliably Republican. Not that mere voting tells that much, but it demonstrates that you aren't likely at the moment to see some sort of monolithic response from the military, at all.
Bottom line in our current nation, if I am to focus on that, is that a given financial elite has maintained very tight control over the core of government and the economy. No uprising would fit their gameplan, nor be tolerated, except perhaps as a means to further control. As I say, I might just have to disagree on the likelihood of success, and hope that your view isn't correct.

slick, go back and re-read my comments. You have misrepresented them in numerous instances. Why?

I said outright revolt was "unlikely" not likely.

I never said anything about unanimity in the ranks of the military. I referred to the independant thought process that an american soldier (emphasis on american) would have when tasked with an illegal order to fire on civilians in his own country.

I don't think it is hard to imagine that most free thinking americans in uniform would recognize they swore an oath to NOT act on such an order.
I think it is likely a squad or platoon etc. when their commanding Officer or Sergeant etc said hell no to an order like that they would follow suit... not shoot him in the back so they could pursue an illegal, immoral slaughter all happening because the elites had gotten so out of hand that the civilian population was in revolt!

You think because you got some military votes for Obama they would react like stone cold killers for him?!? Lol! yea, right, and you call me delusional?!?

And do you really think Obama hasn't pushed the envelope with his recent actions? The polls say otherwise. Common sense says otherwise. I'm hearing liberals say they want their country back in reaction to his crap!

Oh, but I know, you had lunch with someone big, you swim in 'old money' and you know Biden so you must be the authority.

You are ridiculously, gratuitously contrary, simply for the sake of being contrary.

not being contrary, Will. As I tried to state, I have to agree to disagree. You feel that such a critical mass can develop in a modern society, I have grave doubts. Anything past that is anecdotal. Of course, I don't see a damn thing that Obama has done which has or should have 'pushed the envelope' in such a was as to even suggest revolution to any rational citizen. Still, your overall thrust when applied to modern US or Russian society is actually similar to mine, just a bit more optimistic of success.

Uh oh. The Russian Oligarchs are getting a little unhappy with Putin. So who caves in sigma? Putin, the leader who's vastly popular-with-the-common-Russian, or the elite Oligarchs who are really running things and who are getting tired of funding Putin's swagger?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russian-o ... 00898.html

my money's on the oligarchy, especially if EU sticks to its guns on sanctions.

callmeslick wrote:... Of course, I don't see a damn thing that Obama has done which has or should have 'pushed the envelope' in such a was as to even suggest revolution to any rational citizen. ..

I didn't suggest he has pushed it near the revolution stage. Here, read again.

Although our current leader has turned that burner up a bit higher than the pot full of frogs is accustomed to tolerating. Too much more and he may cause some push back that will undo a lot of what he thinks are good changes....so the elites aren't the only ones who can gain ground in a non violent way. At least here it can work. Not so sure about Russia where push back gets you killed straight up.

I'm suggesting he has pushed so hard that he will watch some of what he thinks are positive changes he made get wiped out. Once he loses power and the pendulum swings back the other way his tactics will be remembered and his opponents will wipe out as much as they can.
In Russia there is no pendulum. There is only the hammer...always wielded by the same 'party'. Push back gets you killed in Russia.

OK sigma, back to the elites. Putin and your government really want to know what the average Russian says and reads, especially what Russians say and read in secret.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-2 ... urges.html

Although I'm quite sure the U.S. and China's governments are trying to crack Tor as well. Governments just can't seem to tolerate civilians having secrets. But in most cases, civilians aren't allowed to have access to government secrets. It's a one way street designed to keep control over the masses.

tunnelcat wrote:Uh oh. The Russian Oligarchs are getting a little unhappy with Putin. So who caves in sigma? Putin, the leader who's vastly popular-with-the-common-Russian, or the elite Oligarchs who are really running things and who are getting tired of funding Putin's swagger?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russian-o ... 00898.html

Of course, this is nonsense. Trying to Western journalist to show that American sanctions are able to create a split in the Russian elite, it's very funny. The author of this article not familiar with the peculiarities of Russian psychology. I'll tell you. Russian man can long and hard to perceive pressure from their own government, but the pressure from foreign countries always only brings together and unites the nation. Russian have a different way of thinking than Americans or Europeans. Honestly, I was very surprised that the American elite does not know about it, and they try to apply standard economic sanctions, which will work in other countries, but such measures are absolutely can not be used against the Russian. It's strange that the United States spends so much money on research in Russia, and yet they do not know basic things.
I can confidently say that if the Russian oligarch ceases to be a patriot, he automatically ceases to be a tycoon. Him find a replacement group of oligarchs who unprofitable quarrel among themselves on such a promising and untapped market, as the Russian market.

tunnelcat wrote:OK sigma, back to the elites. Putin and your government really want to know what the average Russian says and reads, especially what Russians say and read in secret.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-2 ... urges.html

Although I'm quite sure the U.S. and China's governments are trying to crack Tor as well. Governments just can't seem to tolerate civilians having secrets. But in most cases, civilians aren't allowed to have access to government secrets. It's a one way street designed to keep control over the masses.

