United States to resurrect plutonium production program

Comment on events and happenings in the Fallout community.
User avatar
vendetta
Wanderer of the Wastes
Wanderer of the Wastes
Posts: 598
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 1:07 am
Location: you can imagine

Post by vendetta »

Kharn wrote:
The problem is a political one. They can't give up Chechnya without sending another house of cards tumbling down, from their Southern countries to disputed borders between China and Russia to the isles between Russia and Japan. That's a political non-option, so it's war. Ethnic cleansing in that sense seems to only viable way out, as they can't grant freedom to Chechnya

But hell, that's rediculous, Russia has little to gain from ethnically cleansing the area. They simply want to win, permanently, and are fighting a war which is costing them many, many lives. If the result is that it looks like ethnic cleansing, so be it, that happens sometimes during war.
Maybe. But the real reason is that they want to secure the Caucasian region for petrol and pipelines. Russia aims to control the Caspian Sea oil. To do so, it has to make sure that the pipelines starting (mainly) at Bakou (Capital of Azerbaidjan) pass through its borders. That's why it clearly tries to keep the Caucase and the Chechens. If they lose one region, as you said, Russia's influence on the region would tumble down as a castle made up of cards.

It's all about economics and petrol. The proved oil reserves in the Caspian Sea are enormous, although not as much as what you would find in Irak or Saudi Arabia, for instance, but still huge. And Russia wants the money.
User avatar
VasikkA
No more Tuna
No more Tuna
Posts: 8703
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 6:14 pm

Post by VasikkA »

Spazmo wrote:And why is there no sympathy for the Tasmanians? The poor, poor Tasmanians...
To who should I direct my sympathy?
ApTyp wrote:The corruption on all levels makes it very tough to enforce any kind of order in the region.
Corruption in Moscow or in Chechnya?
ApTyp wrote:Lies and propaganda.
The only propaganda we're getting is from the russian authorities/media. In fact, we're not given any reliable information from the situation in Chechnya. There is little or no international media crew present, so we'll have to 'rely' on biased information from Moscow or from 'terrorism support groups' as you call them. Sadly, the result is that no one cares.


The war in Chechnya, which is still going on, is at the moment a huge credibility issue for Russia. Russia has to show to the outside world that it can deal with tiny rebellious countries struggling to break away from the Russian federation. Failing in this task may well cause a domino effect in various russian border provinces. Russia is full of different ethnicities, cultures and tribes. Keeping Russia intact is a key objective to the power elite in Kreml. Granting chechens independence would not fit in this policy.

It's true that Chechnya has oil and strategic importance, but that was never the main reason of this conflict.
ApTyp
250 Posts til Somewhere
250 Posts til Somewhere
Posts: 2694
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 1:59 am

Post by ApTyp »

VasikkA wrote: Corruption in Moscow or in Chechnya?
Corruption at all levels.
The only propaganda we're getting is from the russian authorities/media.
Unless you live in Russian Federation, I doubt you get any official statements from Moscow. Those that sift through Western media's layer of indifference is presented with the usual skepticism and implied support of anti-Russian elements in Chechnya. It's very easy to believe that you're being lied to when your only source of information insists on it.

I will readily admit that you shouldn't believe everything Moscow says. But that doesn't mean that terrorism support groups are telling the truth.
The war in Chechnya, which is still going on, is at the moment a huge credibility issue for Russia. Russia has to show to the outside world that it can deal with tiny rebellious countries struggling to break away from the Russian federation. Failing in this task may well cause a domino effect in various russian border provinces.
Tiny rebellious countries? Such as?
Not that it matters anyway. Recent history has shown that none of the break-aways have ended well for the former USSR republics. These states are typically ran by dictator-like figures, their economies are in shambles, and "orange revolutions" will only result in more chaos and disenchantment with the Western politics that supported them.
Kashluk

Post by Kashluk »

ApTyp wrote:
VasikkA wrote:Russia has to show to the outside world that it can deal with tiny rebellious countries struggling to break away from the Russian federation. Failing in this task may well cause a domino effect in various russian border provinces.
Tiny rebellious countries? Such as?
*sigh*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia#Subdivisions
ApTyp
250 Posts til Somewhere
250 Posts til Somewhere
Posts: 2694
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 1:59 am

Post by ApTyp »

None of them is rebellious because they are incapable of feeding and defending itself from internal and external threats, and they know it.
Kashluk

Post by Kashluk »

Actually, many of them (especially those that are inhabited mainly by ethnic minorities, not "real" Russians) would be glad to be granted independence, but they are afraid of Russian armed intervention.

http://www.turkishweekly.net/comments.php?id=1389
http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=571620
http://www.db.idpproject.org/Sites/IdpP ... le+Summary
http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/88/354 ... tions.html
ApTyp
250 Posts til Somewhere
250 Posts til Somewhere
Posts: 2694
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 1:59 am

Post by ApTyp »

No rebellious RF states in any one of those links. Social discontent isn't an indicator of desire for independence. Stop pulling shit from your ass - with exception of Chechnya, every republic that desired independence was given it.
User avatar
Nicolai
ASSHAT
ASSHAT
Posts: 3735
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 4:38 pm
Location: Wheelchair Warez HQ

Post by Nicolai »

They are a bunch of fags.
Kashluk

Post by Kashluk »

