Putin Rumored to Order Russian Officials To Bring Family Members Back Home from Abroad

[SolarpunkFan]

http://www.inquisitr.com/3589849/world- ... road-home/

As threats of a global war rise, Russia is apparently ordering all its officials to bring their family members living abroad back home. According to local media in Russia, Several high-ranking officials and politicians have received a warning message from Vladimir Putin, urging them to bring their family members back to the “Fatherland.”

This news comes after Putin cancelled his previously planned visit to France following disagreements over Russia’s involvement in Syria.

And according to local media, all high ranking officials are now being told that it would be wise to bring their family members living abroad back home. The “recommendation” has been imposed upon officials of every level, including administration staff, regional administrators, lawmakers and even employees of public corporations. It has also been said that those that ignore this recommendation may lose their chance of being promoted in the public sector.

“Non-compliance may be complicating factor in the furtherance of their public sector career.”

This decision has met with mixed reactions. Political scientist Vitaly Ivanov believes that this is a “long overdue” decision targeting those officials who on one hand speak of patriotism but on the other hand send their own children abroad to study.

“People note the hypocrisy of having a centralized state and cultivating patriotism and anti-Western sentiment, while children of government workers study abroad. You can not serve two gods, one must choose.”

Others such as political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky believe that decisions such as these will result in more officials leaving the country rather than producing the desired result. He says that the decision could eventually backfire against Putin.

“On the one hand, this is all part of a package of measures to prepare the elites for some ‘big war’ even if it is rather conditional, on the other hand – this is another blow to the unity of President Putin with his own elite”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry had warned earlier this month that the U.S. was “on the verge” of ceasing talks with Russia following weeks of severe air strikes by the Russian military on Aleppo. The United States Government released an official statement last Monday, delivered by U.S. State Department spokesman John Kirby, saying that they had officially suspended all talks with Russia.

“The United States is suspending its participation in bilateral channels with Russia that were established to sustain the cessation of hostilities.
“This is not a decision that was taken lightly.”

Only hours before the U.S. government confirmed that they had ceased talks with Russia, Russian President Vladimir Putin had signed a decree to suspend Russia’s agreements with the U.S. over the disposition of weapons-grade plutonium. The decree had cited “unfriendly acts” by the United States Government.

Severe tensions have been developing between the United States and Russia over the Russian military’s intervention in Syria. Putin’s officials had previously announced that they had foreseen an attack by the U.S. right after the two nations break off their faltering talks over the Syrian conflict. After the talks were officially suspended last week, Russia has been involved in a series of high-level military drills including a nuclear warfare preparation drill for its citizens. Furthermore it has also been reported that Russia has moved nuclear-capable missiles near its Polish border.

Former Soviet statesman Mikhail Gorbachev has also spoken about the rising tensions between the two superpowers of the world. The eighty five year old spoke to the Russian state news agency, RIA Novosti, saying that the world is currently at a “dangerous point.”

“I think the world has reached a dangerous point. I don’t want to give any concrete prescriptions but I do want to say that this needs to stop. We need to renew dialogue. Stopping it was the biggest mistake.”

“It is necessary to return to the main priorities. These are nuclear disarmament, the fight against terrorism, the prevention of an environmental disaster. Compared to these challenges, all the rest slips into the background.”

Dear 2016: go fuck yourself.

[The Romulan Republic]

I've seen reports on this, but was holding off on posting until I could find a credible source, since it seems to be mostly Right wing outlets/tabloids and such covering it.

If true, it is certainly alarming.

Unless Putin has totally lost his mind, I doubt that he's planning to start a World War. But I wonder if Putin is planning some more overt move than he has engaged in thus far either to interfere in the US election, or to gain as much ground as possible in Syria before Clinton (a Syria hawk to an extent) takes power- he must realize by now that he bet on the wrong horse in the Presidential election.

[SolarpunkFan]

I've seen reports on this, but was holding off on posting until I could find a credible source, since it seems to be mostly Right wing outlets/tabloids and such covering it.

If true, it is certainly alarming.

Unless Putin has totally lost his mind, I doubt that he's planning to start a World War. But I wonder if Putin is planning some more overt move than he has engaged in thus far either to interfere in the US election, or to gain as much ground as possible in Syria before Clinton (a Syria hawk to an extent) takes power- he must realize by now that he bet on the wrong horse in the Presidential election.

Hmm, okay. The right-wing outlet fact is making me a bit less nervous. But do we know for certain that Putin hasn't lost his mind?

[The Romulan Republic]

I wouldn't call it madness so much as I'm worried that with how bold he's been lately, and how much he's gotten away with (at least to an extent), he may be starting to have delusions of his own invincibility.