Of course, the Russian security services are well aware of the fact that the Americans say in his kitchen, and even more so, they know the opinion of the Russian people. But in terms of spy mania United States surpassed all so that it can already be considered a crime against freedom.

And frankly, the people of Western countries need fear not the Russian elite, and the US-British elite. Although they are making a lot of effort to portray Russia as an enemy of all mankind, to the western elite continued to do their mischief without the risk of protest of their own people. Although Western elite hates and destroys not only the peoples of other countries, but also the peoples of their own countries. This is done through the legalization and promotion of drug abuse, prostitution, unconventional sex, same-sex marriage, possession and use of military weapons, alcohol, tobacco. In other countries, they openly and with impunity, organized civil wars, revolutions, military conflicts, outbreaks of diseases in any way to reduce the population of the planet. Their goal - to create a comfortable environment for themselves and not for the people. Their goal - to leave on the planet one billion people a privileged elite and four billion workers, who will not even have the right to use the money.
P.S. If interested, you can read the book by John Coleman "The Committee of 300", 1992.

sigma wrote:................. This is done through the legalization and promotion of drug abuse, prostitution, unconventional sex, same-sex marriage, possession and use of military weapons, alcohol, tobacco. In other countries, they openly and with impunity, organized civil wars, revolutions, military conflicts, outbreaks of diseases in any way to reduce the population of the planet. Their goal - to create a comfortable environment for themselves and not for the people. Their goal - to leave on the planet one billion people a privileged elite and four billion workers, who will not even have the right to use the money.
P.S. If interested, you can read the book by John Coleman "The Committee of 300", 1992.

No sigma, you're wrong on this one point. It's not sex, or drugs or alcohol, but making as much money as possible and being psychopaths while doing it that's the real problem. Greed and arbitrage in other countries, and our own, are how the elites are abusing the world and getting themselves rich doing it. The drugs, prostitution and alcohol are only allowed to placate their slaves, I mean workers , and prevent violent uprisings against those elite.

tunnelcat wrote:

sigma wrote:................. This is done through the legalization and promotion of drug abuse, prostitution, unconventional sex, same-sex marriage, possession and use of military weapons, alcohol, tobacco. In other countries, they openly and with impunity, organized civil wars, revolutions, military conflicts, outbreaks of diseases in any way to reduce the population of the planet. Their goal - to create a comfortable environment for themselves and not for the people. Their goal - to leave on the planet one billion people a privileged elite and four billion workers, who will not even have the right to use the money.
P.S. If interested, you can read the book by John Coleman "The Committee of 300", 1992.

No sigma, you're wrong on this one point. It's not sex, or drugs or alcohol, but making as much money as possible and being psychopaths while doing it that's the real problem. Greed and arbitrage in other countries, and our own, are how the elites are abusing the world and getting themselves rich doing it. The drugs, prostitution and alcohol are only allowed to placate their slaves, I mean workers , and prevent violent uprisings against those elite.

It seems that you are not completely right. American-British elite has a lot of money, parasitic on the global economy. They pursue other goals. Just read the quotes from the western elite, which have been collected from free sources resource The American Dream

sigma wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:

sigma wrote:................. This is done through the legalization and promotion of drug abuse, prostitution, unconventional sex, same-sex marriage, possession and use of military weapons, alcohol, tobacco. In other countries, they openly and with impunity, organized civil wars, revolutions, military conflicts, outbreaks of diseases in any way to reduce the population of the planet. Their goal - to create a comfortable environment for themselves and not for the people. Their goal - to leave on the planet one billion people a privileged elite and four billion workers, who will not even have the right to use the money.
P.S. If interested, you can read the book by John Coleman "The Committee of 300", 1992.

No sigma, you're wrong on this one point. It's not sex, or drugs or alcohol, but making as much money as possible and being psychopaths while doing it that's the real problem. Greed and arbitrage in other countries, and our own, are how the elites are abusing the world and getting themselves rich doing it. The drugs, prostitution and alcohol are only allowed to placate their slaves, I mean workers , and prevent violent uprisings against those elite.

