What is it with stupid people and Russia?

You really do a good job. I love your blog and read it all the time! Don’t let all the other ‘stuff’ in the way of you writing about Russia…!

Sometimes I just wonder if the Russophobe just isn’t very lucky with the men and that’s where all her anger comes from – sexual frustration 😉 And I’m not saying that to pick a fight, it’s just what more often than not comes to my mind while I’m reading her blog… And I’m certainly not saying that because I’m pro-Putin. Though I’m practically blogging out of some GULAG camp in Siberia!

Josefina´s last blog post..Sankta Lucia: Take 1

I’m sure most of your readers appreciate the nuance and intelligence of what you write – so don’t be discouraged by the vocal minority such as these two idiots! This sort of polarisation does seem to happen a lot in blog threads no matter what the subject (have you seen Youtube’s?), but I agree there seems to be something particularly venomous about the Russian ones.

Great post Andy. As a fellow victim of “Stupid people and Russia,” I wholeheartedly sympathize.Just remember when you piss off both extremes, it means you’re doing something right.

Sean´s last blog post..(Un)documenting Stalinism?

That’s referring to the mentioned troll like efforts which don’t appear to have been made against you.

Earnest and spirited dialogue in a respectful enough way shouldn’t be confused with some of the more disgusting manner being provoked in cyber.

Earnest folks need to be careful about getting sucked into such a web of deceit. This reality puts some people off altogether from participating.

In such an instance, a form of terrorism has won.

The use of the word “trap” possibly suggests that Russia had something sinister planned.

There’s another way of looking at this particular matter.

Recent history influenced the Russian government on the need to be militarily prepared. The Kremlin knew of the Georgian military buildup and some comments made by Georgian government officials regarding Abkhazia and South Ossetia (specifically, on the desire to retake the two lands in question). Based on these points, the Russian government made sure to have contingency plans in the event of a Georgian military strike (like the one which occurred this past Aug. 7).

@Tristan – from now on, SL will subject Russia to scrutiny through the medium of interpretative art. No words allowed…

Or maybe not.

Andy´s last blog post..What is it with stupid people and Russia?

I usually write my stupid comments on Kyle’s blog, but now I’ve found another victim to torment, BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Clark´s last blog post..Zappadan Day 6: Zappa Conducts Ravel’s Bolero

I just wanted to let you know…that I could totally hug you. I find your blog exceptionally fascinating. Keep it up! 🙂

Andy,
The reality is quite simple – I didn’t like your previous article. It’s unoriginal, almost reads like something written by Lucas, plus the points made by Sam. I don’t think he is an “idiot”, although I agree that the two ad hominems at the start and at the end were unnecessary – but why worry over them? You’ve had more than half a million unique visitors – does it make a difference if one of them stops reading you?

Also, criticizing an article does not mean that that feeling extends to yourself, or your other articles – some of which are very good, like the one about Khalkin-Gol and Russian bond girls. I for one will continue checking up on SL from time to time, as I usually do.

Anyway, sorry if I offended you. After receiving hate mail from Russophobe cyber goons (the likes of Kolchak) since starting DR a year ago, I’ve become somewhat more predisposed to angry rhetoric in situations that do not really call for it.

Da Russophile´s last blog post..Russia Economic Crisis III: On the Importance of Self-Sufficiency in Liquids

@Da Russophile – just to clarify – this article wasn’t really aimed at you. I’m sorry if you were inadvertently caught in the “crossfire” by my use of the phrase ‘Russophile’.

I don’t agree with most of what you said about the previous article (which is fine – you don’t agree with what I said either!), but your comments certainly don’t fit into the “stupid” category that wound me up. And they certainly didn’t offend me.

PS – I do agree, though, when you say that the previous article was unoriginal – I’m happy with the general argument it puts forward, but the article was actually a dusted off and rewritten version of a previous article, and wasn’t one of my finest.

@Irishman – it’s just a shame I’m rubbish at football.

@everyone else – thanks for the kind words. I wasn’t fishing for compliments, but it’s fascinating to see that the sentiments behind this post resonate so strongly among other Russia bloggers.

Andy´s last blog post..What is it with stupid people and Russia?

One view claims an increase in gunfire exchanges in the days leading up to the Aug. 7 strike.

The Georgian government and its sympathizers spin this period as South Ossetian/Russian provoked. On the other hand, Georgia was noticeably rebuilding its military, with some Georgian officials stressing the need to retake South Ossetia and Abkhazia. It’s Georgia seeking to reacquire South Ossetia and not vice versa.

In the spirit of this particular blog post and what some others express, I’m communicating the following:

Whether as Chrisius Maximus, Chris, totdy, and other, this kind of manner should be ideally kept out of the process (spiteful sarcasm, targeted personal taunts that get off topic and outright rude behavior):

http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@98.BC6ae9L2lRg@.7760b692/657

http://seansrussiablog.org/2007/02/07/andrei-vlasovs-legacy/#comment-53316

The above reflects a partial listing.

I repeatedly made efforts to keep it on the subject, only to get subjected to such obnoxious trolling. Note what someone else here recently said on the subject.

Unlike some others, I can sincerely say that I favor as open a forum situation as possible – but with a certain sense of responsibility.

What has been allowed to carry on in some circles isn’t “academic” in the true sense of the meaning. The repetitiously displayed boorish manner seems to have a certain definite intent to demean and limit the process.

It’s phony to then suddenly take a kinder approach in the company of select others..

”@Irishman – it’s just a shame I’m rubbish at football.”

Not to worry Andy. Arrigo Saachi was a shoe salesman and never kicked a ball professionally in his life, but went on to lead Milan to three Scudetto and one European Cup. He also led Italy to defeat against Ireland in New York at USA ’94 (sorry, had to get that one in!:-))

”I repeatedly made efforts to keep it on the subject, only to get subjected to such obnoxious trolling. Note what someone else here recently said on the subject. ”

I did and meant it. I have overdone it more than once, and forgot that you are entitled to your opinions in fairness. You should learn Russian though. My Irish is pretty bad and I’m ensconsed in a native Irish speaking region now and havent a clue whats going on half the time, in my own country. Languages are crucial. You just have to spend an hour a day at it. I know its hard, no-one wants to do it (expected the gifted Maximus, who was born loving grammar, the lucky sod) but it just has to be done.

