|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on Mar 17, 2024 20:41:05 GMT
So if we used chemical weaponry, which are technically WMD, to kill somebody like Snowden, that would not be an attack on Russia? Correct That's mental. It would absolutely be an attack on Russia. It would risk large numbers potentially of Russian civilians and it would be a grotesque violation of their sovereignty. Any suggestion otherwise just isn't serious. |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Mar 17, 2024 20:41:43 GMT
Republic of Chechnya
Putin: 99.28%
Slutsky: 0.39%
Kharitonov: 0.21%
Davankov: 0.09%
Think it is safe to say that Uncle Ramzan has won the prize for delivering the best result.
|
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Mar 17, 2024 20:45:31 GMT
That's mental. It would absolutely be an attack on Russia. It would risk large numbers potentially of Russian civilians and it would be a grotesque violation of their sovereignty. Any suggestion otherwise just isn't serious. It is you who are not serious. Intelligence agencies frequently carry out assassinations, among other things, in foreign countries. Doing so, while possibly reckless, is not an attack on those countries. |
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Mar 17, 2024 21:13:30 GMT
No he didn't - he failed to take out the so called 'traitors' who survived but his agents did kill UK citizen Dawn Sturgess. Her death had nothing to do with the UK sticking its nose in Russia's business - it was a consequence of Putin's henchmen wandering around Wiltshire with nerve agents specifically outlawed by international treaty. thank you Michael, I was going to point out that British civilians have been caught up in Putin's war against "traitors". It's bad enough to kill your own nationals in other countries, it's worse still to do it in a way which harms people who have no interest in Russia whatsoever & have done nothing apart from being unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I strongly agree with forfarshireconservative's previous comments too. That's what the West usually calls "collateral damage". |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,593
|
Post by john07 on Mar 17, 2024 21:13:31 GMT
Best result for Putin so far is in Tuva where he got 95.96%. Worst result so far is Arkhangelsk where he got 78.14%. Stalin would have had the electoral commissioners shot for piss-poor results like that! |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Mar 17, 2024 21:21:08 GMT
Here is a vaguely interesting one.
Votes from abroad
Putin: 51.49%
Davankov: 32.59%
Kharitonov: 2.75%
Slutsky: 2.14%
In 2018 Putin took 85% of the votes from abroad
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,246 
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Mar 17, 2024 22:02:31 GMT
Ad democratic: EurAsia's illiberal demoCracies have more right to be called that, as our demoCracies can represent only the majority (and often not even this, cf. opinionPolls during terms). Ad liberal: Yes, freedom is important and as such i am generally on the western side. But here You cannot discuss any longer in public the imPlications of genetics or whether climateChange is entirely human-made or quote certain parts of the Bible. In (parts of) the East You still can. I know several people, who have or intend to emigrate for that reason from WestEurope (and sadly even from the country based on faith-freedom) to Russia. Of course you can. The fact people might not agree with you, or even, horror of horrors, call you names, doesn’t mean you can’t discuss those things. Of course You cannot: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/street-preacher-was-charged-with-hate-crime-for-quoting-bible-at-lesbians-xbrhgr25rNot the only case. Myself i had the pleasure & honour, that pseudoScientists tried to make any scientific career of me (but given our univ.s are full of those ungifted voles&tramps i was anyWay not willing to make any) impossible by denouncing a quote from KANT (!!!) as "racist" a.s.o. |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,541
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 17, 2024 22:41:40 GMT
Best result for Putin so far is in Tuva where he got 95.96%. Worst result so far is Arkhangelsk where he got 78.14%. Those combination of numbers are entirely uncredible in themselves. It's a good job you're known as a democracy-hating troll already because otherwise you'd need labeling as a credulous fool for giving any credence whatsoever to the figures coming out of Russia. |
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 21,835
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Mar 17, 2024 22:45:29 GMT
Totally believable Saddam Hussein margin here I seem to remember that the last time Saddam Hussain was elected as President of Iraq, he got literally 100.00% (not 99.whatever%) of the votes, on a turnout of 100.00% (not 99.whatever%). |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Mar 17, 2024 23:09:46 GMT
Putin's Russia - More democratic than Saddam's Iraq
Hmm...