My links wrote:Chechnya, Ingushetia, North Ossetia-Alania, Mari, Bashkortostan, Nizhny Novgorod, Tatarstan and even Karelia to some extent.
So basically a big slice of the Privolzhsky and Southern Federal districts' regions. Keep on actually *getting in to the material*. Reading isn't over-rated.
--
ApTyp wrote:Recent history has shown that none of the break-aways have ended well for the former USSR republics.
Yeah and mother Russia herself has been a real paradise instead.
Last edited by Kashluk on Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ApTyp
250 Posts til Somewhere
250 Posts til Somewhere
Posts: 2694
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 1:59 am

Post by ApTyp »

None of them demand independence.
Kashluk

Post by Kashluk »

If that reading wasn't enough, I can only suggest some more: http://www.psa.ac.uk/cps/1999/ross2.pdf
User avatar
VasikkA
No more Tuna
No more Tuna
Posts: 8703
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 6:14 pm

Post by VasikkA »

ApTyp wrote:None of them demand independence.
Openly demanding independence would be like sending an invitation card to the russian armed forces. With what would they combat the T72's? Sticks and stones? Considering the situation in Chcechnya, the border provinces rather remain as 'autonomous provinces' at the time being. But being a part of Russia gives them no possibilities for actual development in the future, because they are and considered as Russia's backyard. The revenue from state owned oil/gas companies in the area isn't used for developing the regions and most of government funding ends up in the pockets of corrupt authorities. There's no doubt that the general opinion of the locals isn't very Russia-friendly. To them, being a part of Russia means continued misery and mistreatment.
ApTyp
250 Posts til Somewhere
250 Posts til Somewhere
Posts: 2694
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 1:59 am

Post by ApTyp »

VasikkA wrote: Openly demanding independence would be like sending an invitation card to the russian armed forces.
Conjecture. Every ethnic region has separatist nuts, but they are always radical minorities, like skinheads and satanists.
But being a part of Russia gives them no possibilities for actual development in the future, because they are and considered as Russia's backyard.
Being separated from Russian Federation would drown them in economic problems. Believe it or not, Russia still picks up the bill for these regions.
The revenue from state owned oil/gas companies in the area isn't used for developing the regions and most of government funding ends up in the pockets of corrupt authorities.
What about jobs and cheaper gasoline, you dumbass? I used to live in industrial city in Tatarstan, we had people from all over the Soviet Union coming to work here because it was much easier to get apartments and find jobs than in some run-down rural town. Who do you think works at the plants and refineries - the Chinese?

As for the corrupt authorities, that's why people demand that the government come down and punish whoever is responsible, instead of doing something really stupid.
There's no doubt that the general opinion of the locals isn't very Russia-friendly. To them, being a part of Russia means continued misery and mistreatment.
You've been watching Western media too much. Wrong on both counts.
User avatar
King of Creation
Righteous Subjugator
Righteous Subjugator
Posts: 5103
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 3:00 pm
Contact:

Post by King of Creation »

ApTyp wrote:
VasikkA wrote: Openly demanding independence would be like sending an invitation card to the russian armed forces.
Conjecture. Every ethnic region has separatist nuts, but they are always radical minorities, like skinheads and satanists.
Then why do you generalize all Chechens?
<a href="http://www.duckandcover.cx">Duck and Cover: THE Site for all of your Fallout needs since 1998</a>
User avatar
VasikkA
No more Tuna
No more Tuna
Posts: 8703
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 6:14 pm

Post by VasikkA »

ApTyp wrote:Conjecture. Every ethnic region has separatist nuts, but they are always radical minorities, like skinheads and satanists.
Yes, minorities because of the reason I wrote earlier.
Being separated from Russian Federation would drown them in economic problems. Believe it or not, Russia still picks up the bill for these regions.
Like there isn't economic problems already. Most ex-soviet states are currently doing better than Russia economically. Many of the border regions have vast oil and gas reserves. At the moment, Russian oil companies are exploiting them.
What about jobs and cheaper gasoline, you dumbass? I used to live in industrial city in Tatarstan, we had people from all over the Soviet Union coming to work here because it was much easier to get apartments and find jobs than in some run-down rural town. Who do you think works at the plants and refineries - the Chinese?
Capitalism > Communism
You've been watching Western media too much. Wrong on both counts.
Yeah, I bet Eastern media is much more reliable.
ApTyp
250 Posts til Somewhere
250 Posts til Somewhere
Posts: 2694
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 1:59 am

Post by ApTyp »

King of Creation wrote:Then why do you generalize all Chechens?
Because Chechens are unique.
VasikkA wrote:Like there isn't economic problems already. Most ex-soviet states are currently doing better than Russia economically. Many of the border regions have vast oil and gas reserves. At the moment, Russian oil companies are exploiting them.
1. The states that do better than they used to are part of Russian Federation. Those who decided to break off are still stuck in the 90's.
2. Welcome to capitalism - oil companies exchange labor for money.
Capitalism > Communism
Then why do you complain about oil companies "exploiting" oil-rich regions?
Yeah, I bet Eastern media is much more reliable.
When it comes to representing the prevalent opinions among population of Russian Federation - yes, it's a hell of a lot more accurate than FOX or BBC.
Kashluk

Post by Kashluk »

ApTyp wrote:Those who decided to break off are still stuck in the 90's.
Very true, because Russia in general is still stuck in the 70's.
Post Reply