”“However I do think it was a Russian trap.”

Based on what evidence?”

The Russians had the Georgians spanked in two days flat and had troops pouring through the gorge the minute Georgian troops. The Ossetians started firing (allegedly) and hit the Georgians with gradi first. Which leads to two possible conclusions:

1. The Russians give the Ossetians gradi just for the heck of it and also station a few thousand troops just over the border, again for the heck of it.

2. The Russians were waiting for a flare up and took their chance with both hands.

I think it may be two. I could be wrong though, and usually am about these things, but the speed of the Russian victory does look like they were really well prepared for this. Maybe too well prepared.

On the surface, among other points, paragraphs three and four might appear strong in relation to what has been recently communicated.

On the other hand, its main premise has legitimacy. Some creepy things have been said and I’m understandably perturbed (for lack of a better word)

http://www.russiablog.org/2008/06/next_time_spain_defeats_russia.php

In retrospect, in some instances, I could’ve chosen a different way of addressing such manner. This doesn’t negate my repeated efforts at earnest dialogue. One galling aspect dealt with a host/moderator claiming to advocate the same – only to contradict himself. as was noted by someone here, i didn’t deserve such treatment. It hasn’t stopped me.

Over the years, I’ve interacted with a number of intelligent and well educated Russians and non-Russians with an interest (professional and otherwise) in the sort of subjects I comment on.

I greatly appreciate the exchanges and am pleased to know that the feeling is mutual.

IMO, It’s beastly to privately or publicly seek to limit such activity in one form or another.

Andy’s post seems to touch on these aspects.

”i didn’t deserve such treatment. It hasn’t stopped me. ”

You didnt deserve it in fairness, and I wont be doing it again. Although I fundamentally disagree with you on a number of things, I shouldnt have went so far in my criticisms of you. It was poor debating indeed. And it has be said you do genuinely love Russia – and that deserves respect. I didnt bring up languages to offend you – I did it cos I know that even a bit of a lingo will give you a new and refreshing spin on things. I dont doubt you have read more on Russia in English than I have and many others. The only reason I bring up languages now is not to offend you – dont be offended – simply to show that its a great help. I’m in the local and the lads have to turn around and speak English to me. Its well worth the effort getting the books out, painful though it is.

”The Georgian government and its sympathizers spin this period as South Ossetian/Russian provoked. On the other hand, Georgia was noticeably rebuilding its military, with some Georgian officials stressing the need to retake South Ossetia and Abkhazia. It’s Georgia seeking to reacquire South Ossetia and not vice versa. ”

I have heard a lot of Russians say that Georgians are prone to bravado and may well have been under the impression that they could actually hurt Russia. Clearly the reverse was true.

NEVER MIJND THAT SEAN GUILLORY AND OTHERS DON’T KNOW RUSSIAN, WITH YOU NOT HIGHLIGHTING THAT.

There’s no doubting that I’m more well versed than Guillory and others on a number of Russia related issues.

This knowledge doesn’t just involve reading.

BTW, the latest Doss crank involves a moniker with a comic book twang and Doss’ repetitious suggestion of poor grammar on my part.

Never mind that Doss’s own grammar has been found to be faulty. In additon, he doesn’t go out of his way correcting the faulty grammar of others. A sleazy SOB for sure.

”The only person in the world, other Saakashvili, who still asserts this stuff is you. The OECD doesn’t seem to believe it.”

I didnt assert anything; I simply said thats the impression I got. The Russians were there very quickly, closed headquarters or not. And it was a lot faster than a day – on the day the Olympics started the Russians were beating the shit out of Georgia when the fun had only started in earnest the previous night.

”Allegedly, that is, according to Saakashvili, who also claimed that Tskhinvaili was destroyed by the Russians, who also claimed that the Russians had attacked the pipeline, who also claimed that the Russians were marching on Tbilisi.”

This is great stuff – pity it has no relevance. You’re simply using what you believe to be a lie to prove something else you believe to be a lie. You may be right, but it doesnt prove your case.

”Nobody in the military seems to believe it.”
”The OECD doesn’t seem to believe it.”

Plenty of ‘seems’, are there any ‘doesn’ts’?

Very true Irishman Russia was there quickly, get on Google Earth and look at the distances involved. We’re not talking about distances of 100s of miles/kilometers here were takling about 10s of. Flight time for warplanes was minutes in most cases.

From what I gather the Russian aircraft were hitting the Georgians at dawn, within 12 hours of the opening bombardment Russian army units were crossing the mountains and into SO. Why? Because the Russians had their forces in a high state of readiness, they expected something to happen. Events prior to that such as Condi Rices visit to Tblisi and Israel breaking some armaments deals were clues.
I don’t think the Russians set a trap, they just sat and waited for the idiots in Tblisi to do something and it turns out they took the opportunity and got their asses handed to them.

Just wanted to ck, on something I wrote – which is why I came back.

Scrat:

As you no doubt know, the term “rapid deployment force” refers to quick responces.

I suspect we’ve not been given all of the particulars.

There’re instances when one side in a conflict can get a tip in advance.

All things considered, I don’t think the Russians were really looking to cruise for a bruise in this one.

” have no doubt that there were some people involved on the Russian side that wanted something to happen, I think Russia needed it to happen to teach the west a lesson, especially the US. It appears to have worked.”

”There’re instances when one side in a conflict can get a tip in advance.

All things considered, I don’t think the Russians were really looking to cruise for a bruise in this one.”

I would agree with the above I guess. Whilst not a trap I suppose, I do think the Russians were itching for a chance, and lets face it, they bloody took it.