But I don't know, obviously, because I can't read Putin's mind.

[Sea Skimmer]

LOL no,thanks for posting no name BS spin news. This is about Putin's internal power, and announced a while ago as part of an 'anti corruption campaign'.

[Lord Revan]

I think all this "WW3 is gonna start right now!" paranoia is more probable to actually start it then anything the Kremlin is doing.

[The Romulan Republic]

I think their are two dangers:

1. Alarmism, ie "WW3 is about to happen, panic!" leading to people pushing for more militant candidates and bad policies.

2. Complacency, ie "WW3 can never happen" leading to indifference or support for reckless foreign policy because we don't believe the consequences could be that bad.

Yes, I know this sounds like a golden mean fallacy, but just because a position is in the middle of two extremes does not make it false, any more than it makes it right.

[FireNexus]

Putin's not doing this because he thinks World War 3 is about to start. Putin is doing this so officials will fear too much for their family's safety to take any risks such as opposing him.

[The Romulan Republic]

That makes sense as an explanation. A horrible, horrible explanation.

And yet still, in this case, obviously the lesser evil.

[Lord Revan]

I think their are two dangers:

1. Alarmism, ie "WW3 is about to happen, panic!" leading to people pushing for more militant candidates and bad policies.

2. Complacency, ie "WW3 can never happen" leading to indifference or support for reckless foreign policy because we don't believe the consequences could be that bad.

Yes, I know this sounds like a golden mean fallacy, but just because a position is in the middle of two extremes does not make it false, any more than it makes it right.

Obviously, it's no secret that Putin would want to turn Europe into vassal states whose sole purpose is to keep the russian economy going even at expense of their own economy, but it's also no secret that Putin wouldn't try anything that had high chance of ending up doing more harm then good to Russia (and by extension himself). I mean USSR had 80+ years to start World War 3 if they wanted but didn't what makes any more logical for the Russian Federation to suddenly want to start it?

So yeah we don't want to be complacent, we also don't want to be paranoid alarmist either, but rather we want to give the message that it's not worth the cost to attack us.

That makes sense as an explanation. A horrible, horrible explanation.

And yet still, in this case, obviously the lesser evil.

I think there's few people here who think Putin is a nice man or that his methods aren't horrible by any rational standardand (and I suspect those that think so, think so because Putin isn't from USA and therefore cannot be evil in their minds). However Putin hasn't so far shown any signs of the self-destructive insanity needed to start WW3 because he was bored (as these articles seem to imply).

[The Romulan Republic]

Perhaps we should be more concerned, after all:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/putin ... ar-n665376

MOSCOW — Americans should vote for Donald Trump as president next month or risk being dragged into a nuclear war, according to a Russian ultra-nationalist ally of President Vladimir Putin who likes to compare himself to the U.S. Republican candidate.

Vladimir Zhirinovsky, a flamboyant veteran lawmaker known for his fiery rhetoric, told Reuters in an interview that Trump was the only person able to de-escalate dangerous tensions between Moscow and Washington.

By contrast, Trump's Democratic rival Hillary Clinton could spark World War Three, said Zhirinovsky, who received a top state award from Putin after his pro-Kremlin Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) came third in Russia's parliamentary election last month.

Related: Putin Says Hacking 'Hysteria' Aims to Distract U.S. Public

PlayPutin Claims U.S. Provoking Anti-Russian Sentiment Facebook Twitter Google PlusEmbed
Putin Claims U.S. Provoking Anti-Russian Sentiment 2:08
Many Russians regard Zhirinovsky as a clownish figure who makes outspoken statements to grab attention but he is also widely viewed as a faithful servant of Kremlin policy, sometimes used to float radical opinions to test public reaction.

"Relations between Russia and the United States can't get any worse. The only way they can get worse is if a war starts," said Zhirinovsky, speaking in his huge office on the 10th floor of Russia's State Duma, or lower house of parliament.

Image: Leader of Liberal Democratic Party of Russia Zhirinovsky speaks during interview with Reuters in Moscow
Vladimir Zhirinovsky, leader of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, speaks during an interview with Reuters in Moscow on Oct. 11. MAXIM ZMEYEV / Reuters
"Americans voting for a president on Nov. 8 must realize that they are voting for peace on Planet Earth if they vote for Trump. But if they vote for Hillary it's war. It will be a short movie. There will be Hiroshimas and Nagasakis everywhere."

Zhirinovsky's comments coincide with deep disagreements between Washington and Moscow over Syria and Ukraine and after the White House last week accused Russia of a campaign of cyber attacks against Democratic Party organizations.