|
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Mar 18, 2024 0:01:27 GMT
Of course you can. The fact people might not agree with you, or even, horror of horrors, call you names, doesn’t mean you can’t discuss those things. Of course You cannot: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/street-preacher-was-charged-with-hate-crime-for-quoting-bible-at-lesbians-xbrhgr25rNot the only case. Myself i had the pleasure & honour, that pseudoScientists tried to make any scientific career of me (but given our univ.s are full of those ungifted voles&tramps i was anyWay not willing to make any) impossible by denouncing a quote from KANT (!!!) as "racist" a.s.o. Your arguments are about as consistent as your spelling. |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Mar 18, 2024 0:24:27 GMT
Best result for Putin so far is in Tuva where he got 95.96%. Worst result so far is Arkhangelsk where he got 78.14%. Those combination of numbers are entirely uncredible in themselves. It's a good job you're known as a democracy-hating troll already because otherwise you'd need labeling as a credulous fool for giving any credence whatsoever to the figures coming out of Russia. Putin doing very well in Tuva compared to Arkhangelsk is not remotely surprising and the fact that you think otherwise only demonstrates you own ignorance of Russian politics. Tuva has long been one of Putin's best regions (3rd best in 2018, 5th best in 2012, 8th best in 2004) while Arkhangelsk was pretty poor for him in 2012 and 2018. The reasons for this are pretty obvious to anyone with basic knowledge of the subject at hand. |
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Mar 18, 2024 2:00:11 GMT
He did not use chemical weapons against us, he took out Russian traitors on British soil. A reckless action for sure but not an attack on us. As for the shooting down on of MH17, exactly what happened is far from clear but it seems all but certain that it was neither a deliberate act or that Putin knew anything about it. The threats of nuclear war are rhetoric and given the UK's involvement in the Ukrainian conflict harassing Shapp's plane is not an unreasonably aggressive act. To the extent that Putin is a threat to the UK it is only because we choose to stick our nose in Russia's business. "Russia's business" being: invading a sovereign country in an illegal war, annexing regions under the blanket of fake referendums, and murdering opposition leaders. This sham election bolsters Putin to invade eastern Europe and if it wasn't our issue before, it certainly will be then. Hungary, arguably Slovakia, are turned to the dark side. We can't allow any other country to join them. Hungary acts in what it perceives to be its own interests. It's nobody's stooge. Not the kremlins, nor Brussels. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,671
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Mar 18, 2024 12:18:06 GMT
I'd been pondering how much Putin really would need to lean on the election to win considering he was floating around 60% in opinion polls for months, and nobody else above 20%. He was well on track to win, it would probably only have needed the lightest of touches to ensure the "right" result while also looking believable - for certain values of believable.
Though he's successfully ensured his continuence, one of his biggest tasks now is succession planning. All men are mortal. It's clear he believes in a strong Russia, and it wouldn't be in character to let the country collapse in his absence.
|
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Mar 18, 2024 12:21:36 GMT
I'd been pondering how much Putin really would need to lean on the election to win considering he was floating around 60% in opinion polls for months, and nobody else above 20%. He was well on track to win, it would probably only have needed the lightest of touches to ensure the "right" result while also looking believable - for certain values of believable. Though he's successfully ensured his continuence, one of his biggest tasks now is succession planning. All men are mortal. It's clear he believes in a strong Russia, and it wouldn't be in character to let the country collapse in his absence. He has hinted about possible changes in the Russian government so it is possible that we about to see a preferred successor elevated to high office. However I suspect such a move is more likely to take place after the next legislative elections which are due in 2026. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Mar 18, 2024 13:05:04 GMT
I'd been pondering how much Putin really would need to lean on the election to win considering he was floating around 60% in opinion polls for months, and nobody else above 20%. He was well on track to win, it would probably only have needed the lightest of touches to ensure the "right" result while also looking believable - for certain values of believable. Though he's successfully ensured his continuence, one of his biggest tasks now is succession planning. All men are mortal. It's clear he believes in a strong Russia, and it wouldn't be in character to let the country collapse in his absence. He has hinted about possible changes in the Russian government so it is possible that we about to see a preferred successor elevated to high office. However I suspect such a move is more likely to take place after the next legislative elections which are due in 2026. The aftermath of a presidential election is always a good time to do this sort of thing, not least because if it isn't working, you can bring in a new face ready for those elections. His namecheck of Patrushev junior last year in the much-vaunted "major speech" would suggest a long-term role for him. Or it could be someone we've not even considered, as the cabinet includes a fair few who are too old (Lavrov is surely ruled out on age),just do not fit the template, or who have too much noise around them (Khusnullin). |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Mar 18, 2024 13:42:31 GMT
He has hinted about possible changes in the Russian government so it is possible that we about to see a preferred successor elevated to high office. However I suspect such a move is more likely to take place after the next legislative elections which are due in 2026. The aftermath of a presidential election is always a good time to do this sort of thing, not least because if it isn't working, you can bring in a new face ready for those elections. His namecheck of Patrushev junior last year in the much-vaunted "major speech" would suggest a long-term role for him. Or it could be someone we've not even considered, as the cabinet includes a fair few who are too old (Lavrov is surely ruled out on age),just do not fit the template, or who have too much noise around them (Khusnullin). Ordinarily I would agree but I think they will want to wait until the Ukrainian conflict is either over or at very least has wound down. Depending on how things go will determine the type of person they need as the next President. Lavrov was never in contention, he is an exceptional functionary but not part of the inner circle. |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Mar 18, 2024 13:55:19 GMT
100% counted
Putin: 76,277,708 (87.28%)
Kharitonov: 3,678,470 (4.31%)
Davankov: 3,362,484 (3.85%)
Slutsky: 2,795,629 (3.20%)
I can't find any exact figures but that is about 1 million invalid ballots.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 16,930
|
Post by right on Mar 18, 2024 14:56:16 GMT
Here is a vaguely interesting one. Votes from abroad Putin: 51.49% Davankov: 32.59% Kharitonov: 2.75% Slutsky: 2.14% In 2018 Putin took 85% of the votes from abroad |
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on Mar 18, 2024 18:06:09 GMT
All these Russian Putinists in Europe should piss off. If he's that great, why are they here?
|
|