”Very true Irishman Russia was there quickly, get on Google Earth and look at the distances involved. We’re not talking about distances of 100s of miles/kilometers here were takling about 10s of. Flight time for warplanes was minutes in most cases. ”

Its a fact, by friday lunchtime Russian troops were spanking Georgia, and it supposedly started on the thursday evening. It just struck me that the Russians were very quick indeed at getting down to business. Now that may be down to experience, but it was very fast deployment.

”It sure beats Russia Today’s repetitious comments about Alexy’s “nationalism.” An example of that network taking to some of the biases evident in Western mass media.”

But he was a nationalist. He blessed troops heading to Chechnya on their dirty mission. If that isnt nationalism I dont know what is. Nationalist does have negatibe connotations, and I think RT are right to use this word about him. To me patriotism is criticising your country constructively when its wrong; nationalism is supporting it even when its wrong.

Still yet one more (as soon as I posted my last set of comments, I noticed a new post)

The last Alexy follow-point doesn’t negate the selectivity in how “nationalism” is applied. A specific was given at this thread.
As for Chechnya, there was extreme brutality on the Chechen separatist side. A point which has been authoratitvely detailed elsewhere. Blessing troops doesn’t necessarily mean supporting manner considered unacceptable in warfare.

The poorly funded and trained Russian armed forces got caught in a difficult situation. Like I said before, this no doubt influenced the better Russian military performance on former Georgian SSR territory. Another factor has to do with the Georgian government side not having the same overall brutal aspects that was evident in Chechnya.

Among the best of the recently released articles (IMO) on Alexy have been in Russia Profile (Zolotov and Babich) and The NYT (Kishkovsky)

”The last Alexy follow-point doesn’t negate the selectivity in how “nationalism” is applied”

I do agree that it is selectively applied. But in Alexei II’s case it is not. He was a Russian nationalist.

”Blessing troops doesn’t necessarily mean supporting manner considered unacceptable in warfare.”

Of course that is true, but Alexei knew well what was going on in the South and made no protest. Surely he claimed to represent the Russian Orthodox Church and by blessing troops was he not at the very least endorsing their mission? If I was an ROC and didnt want war I’d be pretty unhappy that the Patriarch was doing what he was doing. I know this stuff is common in many countries, but that doesnt make it right. It doesnt take much reading of the Bible to figure out that Jesus was against killing. Who exactly was Alexei answerable to, The Lord or Boris Yeltsin? I suspect he was pre-occupied with more earthly matters, such as funding church rebuilding and avoiding getting banned again like back in the early 1920s.

Scrat – thanks for the interesting and informative comments. They were quick but I think you, MA and CD are right, it wasnt a trap. More like opportunity knocked on the door.

”As for Chechnya, there was extreme brutality on the Chechen separatist side. A point which has been authoratitvely detailed elsewhere.”

Actually the Russians kicked off the extreme brutality. The first Russian tank forces captured in November 1994 were actually imprisoned underneath the Presidential Palace and eventually handed back (courtesy of the soldiers mothers , not the efforts of the Russian state which were zero, and tried to deny for ages that they even were Russian troops!). A few weeks later the Russian bombardment began, followed by the New Years Eve massacre, where the Chechens beheaded many Russian tank-troops and put them on lamp-posts. I’m not condoning that at all, it was dreaful, but Russia should not have bombed Grozny with planes and artillery in the first place – I think that this was the single biggest mistake of the First Chechen War (apart from being spanked in Grozny in 1996). It turned what could have been a small series of battles with intermediate negotiations into an all-out war in the worst sense.
Anyway, we can never agree on this subject I think!

I’m guilty for sure of not keeping away.

In Chechnya, Russians were being persecuted there by extremists, with many Russians fleeing.

There’s no legitimate denying the gruesome behavior of some of the Chechen separatists. Ignoring this isn’t accurate. Scrat touches on this point, concerning the non-Russian human rights abuses in Chechnya. This explains in good part why separatist appeal has declined in Chechnya. The situation in Chechnya became unbearable for reasons that can’t be accurately pinned on Russia – but on the internal flaws within Chechnya. Saying all this doesn’t excuse how Rusisa conducted itself militarily.

As noted before and in relation to this subject, greater autonomy doesn’t necessarily mean better human rights conditions. In the American south, “states’ rights” advocates were known to use an otherwise earnest appeal to better enact restrictive measures against Blacks. In post-Soviet Russia, places like Tatarstan, Kalmykia and Chechnya of the last decade (the two instances when it had noticeable autonomy) haven’t been considered among the most democratic or humane of places in Russia (the “humane” points especially relate to the last two).

In this sense, I believe Scrat to be right. Chechnya still has a way to go in returning to what can be considered a reasonably normal state.

Yeah, I kind of prefer not discussing what has already been discussed at length before among the same people – with nothing new offered.

”Not likely. I personally believe the Russians did them a favor, it wasn’t long after the Chechen declaration of independance before slave markets were open again. ”

Scrat there is no doubt there were incidents of slavery, people put in pits etc but this was not systemic or widespread in 1991-1994. Indeed according to a Russian acquintance of mine who’d lived in Grozny and another Russian commenting at SRB there were no gang rapes, mass murders or much of the other horrors that Russian media were claiming happened during that period, and indeed the guy at SRB (I’ll find the thread and link it) said that life was reasonably OK during that time. The Chechens did admittedly allow lunatics out of hospitals and murderers out of jail – of that there is no dispute. Most Russians did not leave Chechnya until after the Russian invasion. I have no doubt that the place was dangerous and unstable but a Russian invasion was hardly the right response. In fact Chechnya had one of the few working economies of the whole RF at the time, although of course most of it was illegal. But people were fed and life continued.

”Yeah, I kind of prefer not discussing what has already been discussed at length before among the same people – with nothing new offered.”

The only person who offered nothing new here is actually you. Were you even aware that Russian troops were captured in November 1994, before the war proper started, and were denied as being Russian by the Kremlin for ages? They were fed and watered under the Palace. Not too much of that happening at Mozdok I would think. You have engaged in the usual whataboutery and made the same statements about human rights again as if Russia herself was some sort of saint at the time. To CD’s and Scrat’s credit they know something about Chechnya; you however do not and are right to withdraw from the conversation.