It seems that you are not completely right. American-British elite has a lot of money, parasitic on the global economy. They pursue other goals. Just read the quotes from the western elite, which have been collected from free sources resource The American Dream

You said it yourself. Many, although not all, American capitalists are global parasites and I would agree with you. But those very parasites who make it rich off of the labor arbitrage of every third world countries around the world, then pollute those countries in the process without care are psychopaths, masquerading as business men and corporate owners, plain and simple. They don't care how their laborers are treated and live or the fact they are poorly paid for their work, as long a product gets produced, shipped out as fast and cheaply as possible, and sales figures climb, giving them hefty profits.

Hey sigma, what exactly does Russia make and produce for itself and for export, other than gas and oil? How long can Russia survive the sanctions without international trade? It also seems that even a government official cannot freely tell those older Russian people that things are going to get bad. Your leadership especially doesn't want to let pensioners know that their pensions might have be frozen in 2015 if this keeps up. After all, the older people are the main viewers of the state-owned Russian news and more likely to believe Putin's propaganda machine blather that "things will be just fine".

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101903367

Hello, Cat.
First, I want to hear from you, what right have the United States to apply the so-called "economic sanctions" against other countries in the interests of the United States economy?
Second, I want to hear from you, or an explanation of why the United States can afford to put air strikes on the territory of independent states?
Third, I want to hear from you from you, why the international community has taken no action to establish control over the United States that have already drowned in the blood, and they again continue with impunity to drink the blood of innocent people around the world?
This is entertainment? Enjoying the murder? Enjoying impunity? Maybe it's racism or fascism? I just want to understand it.

sigma wrote:Hello, Cat.
First, I want to hear from you, what right have the United States to apply the so-called "economic sanctions" against other countries in the interests of the United States economy?

Better than WWIII isn't it? No one would win. Besides, Russia should have sanctioned the U.S. when Bush did his little illegal invasions. Russia missed out on putting the U.S. in it's place back then. But sadly, Russia wouldn't have been able to get the Europeans to go along, since Europe bought our "get Bin Laden at all costs" and "Saddam must be stopped" propaganda whine the administration was crying out back then. But hey, all Putin has to do now is back off with his saber rattling routine, let Ukraine handle their own affairs for now, get the sanctions dropped and wait for a better opportunity to pounce. The Russians in Ukraine will always want to be allied with Russia, so that's not going to change. Sometimes patience is a virtue and things will go your way. America? We're imploding because of our own selfish greed and arrogance, so all Russia has to do is bide it's time until the U.S. stumbles into it's own miasma of corruption, anarchy, aristocracy and arrogance. We're so full of ourselves we're going to explode.

sigma wrote:Second, I want to hear from you, or an explanation of why the United States can afford to put air strikes on the territory of independent states?

Are you referring to our belated air strikes against ISIS in Iraq? If so, the more the better. ISIS is a cruel, genocidal bunch of paternalistic nutcase Holy War terrorists. In fact, Russia should join us in stopping them, because they won't ever stop at what they're doing. There are crazies in the world, and then there are monsters, like ISIS. Hitler was one of those monsters I'm sure you would agree and sometimes the only way to stop a monster is to destroy it. Stopping them would would also save your country from having to deal with them in the future if they actually formed some sort of country and military army of any strength. You just know that they would eventually decide it to set their sights on YOU and wipe out those infidel Russians.

sigma wrote:Third, I want to hear from you from you, why the international community has taken no action to establish control over the United States that have already drowned in the blood, and they again continue with impunity to drink the blood of innocent people around the world?
This is entertainment? Enjoying the murder? Enjoying impunity? Maybe it's racism or fascism? I just want to understand it.

Oh, I don't get any satisfaction from the activities of our government and it's cronyism with our greedy military industrial complex. It's an evil marriage that needs a divorce. We look like a bunch of bullies who want to get our way using whatever means necessary AND, make a profit from doing it. We're making more enemies than we can deal with in anymore. In fact, the ONLY reason we are in the Iraq mess NOW is because of the stupid actions of a past president, , who destabilized the whole region with his delusions of grandeur and his twisted idea of getting revenge for his daddy's embarrassment called the first Gulf War.

I think TC has forgotten that the UN sanctioned that little incursion into Iraq.

