Russian Propaganda

[Balthazzar]

Media personality Solovyov, assessed to be Putin's ally, made some controversial remarks on his show recently, suggesting a missile launch aimed at the statue of liberty, her torch specifically. Then another, suggesting over "America" from the Atlantic to the pacific. Another, panelist (a scientist) suggested something similar, only from east to west over "Europe". Apparently Russian capabilities are a source of pride, or the propaganda utilized for the shock potential and psychological effect. Either way, the statements are somewhat inflammatory and seem hostile, suggestive of a broader reach and aim than just the Ukraine.

Read story here

 

[Tomef]

Media personality Solovyov, assessed to be Putin's ally, made some controversial remarks on his show recently, suggesting a missile launch aimed at the statue of liberty, her torch specifically. Then another, suggesting over "America" from the Atlantic to the pacific. Another, panelist (a scientist) suggested something similar, only from east to west over "Europe". Apparently Russian capabilities are a source of pride, or the propaganda utilized for the shock potential and psychological effect. Either way, the statements are somewhat inflammatory and seem hostile, suggestive of a broader reach and aim than just the Ukraine.

Read story here

These Kremlin approved talking heads are fond of this kind of talk, threatening to swamp the UK with a nuclear tidal wave and so on. Like some idiot in a bar talking about what he’s going to do with anyone who messes with him. In terms of actual military decisions, Russia’s state institutions are pretty leaky, so intelligence is usually picked up quite early on. Timing is the wild card though, as Putin keeps details of that sort within his own remit.

 

[Balthazzar]

These Kremlin approved talking heads are fond of this kind of talk, threatening to swamp the UK with a nuclear tidal wave and so on. Like some idiot in a bar talking about what he’s going to do with anyone who messes with him. In terms of actual military decisions, Russia’s state institutions are pretty leaky, so intelligence is usually picked up quite early on. Timing is the wild card though, as Putin keeps details of that sort within his own remit.

This may be true, but if this reflects Russia's general public thinking, then where does this lead ... eventually?

 

[Tomef]

This may be true, but if this reflects Russia's general public thinking, then where does this lead ... eventually?

In terms of the public, I think the broad masses are fairly malleable. Around 900,000 Russians left their country in the months following the invasion, I think it’s a reasonable bet that the bulk of those people represent the more independent thinkers. I’m not suggesting the rest are all brainwashed as such - quite recently, when some soldiers from the front lines tried to persuade some high school kids of the justness of the war, they were derided as murderers - but it’s not new to say that Russians will go along with pretty much anything the state wants them to. Seems to have been like that since way before communism. So, opinions come from above, as far as that goes.

The mood Putin is driving involves a whitewashing of the Soviet years, the demonisation of the West and creating an appetite for war and sacrifice (the idea of sacrifice, even when utterly needless, seems to be ingrained in Russian thought). The intention seems to be to have the populace ready for whatever Putin feels is needed. If he does decide to wage war against NATO countries, some kind of popular uprising within Russia against that seems pretty unlikely. But Russians also have a history of switching allegiance pretty quickly once a ‘beloved leader’ is deposed, so if someone nearer the top defenestrates Putin, and is strong enough to maintain order in the wake of that, the people will get behind that person (and whatever they want) too.

 

[Balthazzar]

In terms of the public, I think the broad masses are fairly malleable. Around 900,000 Russians left their country in the months following the invasion, I think it’s a reasonable bet that the bulk of those people represent the more independent thinkers. I’m not suggesting the rest are all brainwashed as such - quite recently, when some soldiers from the front lines tried to persuade some high school kids of the justness of the war, they were derided as murderers - but it’s not new to say that Russians will go along with pretty much anything the state wants them to. Seems to have been like that since way before communism. So, opinions come from above, as far as that goes.

The mood Putin is driving involves a whitewashing of the Soviet years, the demonisation of the West and creating an appetite for war and sacrifice (the idea of sacrifice, even when utterly needless, seems to be ingrained in Russian thought). The intention seems to be to have the populace ready for whatever Putin feels is needed. If he does decide to wage war against NATO countries, some kind of popular uprising within Russia against that seems pretty unlikely. But Russians also have a history of switching allegiance pretty quickly once a ‘beloved leader’ is deposed, so if someone nearer the top defenestrates Putin, and is strong enough to maintain order in the wake of that, the people will get behind that person (and whatever they want) too.

So, valid panel statements likely and it's always wiser to not simply brush off this type of rhetoric as idle talk and humor.

 

[Tomef]

So, valid panel statements likely and it's always wiser to not simply brush off this type of rhetoric as idle talk and humor.

I think Putin wants to keep his options open, and is prepping the nation for a protracted war if he sees that as the best option.