”Among other examples, when the UK responded to the Argentine takeover of the Falklands, I don’t recall there being a stated wave of British nationalism”

You dont recall because you arent from this part of the world. There was a huge wave of Brit nationalism at the time of Las Malvinas – indeed it saved Margaret Thatcher’s job. If you doubt me ask Tim Newman or Andy. Argentina would have her revenge 4 years later at Mexico City though:-)

”On the use of the n word (nationalism), how often are American leaders called nationalists?”

I thought we were talking about Alexei II. So, was he answerable to God or Vladimir Putin and Boris Yeltsin? Which was it? The Russian Constitution or the Bible?

With plenty of evidence, Russians left Chechnya en masse because of some of the extremist bullying against them.

This included signs that read along the lines of Russians don’t leave, we need slaves.

At a now downed forum, a couple of Russians and one other person pasted the silly nonsense of overwhelmingly evil Russians against virtuous Chechens.

” probably have a better recollection of the Falkands war than yourself. I don’t recall the N word (nationalism) being used to describe the British reply to the Argentine takeover.”

You probably do, being of greater vintage than me. But clearly you are unaware of The Sun newspaper and its importance in Britain, or how it whips up nationalism anytime Britain heads off to a foreign war. If you think that nationalism does not motivate a majority of Brits when it comes to foreign wars, then you know nothing of Britain at all. Without The influence of the likes of The Sun it is debateable whether or not Britain could actually send troops anywhere. At any rate Las Malvinas asked for help, and I dont see what this has to do with Alexei II in the first place. You took issue with RTs labelling of him, I replied they are right. Do you actually have a counterpoint, or are you going to waste your time pointing at Britain, the US or everywhere else?

”With plenty of evidence, Russians left Chechnya en masse because of some of the extremist bullying against them.”

There is no evidence of the mass migration of Russians from Chechnya before the war started, cos it didnt happen. Admittedly Russians would be loathe to leave their apartments – far and away the biggest thing in the life of a Russian – but life was not unbearable for Russians pre-December 1994. Russian bombing did that.

”At a now downed forum, a couple of Russians and one other person pasted the silly nonsense of overwhelmingly evil Russians against virtuous Chechens.”

This is a total Red Herring. I never described Chechens as virtuous; indeed they are difficult people and most definitely tend towards violence far more quickly than most nationalities. But evil and virtue have no place in the discussion – these are subjective terms with no use. Both the Russians and Chechens were brutal, the main difference being the Russians levelled the place.

”You got it wrong again and this time I’ll really make an effort to stay away from here. ”

The first clause is not yours to judge and the second clause has obvously not been borne out. I have made a conscious effort not to offend you here and listen to your points, but as usual you cannot handle disagreement. Its pretty sad, and bearing that in mind I think I should exeunt myself.

I was about 7 or 8 at the time of the Falklands war, but even I remember the wave of nationalism / patriotism that came back with the British Navy…

Nationalism doesn’t tend to be a particular problem in America as far as I can tell – largely because America doesn’t really have a national (racial) identity that underpins its society to the extent that it underpins European societies.

Andy´s last blog post..Word Cloud

db (Chris Doss)

Another example of how disturbed an individual you are.

Of late, I understand that you’ve somewhat acknowledged that alcohol might explain your demented state at these venues.

You’re a “legend’ among trolls.

Andy

Alexy’s so-called “nationalism” embraced the other main faiths in Russia. Key Muslim, Budhist and Jewish leaders in Russia seemed to have been on good terms with him.

Contary to the once gain displayed trolling here, I’m the one being the more earnest.

Sucking up to the db moniker of Chris Doss serves as a confirmation.

Later with the dreck.

There was much havoc in Chehnya before the lead up to the start of the first Chechen war. Russian did in fact leave in liarge numbers for the reason stated. Not all Checehens displayed neagtyive manner. This explains why a good number of Russians remained.

On the matter of looks, Chris Doss’ apparent friend looks like he can lose some weight:

http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/

See how he plays up to the Chris Doss kook.

http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20080602/009552.html

”Contary to the once gain displayed trolling here, I’m the one being the more earnest.”

Not to start a flamewar here, but I havent been trolling. And db is not Chris Doss.

” brought up the Falklands for the clearly stated reason I gave.

Not being able to comprehend it explains part of the problem, which is certainly no fault of my own.”

You brought up an example – which in any case 3 seperate people have shown to be wrong – which had no relevance whatsoever to your point that RT incorrectly called Alexei II a nationalist. He was a nationalist. No, methinks the confusion lies not in Connemara or London or Moscow, but in New York.

And I havent trolled against you. You’re always saying you want earnest discussion; thats what I am giving to you. Stop turning everything into a zero-sum game.

”db is an obnxious troll in the Chris Doss manner. Showing the kind of approval for such input constitutes trolling.”

Its just amazing how he finds the stuff he does. I dont think most actual Californian surfer dudes would even call themselves that!:-)

”You once again overlook what was actaully said pertaining to nationalism and Alexy.”

I overlooked nothing at all and anyone reading can see this. You have not provided a shred of evidence that he was not a nationalist, and worse referred to an example – a wrong one – that Britain was unnaffected by nationalism during the Falklands War. I dont think you even know what you’re trying to get at.

[quote]There is no evidence of the mass migration of Russians from Chechnya before the war started, cos it didnt happen. Admittedly Russians would be loathe to leave their apartments – far and away the biggest thing in the life of a Russian – but life was not unbearable for Russians pre-December 1994. Russian bombing did that.[/quote]

I suggest you do some reading. You’re flatout wrong. Not only were Russians persecuted in Chechneya but in just about every other small country in the area you can think of to one extent or another.

No Andy didn’t “catch” me on the Falklands.

As Scrat astutely suggests, you don’t appear to be so familar with the subject matter.

One unnamed Russian at another blog doesn’t serve as ample proof to what you’re suggesting.