Not to mention that ISIS got to be a threat by growing in Syria, so we can’t take all the blame. (unless you want to go into the inaction of our government there)

Every cloud has a silver lining. In my opinion, we need to say "Thank you, America!" That their hostile activities against Russia in the end only leads to a strengthening of Russia's position in the world, the development of Russian industry, the development of relations with foreign businesses, while the policy of the USA more and more put themselves in the position of a white crow.

Agreed and we need to thank Russia for their policies post WW2 policies that have made us the economic and military superpower that we are, and how people world wide still take their lives in their hands just for the opportunity to live in this great nation. A nation where Russian immigrants flock to, to escape the oppression of their home country for the chance at a better life.

thank you Russia for showing the world the difference in an oppressive post communist country pretending to be free, and a democratically elected nation based on individual liberties

CUDA, you can answer the question of why the Soviet Union went to the maximum concessions to the West, abolishing the coalition of the Warsaw Pact, while the West did not want to abolish NATO?
I'm not arguing that the United States is a haven for Russian dissidents, as well as Russia is a haven for Western dissidents.
Just explain to me the reasons why the United States is the largest military aggressor in the world, even in the 21st century? And why did he go unpunished, killing innocent people in other countries? I do not see any reason to be proud of winning the American military, while, as in the United States no one attacked.
For example, the commanders of American troops unit receive awards from the Government of the United States for the killing of civilians, while in my opinion, they should be shot for these war crimes.

UHM doode. The Warsaw pact collapsed with the fall of the Soviet union. And it's members fled to tyranny and joined nato to get away from you. Didn't they mention that in your state run media?????

A-a-a-nd? NATO was created to protect against the Communist threat, and when why NATO has not yet been abolished, although in Russia for more than 20 years there is no socialist system of society?

And there never was…but you prove to still be a threat.

That is, you want to say that this is the main Russian military aggressor and a threat to peace in the world, but not the United States? Everything is clear with you, guys.

Yes tell Georgia and the Ukraine that Russia is a peacful nation and wont invade. But I'm sure in your twisted sense of reality those were both America's fault too huh.

If I understand correctly, you refuse to admit that Ukraine and Georgia were US intelligence project for the expansion of NATO? I understand that the American mind has nothing to do with the human mind.
The only thing that I see in you a desire to competition, not cooperation for peace.

And if I understand correctly, Russia still chose to invade a sovereign nation just because they didnt like who they were associating with. Seems you are just as dirty as you claim we are, huh

woodchip wrote:I think TC has forgotten that the UN sanctioned that little incursion into Iraq.

I can't explain why the UN believed Bush's load of bullcrap either. Even Colin Powell fell for it. But I will tell you one thing. As soon as Bush started his rhetoric about how we need to get rid of that bad old Saddam and that the U.S. was just the country to do it and that Afghanistan and Bin Laden just weren't important anymore, I smelled a big, heaping, stinky pile of crap. Maybe my BS sniffer is better than the UN's. Maybe the UN forgot that Bush's daddy was embarrassed he hadn't finished the job and taken over all that oil when he had the chance and that his son maybe wanted some payback. Either way, we'll never know if Saddam could have kept the lid on the sectarian violence, will we?

sigma wrote:A-a-a-nd? NATO was created to protect against the Communist threat, and when why NATO has not yet been abolished, although in Russia for more than 20 years there is no socialist system of society?

You know, that's a damn good question. Why is there still a NATO? Russia is no longer a communist nation, so why still have what amounts to a military organization of European countries, lorded over by the U.S. I might add, that's still around as a protector against commies? What commies? An entity that was created to counter the Soviets, who are NOT still around by the way. I can see why Russia STILL has a cold war mindset when WE keep harboring the same mindset for some idiotic reason. We're so commie fearful we can't see the trees for the forest anymore. What's funny is that China must be the correct form of communism in our eyes because they make things for us cheap like a good capitalist drools over in his dreams. Never mind that China's government is a hard line communist government that represses it's people and allows corporations to pollute their land all in the pursuit of profit, and could nuke us just as easily as Russia could. In fact, they're more likely to do it than Russia if we defend Japan and Taiwan in any standoff with the Chinese. U.S. foreign policy and economic policy is just plain weird.

CUDA wrote:And if I understand correctly, Russia still chose to invade a sovereign nation just because they didnt like who they were associating with. Seems you are just as dirty as you claim we are, huh

I don't see the Crimean people waging a war on the Russians in an effort to evict them, do you? Maybe because the Crimeans are mostly Russian. It remains to be seen if they like being a part of Russia. Maybe they'll get buyer's remorse and we can go in and evict the Russians when they change their minds, all to show Putin the error of his ways.