 

[Balthazzar]

I think Putin wants to keep his options open, and is prepping the nation for a protracted war if he sees that as the best option.

If it comes to one of this type, I'm fairly sure it's expected. Who truly wants a big boy showdown and longer winters?

 

[Stevicus]

Media personality Solovyov, assessed to be Putin's ally, made some controversial remarks on his show recently, suggesting a missile launch aimed at the statue of liberty, her torch specifically. Then another, suggesting over "America" from the Atlantic to the pacific. Another, panelist (a scientist) suggested something similar, only from east to west over "Europe". Apparently Russian capabilities are a source of pride, or the propaganda utilized for the shock potential and psychological effect. Either way, the statements are somewhat inflammatory and seem hostile, suggestive of a broader reach and aim than just the Ukraine.

Read story here

Well, it would be a pretty dumb idea if they did something like that. Hitting the Statue of Liberty with a missile would have the same reaction as 9/11 did. Even the aptly named "Moscow Marge" would find her position on Ukraine and Russia untenable, as would the entire "America First" crowd. It could solidify and unify aspects of American nationalism and lead to a war fever and an even greater sense of xenophobia among Americans. But it could be a big boon for the fallout shelter industry.

 

[Tomef]

If it comes to one of this type, I'm fairly sure it's expected. Who truly wants a big boy showdown and longer winters?

I think Putin’s preferred option would be to freeze current borders where they are, and install a Kremlin-friendly president in Kyiv.

What he really doesn’t get, I mean he seems incapable of understanding, is that Ukrainians will never simply comply as the Russian people do, no matter how much he tries to pound them into submission. With his inability to understand and their unwillingness to be controlled by a foreign power, Putin is going to have to rethink what is needed to keep the Russian Federation together. He does seem to think that ‘losing’ Ukraine - losing political control over Ukraine that is - will lead to secession attempts by other Russian colonies, those ‘republics’ who for the moment are kept in line via puppet governments. Backed into a corner, meaning facing the loss of Russia’s whole sphere of influence, it’s anyone’s guess what he might think is necessary.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Well, it would be a pretty dumb idea if they did something like that. Hitting the Statue of Liberty with a missile would have the same reaction as 9/11 did. Even the aptly named "Moscow Marge" would find her position on Ukraine and Russia untenable, as would the entire "America First" crowd. It could solidify and unify aspects of American nationalism and lead to a war fever and an even greater sense of xenophobia among Americans. But it could be a big boon for the fallout shelter industry.

With the incredible loss of freedoms and a corrupt government that is just getting worse by the decade, I wonder if the reaction would be as intense now.

 

[Stevicus]

With the incredible loss of freedoms and a corrupt government that is just getting worse by the decade, I wonder if the reaction would be as intense now.

Any kind of attack like that would enflame Americans and galvanize public opinion towards war. Before Pearl Harbor, the general public was somewhat "meh" about going to war, but once that attack took place, that all changed literally overnight.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Any kind of attack like that would enflame Americans and galvanize public opinion towards war. Before Pearl Harbor, the general public was somewhat "meh" about going to war, but once that attack took place, that all changed literally overnight.

Look at what happened with the trade towers and the pentagon. It was full steam ahead with Afghanistan but meh with Iraq.

Now a number has adapted to siding with terrorists now and Afghanistan since the disastrous pull out is no big deal.

 

[Estro Felino]

Russia is one of the most americanized countries I can think of, actually.
They would never do something like that. They believe in Western values, and they would never harm its symbols.

 

[Stevicus]

Look at what happened with the trade towers and the pentagon. It was full steam ahead with Afghanistan but meh with Iraq.

Now a number has adapted to siding with terrorists now and Afghanistan since the disastrous pull out is no big deal.

Over time, the steam subsided, and it was back to business as usual.

 

[Copernicus]

Media personality Solovyov, assessed to be Putin's ally, made some controversial remarks on his show recently, suggesting a missile launch aimed at the statue of liberty, her torch specifically. Then another, suggesting over "America" from the Atlantic to the pacific. Another, panelist (a scientist) suggested something similar, only from east to west over "Europe". Apparently Russian capabilities are a source of pride, or the propaganda utilized for the shock potential and psychological effect. Either way, the statements are somewhat inflammatory and seem hostile, suggestive of a broader reach and aim than just the Ukraine.

Read story here

Russian aggression is driven by a lot of negative feelings, especially the shame felt over the collapse of the Russia-dominated Soviet Empire. Russia went from being a feared major superpower to a smaller, much poorer country almost overnight. And it was surrounded by resentful populations that had previously been under Russian control. Many of those countries, especially in central Europe, had rushed to join NATO, whose only real reason for existence has always been to contain Russian expansionism. So boasts and threats in their news media need to be understood in that context. They are mostly for domestic consumption, because Russians want to be respected and feared as a major world power. But they are also intended to wear down foreign resistance to the restauration of regional hegemony, which many Russians feel they are entitled to. Threats to foreign powers, especially NATO powers, are going to continue no matter who is in power.