As previously noted, some Russians did stay. Most Russians and Chechens aren’t extremists. However, there was enough extremism against Russians to confirm what has been communicated.

Among known experts in the field, Robert Bruce Ware seems to share the fact based views of others besides myself. The same seems to be true of Charles William Maynes and Dmitry Simes.

”One unnamed Russian at another blog doesn’t serve as ample proof to what you’re suggesting.”

Actually I named four books, three of which were specifically about the First Chechen War. You however, have no such references at all.

”Among known experts in the field, Robert Bruce Ware seems to share the fact based views of others besides myself. The same seems to be true of Charles William Maynes and Dmitry Simes.”

Could you name the books or research papers written by these guys that confirm your views? And how many Russians do they reckon left before the war? You have actually read the, havent you? Its not like the situation a while back where you clearly hadnt read that book on the Soviet Union/Nazi deal about Czechslovakia? Sorry for bringing that up, but you do have ‘form’.

”As previously noted, some Russians did stay. Most Russians and Chechens aren’t extremists. ”

No Mike, MOST, not some, of the Russians in Chechnya did stay. They left when their own government bombed and destryoed the country and killed upwards of 20,000 of them in the First Chechen War. Have you figured out what an aul is yet Mike? Its not a Russian word so it might not confuse you too much.

”He suggested a comparison, and I pointed out that it was wrong. Things like this are the whole point of having a comments section, surely…?”

I do agree; but most people, when wrong, put their hands up, and at least try to explain what they are getting at. Mike, as usual, has made no attempt to do this and instead started the insults. Par for the course I suppose, and a pattern repeated everywhere in the blogosphere. I’m still waiting to hear how Alexei was not a nationalist, though its a wait in vain I suspect.

”In particular, I find the use of wording in the Wikipedia quote fascinating: it says non-Chechens “left… amidst reports of violence”, rather than as a result of violence. ”

I just read that, and one of the references is Memorial who I’d actually be inclined to believe. Lots of Russians did leave, but most didnt – as the casualty figures on the page indicate (very high maybe?)

“It gives three footnotes, but none are accessible, so I too would be interested to see if anyone can back this up.”

The Jewish Telegraph Agency reported on this extensively at the time, focussing mainly as you would expect on violence against Jews. I thought it was common knowledge. I mean, would you hang around in Chechnya in 1991-1994 in the midst of a nationalist/ultranationalist movement in conditions of zero law enforcement if you were an ethnic minority?

There was extensive violence on the part of Chechen gangs and individuals against non-Chechens, mostly murder and expropriation of property.

The Russian side in this is not out there in any strength. I do know one thing though. My wifes best friend lives in Gomel Belarus. She lived in Vladikavkaz in the 80s, had a daughter, a husband a nice apartment a career. All of that changed, she lost her job, her husband was killed on the street, she was raped twice before she finally left, penniless, a refugee. She came to Belarus and started a new life. She is remarried has a second daughter, a good husband and a small business. Her eldest daughter is going to the university.

“There was extensive violence on the part of Chechen gangs and individuals against non-Chechens, mostly murder and expropriation of property.”

Were she here she would back you up Chris. This didn’t only happen in Chechnya either. All of the old republics had it to some degree or another.

Well Scrat, some people’s fantasies, that this kind of thing would take place would be obvious to anybody who has actually bothered to read any Ichkerian literature and noticed that it is basically fascist. I’m not one to bandy that word around much, but in the case of Ichkerianism with its emphasis on Blut und Boden and desire to return “Ichkeria” to a premodern, ethnically pure state of pristine rustic mountain tribes (going so far as to celebrate the destruction of Grozny!!), it’s a pretty close fit.

Sure, anybody from Uzbekistan with tell you how the Russians and Jews and Armenians were forced out. Happened all over the place. God I hate tribalism.

Here’s Micheals article and like I said Andy, it’s safe to point a finger at Russia for a journalist when they write something.

“Anna Matveeva guardian.co.uk, Saturday 13 December 2008 10.00 GMT Article historyA Russophobia virus has infected the air. What is it? It is when an English literature teacher in a good school, explaining how to answer an exam question on comedy, tells your daughter: “Don’t worry, simply write – I am Russian, I do not have a sense of humour.” Or the ease with which jokes like “You are Russian, you must know all about corruption,” are made. A BBC documentary presenter asks his Russian interpreter in the Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad: “Do you feel Russian or European?” What does he expect the woman to say?

When a fashionable detective writer wants to write a thriller with a foreign twist, guess who will be the nemesis? An al-Qaida plot in Hackney runs the risk of being politically incorrect. But Russian dissidents and oligarchs chased by Scottish police fit the bill perfectly. The British media, mindful of inter-race relations, seeks to avoid hurting the feelings of Muslims, but the idea that Russians can feel hurt does not occur to them. For Russians in the west, if one is not an oligarch, pop star or secret assassin, and does not think that “Putin’s regime” is second-worst to that of Ivan the Terrible, treading these waters is problematic.

This is not to say that Russians in Britain are discriminated against in the workplace, or that my neighbours suspect me of dumping polonium when I throw rubbish away. Rather, it is possible to say things without thinking of what it might be like on the receiving end. Stereotypes promoted by the media are now entrenched: Russian companies are corrupt and are puppets of the state, minorities are not allowed to speak their languages and males are chauvinist machos. The economy survives on pumping gas, while the leadership dreams of conquering half of the world. News from Russia is bad news. It is hard to blame journalists for reporting what is newsworthy: saying that Russians go to supermarkets and buy the same food as their western counterparts is boring, while writing that Moscow hosts the first ever all-male strip joint is “sexy”.

The Russia-Georgia debacle brought these attitudes to the fore. The reaction of the media and the politicians was overwhelmingly anti-Russian, because their gut feeling told them who was in the wrong. More objective reports appeared much later. Why was the conflict in South Ossetia so important? Because Russia was a party to it. Readers were led to believe that minuscule South Ossetia is a proto-state like Kosovo, while no parallels were drawn with Nato action in ex-Yugoslavia in support of Albanians.

The question is: can Russia do anything good? In Russophobes’ eyes, it should (1) surrender and apologise, (2) give western companies control over natural reserves because Russians mismanage them anyhow, (3) limit their ambitions to culture and (4) award Boris Berezovsky a medal for democracy-promotion.

What feeds Russophobia? Moscow’s own actions are only part of the story. In the last few years several constituencies came together to create a new momentum. The cold warriors found a mission again. The existence of a familiar enemy who plays by the rules is more comfortable than the “enemy amongst us” who may work in a corner chip shop. Western liberals who passionately believed in Russia’s democratic transformation to their own recipe became disillusioned, turning the energy of embittered idealism into exposing the evils of “Putin’s KGB regime”. They were joined by immigrants who made their way in the new country by “unveiling the truth” about Russia.

What are the effects of Russophobia? Economically, as BP and Shell found out, it is harder to do business. Politically, it is impossible to conduct a frank dialogue on issues of common concern, as trust has gone out of the relationship. In the security field, it has resulted in militarisation on both sides, undermining the achievements of disarmament. Finally, polarising language flourishes. Unlike in the 1990s, the Russian elite reads English-language media, getting from it the idea that “the west is against us”.

Why should we care? Attitudes matter as Russia is at a crossroads. It can go either towards increased modernisation or militarisation. It can build pragmatic, but solid relations with the west, or it can indulge in spoiling the international game and setting up anti-western alliances. It is the responsibility of the western intelligentsia to see that stereotypes create enemies and not to miss their chance to prevent a new division of Europe.”

Returning to the neolithic is one of Ichkerianism’s express goals. Literally. Nuhaev wrote about this a lot.

???-???? ??? ??-?????? ?????????-)
?????????? ?????? ??????

I can agree with the rant to a degree. I would like to debate Russia as I am genuinely interested in the country. I have been there a few times often doing voluntary work for a few weeks every year and I have noticed that most people especially on the russophobe side have only second hand information about Russia. For instance on La Russophobe I pointed out that the claim that only state owned TV is broadcast terrestrially in Russia. Of course if you watched much Russian TV you would know that Euronews is broadcast terrestrially. Of course with that I was a Kremilin stooge effectively. This led me to believe they have no real intimate first hand experience of Russian culture or viewpoint. Looking at a few other posts on that and other sites I came to the conclusion that most people being critical of Russia often play to old russian stereo types and use second hand politically loaded information. Its largely propaganda on all sides. The problem with the internet is the crazies always come to the forefront. For me Russian blogs have become so politically loaded they are now inaccurate and illrevant.

At present, the currently above mentioned (Pontiac Sponsors College Football with Little Presence in the College Market) isn’t mine.

Michael Averko´s last blog post..Pontiac Sponsors College Football with Little Presence in the College Market

Francophobe is a word.

Chris:

Believe it or not I actualy have found people using the word Americanophobe. I am quite astounded that so many people can hate entire countries they have never been too. These ophobe websites I fell propagandists of the worst kind just not trying to influence people but actually influence them to hate.

“So the question should not be how did the Russians arrive in South Ossetia so slowly but how did it take them so long?”

Exactly. From my understanding (which is drawn from talking to an American scholar of the Russian military), the Russian operation has been EXCORIATED in the Russian military press for its slowness. The Russian military does not view it as a great success.

I agree. It’s absurd to think that an army of Russia’s calibre (much as we like to rubbish it compared to Western militaries, it’s still a decent army on a global scale) couldn’t react to an incident that took place 65 miles away from a major army base within 24 hours.

Imagine if, two or three years ago, Iran had invaded a part of Iraq that was 65 miles away from the nearest US troop base. How long would it be before the first US counter-attack was launched?

Andy´s last blog post..Siberian Light nominated as Best European Blog

Andy

Imagine if, two or three years ago, Iran had invaded a part of Iraq that was 65 miles away from the nearest US troop base. How long would it be before the first US counter-attack was launched?

You also have to take into account that Vladikavkaz is one of Russias largest and most combat ready military bases. It would be like Iran attacking US citizens 65 miles from Fort Bragg. Also 58th army where heavily involved in the Chechen and Ingush conflicts so they had a high level of combat experience.

Clearly Georgia despite Russia saying it would defend South Ossetia I think Georgia thought that its standing with the US and international community would prevent that. It was a high stakes game of bluff.

For clarity sake, Pridnestrovie is also referred to as Transnistria, Transdniestria, Transdnestr and Trans-Dniester.

Michael Averko´s last blog post..Disciples of George W. Bush Back Away From No Child Left Behind

”Incidentally, fantasies about a united Chechen people notwithstanding, ”

”Well Scrat, some people’s fantasies, that this kind of thing would take place would be obvious to anybody who has actually bothered to read any Ichkerian literature and noticed that it is basically fascist.”

Chris, if you’re referring to me, then do so, and not act like a big bloody blouse. I thought Moscow toughened people up, not softened them.

I have no fantasies about a united Chechen people. What I do have an issue with, and always had, is levelling a country with fighter bombers and tanks, killing around 40,000 people in the process (many of them Russians, who, shock-horror, hadnt left, indeed the majority of Russians did not leave until bombing started), a country which did not even belong to Russia until 200 years ago, and which I believe is fully entitled to run its own affairs if they so wish. I do appreciate that Chechnya was never a proper bordered country in any sense, but that did not give and still doesnt give the Russians the right to level the place and then have it run by paid gangsters. Thats my issue, not ‘Ichkerian Facism’. Listening to you one would think every Chechen who didnt want the Russians around was a Facist. Total bullshit. You seem to think every Chechen who took up a gun against the Russians was like Basaeyev or Abu Khattab(who wasnt even a bloody Chechen!). They werent. They were just people who didnt much fancy Russian tanks rolling in again. What precise problem you have with this I dont know.

“but the rest of us would have been happy simply with the minimum loss of life.”