 

[Balthazzar]

Well, it would be a pretty dumb idea if they did something like that. Hitting the Statue of Liberty with a missile would have the same reaction as 9/11 did. Even the aptly named "Moscow Marge" would find her position on Ukraine and Russia untenable, as would the entire "America First" crowd. It could solidify and unify aspects of American nationalism and lead to a war fever and an even greater sense of xenophobia among Americans. But it could be a big boon for the fallout shelter industry.

Depending on intent, you may be correct. On the other hand, the prospect of intent intact, equates to an in your face, uh huh. Truth is, I'm uncertain of Putin's intent, but I'd suggest it is something about the EU and minimizing threat risks.

 

[Copernicus]

Depending on intent, you may be correct. On the other hand, the prospect of intent intact, equates to an in your face, uh huh. Truth is, I'm uncertain of Putin's intent, but I'd suggest it is something about the EU and minimizing threat risks.

I think that his intent goes well beyond the EU and minimizing risks. His invasion of Ukraine was a very risky move, since it received nearly universal condemnation internationally and led to the diplomatic and financial quarantine that plagues Russia today.

As an ex-KGB officer living in East Germany when the wall came down, Putin suffered the greatest trauma in his life with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It was his main job to defend and preserve Soviet Power, but everything he was doing simply fell apart. He resigned his commission in 1991, the year in which Russia was left standing when the Soviet Union collapsed around it. Everything Putin has done in recent years has been devoted to revanchism--regaining as much lost territory and regional influence as possible. He has gone to great lengths to rehabilitate the image of the Soviet era domestically, including the infamous Soviet dictator Stalin, but he has not been shy about whitewashing the tsarist past, as well. His entire justification for occupying and annexing Belarus and Ukraine has been to suppress nationalist sentiment in those old conquered provincial territories in that pre-revolutionary empire. I don't think that Russian youth, especially in urban areas, is happy with Putin's "One People" revanchism, but Putin has consolidated his power to the point where few people now dare to oppose it. Talking heads on Russian TV rarely say anything critical against his war, and it is easier to get away with criticizing him as not being tough enough with the West.

 

[Balthazzar]

I think that his intent goes well beyond the EU and minimizing risks. His invasion of Ukraine was a very risky move, since it received nearly universal condemnation internationally and led to the diplomatic and financial quarantine that plagues Russia today.

As an ex-KGB officer living in East Germany when the wall came down, Putin suffered the greatest trauma in his life with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It was his main job to defend and preserve Soviet Power, but everything he was doing simply fell apart. He resigned his commission in 1991, the year in which Russia was left standing when the Soviet Union collapsed around it. Everything Putin has done in recent years has been devoted to revanchism--regaining as much lost territory and regional influence as possible. He has gone to great lengths to rehabilitate the image of the Soviet era domestically, including the infamous Soviet dictator Stalin, but he has not been shy about whitewashing the tsarist past, as well. His entire justification for occupying and annexing Belarus and Ukraine has been to suppress nationalist sentiment in those old conquered provincial territories in that pre-revolutionary empire. I don't think that Russian youth, especially in urban areas, is happy with Putin's "One People" revanchism, but Putin has consolidated his power to the point where few people now dare to oppose it. Talking heads on Russian TV rarely say anything critical against his war, and it is easier to get away with criticizing him as not being tough enough with the West.

An addition to the something aforementioned ... I won't argue the point. Bravado duly noted.

 

[Stevicus]

Depending on intent, you may be correct. On the other hand, the prospect of intent intact, equates to an in your face, uh huh. Truth is, I'm uncertain of Putin's intent, but I'd suggest it is something about the EU and minimizing threat risks.

I think the intent, if such a thing were to come about, would be to send a message of "screw you" to the U.S. Just as with 9/11, it won't really weaken us militarily or strategically, but it's more a form of psychological warfare.

 

[Balthazzar]

I think the intent, if such a thing were to come about, would be to send a message of "screw you" to the U.S. Just as with 9/11, it won't really weaken us militarily or strategically, but it's more a form of psychological warfare.

We've been under some stressors the last few, and while I don't think they would, it's the attitude that gets me thinking. 9/11 seemed to be the beginning of a larger machine. 23 years years later, conflict has increased in other areas. The psychological aspects noted enough to be both ongoing and sometimes desynthetizing, which could prove dangerous. Never forget rings a bell, but sometimes we forget things or take them for granted.