Isn’t minimum loss of life basically what happened? Unless one things permitting Tbilisi to keep pounding South Ossetia and the corresponding reprisal attacks, likely escalating to partisan war, would somehow have involved less death?

Re: 10:59 PM Post

No, I handle criticism quite well “Irishman.” This includes dealing with your not so earnest approaches.

When compared to some other recent conflicts, the Russian counterattack against Georgia serves as an example of “humanitarian intervention.”

Don’t confuse your manner towards me with my facing three academics on a major worldwide radio show.

In that quote you refer to, I’m referring to this past summer’s war in the former Georgian SSR. This sdhould be clearly understood when referring to the commentary coming just before it.

Michael Averko´s last blog post..Joe The Plumber Is Now Joe The Journalist

He gets away from what I was replying to.

His other pints were already addressed at this and some other forums.

Michael Averko´s last blog post..A Tale of Two Anne’s

Funny.

The point being that it’s bogus to say that a certain mentioned person ducks critical views different from his own.

It’s comparitvely easier to perform in situations where one is shielded from such criticism.

Michael Averko´s last blog post..A Tale of Two Anne’s

You repeat what was earlier discussed. Someone with your prose and views posting as Finbar69 did the same elsewhere. That individual was soundly debunked.

You’re once again wrong in how you characterize what I said on Chechnya. It gets boring rehashing what you repeatedly bring up.

You end by getting off topic. A typical trait on your part.

In this recent salvo, you launched a BS cheap shot about my (as per what you said) not being able to take criticism. I appropriately replied.

Michael Averko´s last blog post..A Tale of Two Anne’s

Try sticking with the issues, in addition to not rehashing what has been repeatedly stated.

That’s good discussion and media.

That’s what I’m about.

Michael Averko´s last blog post..A Tale of Two Anne’s

You’ve lied before, as per a Russia Blog link I posted where you falsely accused me of palgiarism. That link was posted earlier at this thread.

How coincidental is it for another Irishman to post at another Russia related site with your prose and views?

You’re a creepy little crank, who has hacked away cheap shots at other sites. That’s no lie.

In your 1059 PM post here, it’s made clear clear that you were replying to me. You do this by quoting my eartlier comments at this thread. I appropriately replied to it.

I’m trying to maintain a new year’s resolution of keeping away from vile cranks like yourself. On the other hand, I don’t want to be kept from participating in otherwise acceptable conversation. It can be a fine line for sure.

All of this relates to Andy’s above post. STUPID people who immediately jump on what someone else says because of their own small minded views.

In another SL thread (a recent one) , you even acknowledged doing just that. Andy intervened by diplomatically correcting your misinterpretation of what I communicated.

Michael Averko´s last blog post..Congress Should Bail Out Porn Industry

”How coincidental is it for another Irishman ”

About as coincidental as finding another Yank, Brit, Frog or Paddy who disagrees with you. Indeed, with the exception of a few Russians, probably nationalists, there are around 6 billion people who likely disagree with you. I’ve certainly had shots at you elsewhere, but I dunno who Finbar is.

”All of this relates to Andy’s above post. STUPID people who immediately jump on what someone else says because of their own small minded views. ”

Mike, I am neither Russophobe nor Russophile, nor would I call anyone such names, except you, because you are a Russophile. Certainly if Andy is referring to me I am sure he would have let me know by now. Taking a hard line on Chechnya, unlike apologising for it does not mean I have a small mind. Stop speaking for other people.

”You’re a creepy little crank,” ”your frequently sleazy manner.”

I’m probably taller than you, but apart from that I havent personally insulted you on this thread and I am not going to follow your lead in response.

”It’s not a lie to note how you have perioidically refer to me at another venue.”
I’ve often referred to positively there, and I think I recently said you were knowledgeable on a lot Russia stuff.

”Michael Averko´s last blog post..Congress Should Bail Out Porn Industry”

WTF?:-) Do they need bailing out too?

Another round of inaccurate commernts from the usual source. This includes suddenly playing the role of innocent victim after stating a series of disrespectful and inaccurate comments.

I’ve been a constructive critic of Russia. This has included my expressed views on Russia’s decision to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia as indpendent states. Along with some others, I’ve offered valid constructive suggestions on improving the current status quo of Russian government funded English language media/PR efforts.

Some people erroneously see themselves as being more “objective.” Overall, that’s not the case. Moreover, I’m the one offering valid points, which are often under-respresented at a number of the leading non-Russian English language venues. I do this by welcoming earnest (as opposed to not so earnest) dialogue with those in disagreement.

The word “small” can refer to something else other than the actual height of a person.

My M.O. is clear. Interact respectfully and this manner will be reciprocated. Get chippy and you can expect the same.

I dunno what’s up with that last blog post bit.

Michael Averko´s last blog post..Congress Should Bail Out Porn Industry

”If you don’t want to challenge any of my post then keep me out of your little schoolyard name calling session please I don’t have enough time for that. ”

I called what you wrote nonsense, and point-by-point I went through that nonsense. If you cant see that, or refuse to acknowledge that., then maybe you’d best avoid posting Ossetian/Russian garbage in future. Most of what you wrote was simply WRONG. If you believe that Chechnya started the First War in 1994, then you either hopelessly ill-informed, disingenuous, or both. Le do thoil, a chara.

”By the way Finbar is the anglicised form of Fionnbharr who was an abbott and bishop who kept the Catholic Church alive in Ireland during the seventh and eighth centuries….” etc

Free world, could you do us a favour? Rather than copying almost verbatin stuff from the internet, and passing it off as your own, couldnt you simply provide a link to what you are thieving?
http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/1/Finbar

”This was achieved despite Stalin’s blunders which included a purging of the Red Army officer corps in the 1930s and his refusal to believe his own intell. of an upcoming Nazi attack. ”

Thats totally true. And lets not forget Hitler’s contribution, telling Guderian to ignore Moscow with the city at his mercy and concentrate on the South.

”Without naming names, some individuals frankly don’t know the subject matter they’re commenting on.”

Well, at least I know the year the First War started, unlike someone I could mention, without naming names. .

”That person sure as heck wasn’t yours truly.”

Ahem. Actually it was you. Click on the link below and read the comments underneath. You got it wrong, and even – grudgingly-admitted it, when you had no way out. I wouldnt have brought this up except for the fact that this alone convinced me you know nichevo about Chechnya.

http://seansrussiablog.org/2007/05/22/crying-sun-the-impact-of-war-in-the-mountains-of-chechnya/#comment-3178

Really? Dairire, a chara? Cheapean me nach bhfuil tu Eireanach. An bhfuil aon Gaeilge agat? Ce as thu? Did you buy any chance bring home an Ossetian wife? It would explain the massive pile of bullshit that you subsequently wrote. What kind of Irish college – which colleges exactly – send kids to fucking Vladikavkaz?

Heres a link showing Letterkenny college being an offical partner to the North-Ossetian State University in Vladikavkaz. Students do not goto Vladikavkaz they come from there to study in Ireland. though I don’t think they do it anymore.

http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=1839&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=208.html

As for the Ossetian wife no I am way too busy for that., but I will tell you this the women are very pretty. They remind me in the stereo type Italian woman.

“I called what you wrote nonsense, and point-by-point I went through that nonsense. If you cant see that, or refuse to acknowledge that., then maybe you’d best avoid posting Ossetian/Russian garbage in future. Most of what you wrote was simply WRONG. If you believe that Chechnya started the First War in 1994, then you either hopelessly ill-informed, disingenuous, or both. Le do thoil, a chara.”

I clearly did not see your post as it was probably in amonst all the nonsense name calling you and other members where clearly taking part in. So I will reply to them now.

First an foremost if I want a regurgitation of politcal spin on Chechnya I will look at CNN. What most western political commentators tell us is that Chechnya was a little nation yearning for independance and declared it in 1991. However the big bully Russia using a variety of dirty tactics eventually bombed Grozny in 1994. The thing about propaganda is its partially true. Russia did bomb Grozny in 1994, Russia did enter into Chechnya in 1994. However this viewpoint leaves out several key facts. The first chechen war actually started directly after the declaration of independance. I know its nice and neat for some to say the war started when the russians launched their first attack however there had been running battles in Chechnya in the years before that. Some refer to the period of 1991-1994 as the undeclared civil war though very quietly. This period was was to see the split in the Chechen Ingush Autonomous Region and is the first time Chechnya’s borders as they are now even existed. You have failed to mention at best Chechens where split on seeking independance and this was the catayst for the start the war. Another point you failed to mention was the brutal ethnic cleansing of non-chechens including ethnic Russians and other nationalities upto 1993 and was the main reason for the collapse of the chechn economy. Estimates put the number at least 90,000 ethnic cleansed. These where the first casualities of the first conflict in Chechnya.

Really? Dairire, a chara? Cheapean me nach bhfuil tu Eireanach. An bhfuil aon Gaeilge agat? Ce as thu? Did you buy any chance bring home an Ossetian wife? It would explain the massive pile of bullshit that you subsequently wrote. What kind of Irish college – which colleges exactly – send kids to fucking Vladikavkaz?

Heres a link showing Letterkenny college being an offical partner to the North-Ossetian State University in Vladikavkaz. Students do not goto Vladikavkaz they come from there to study in Ireland. though I don’t think they do it anymore.

http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=1839&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=208.html

”The most brutal battle in this period was the battle of Grozny a battle started by chechens. The chechen victory here resulted in Russia shelling Grozny and media coverage in moscow forced Yeltsin to a peace agreement an eventually his job.”

You have jumped to conclusions. Infact there where three battles of Grozny. The last in August 1996 a battle started by the Chechens.

Yes, of course we are all convinced of the integrity of the FSB and the Russian courts, and should ignore the truckload of hexogen placed in a building in Ryazan by the Moscow FSB (without telling the Ryazan FSB) and which was later claimed to be a ‘drill’. Some bloody drill that, almost exactly like the real thing, except without the boom. And yes we should all also believe it was entirely in Chechnya’s interest to have their people bomb Moscow.

It was as much in the Chechens interests to bomb these buildings as to invade Dagestan or for example

Again this is simply untrue. Most Russians did not leave until after bombing started and Chechnya was actually one of the few regions that had a functioning economy in 1994, courtesy of smuggling on a massive scale from Turkey and Dubai.

At least 90,000 where forced out with some estimates as high as 200,000. Chechens effectively ethnic cleansed those key to their economy. Russias blockade, effectivey cut off jobs in Russia and trade. As for the Russian coined phrase “Chechen bandit economy” only warlords and chechen politicans got rich of this including Dudayev. In 1993 many Chechens did not even get their salaries paid.

Stop conning yourself. The Russians couldnt be like the Brits if they fucking tried. They bombed the shit out the place, ruined Grozny (what was left of it) and killed thousands more people, and, thanks to a clampdown on NTV, no-one has any idea how many really died. If you’re Irish then I’m bloody ashamed.

That was the very point I was making like the Brits they bombed the crap out of the place.

The NTV claim is pretty weak, first considering that its impossible to total casualites in any war. Just go and ask the americans or British how many civilians have died in Iraq see what anwser you get. you also failed to mention that towards the end of 1995. Remeber Chechens would never have disguised themselves as journalists being a guerilla force and all. Of course the Russias really copied the US bombings in 1995 in Yugoslavia and first Iraq conflict.

The Russians were not facing even half the rebels in 1999 than they did in 1994. Chechnya was a broken country by then courtesy of being starved of Federal funds, subversion by the FSB and no spoort at all for the government there from Moscow. And Russia went in, again, and destroyed the place, again. Marvellous.

So Chechnya where broken because of being starved of federal funds! What would Chechnya want Federal funds considering they declared independance from Russia.

Again wheres you mention of how the Shamil Basayev led 1400 men in Dagestan. It was this event that triggered the second chechen conflict.