Even as WikiLeaks released another trove of internal documents from Clinton's campaign on Wednesday, Putin insisted his country was not involved in an effort to influence the U.S. presidential election.

Related: Trump Was Told That Russia Did Hacks Long Before Debate

Zhirinovsky likes to shock liberal public opinion and he has frequently heaped scorn on the West, which he and other Russian nationalists regard as decadent, hypocritical and corrupted by political correctness.

His combative style, reminiscent of Trump's, ensures him plenty of television air time and millions of votes in Russian elections, often from the kind of blue-collar workers who are the bedrock of the U.S. Republican candidate's support.

PlayOCT. 11: Trump Says 'Shackles' Are Off, Unleashes Anti-GOP Tirade Facebook Twitter Google PlusEmbed
OCT. 11: Trump Says 'Shackles' Are Off, Unleashes Anti-GOP Tirade 2:16
Zhirinovsky once proposed blocking off mostly Muslim southern Russia with a barbed wire fence, echoing Trump's call for a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico.

Zhirinovsky, who said he met Trump in New York in 2002, revels in his similarities with the American businessman — they are the same age, favor coarse, sometimes misogynistic language and boast about putting their own country first. Zhirinovsky has even said he wants a DNA test to see if he is related to Trump.

But unlike Trump, a billionaire real estate developer who casts himself as the anti-establishment candidate in the U.S. presidential race with no past political experience, Zhirinovsky is a consummate political insider who has sat in the Duma for more than two decades.

Related: Follow Trail of Russian Hackers, Putin's Revenge in Siberia

Putin has also praised Trump as "very talented", while the Republican candidate has said the Kremlin boss is a better leader than U.S. President Barack Obama. Clinton has accused Trump of being too cozy with Putin and questioned his business interests in Russia.

PlayOCT. 8: Could Russian Hackers Be Targeting U.S. Election Systems? Facebook Twitter Google PlusEmbed
OCT. 8: Could Russian Hackers Be Targeting U.S. Election Systems? 2:17
In other comments that have delighted Moscow, Trump has questioned the value of NATO for Washington, has spoken ambiguously about Russia's 2014 annexation of Ukraine's Crimea and suggested that the United States under his leadership would adopt a more isolationist foreign policy.

"He (Trump) won't care about Syria, Libya and Iraq and why an earth should America interfere in these countries? And Ukraine. Who needs Ukraine?," said Zhirinovsky, who once counted himself a friend of Iraq's Saddam Hussein and Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi and whose deaths he still laments.

"Trump will have a brilliant chance to make relations more peaceful ... He's the only one who can do this," he said, adding that Trump could even win a Nobel peace prize.

Related: U.S. Publicly Blames Russian Government for Hacking

In contrast, Zhirinovsky described Clinton as "an evil mother-in law" and said her record as secretary of state under Obama in 2009-2013 showed she was unfit to lead her country.

"She craves power. Her view is that Hillary is the most important person on the planet, that America is an exceptional country, as Barack Obama said," said Zhirinovsky. "That's dangerous. She could start a nuclear war."

PlayOCT. 11: Clinton Faces New Questions Over New Hacked and Leaked Emails Facebook Twitter Google PlusEmbed
OCT. 11: Clinton Faces New Questions Over New Hacked and Leaked Emails 2:14
In typically chauvinistic remarks, Zhirinovsky said Clinton's gender should also bar her from the presidency.

"Most Americans should choose Trump because men have been leading for millions of year. You can't take the risk of having one of the richest, most powerful countries led by a woman president," he said.

Asked about lewd comments Trump made about women in 2005 that have harmed his campaign, Zhirinovsky defended the Republican: "Men all round the world sometimes say such things that are just for their comrades. We must only consider his business (and political) qualities."

Though Putin and Trump have never met, Zhirinovsky said he believed they could establish a close working relationship, adding: "Victory for Trump would be a gift to humanity. But if Hillary Clinton wins it will be the last U.S. president ever."

Also posted in the election thread, but it seemed just as relevant here.

In summary, a Russian legislator aligned with Putin has just made an explicit threat/ultimatum of nuclear war with America if Trump is not elected. This is in his words, reported by a mainstream media organization.

My thoughts are that its more likely brinksmanship/scare tactics than a sincere declaration of intent to start a war on or shortly after November 8th. But it is still appallingly inflammatory and irresponsible, and downright dangerous.

It also makes me almost wonder if, all evidence to the contrary, Russia is actually trying to elect Clinton. Because if they think this will actually help Trump at all, they have zero understanding of American psychology. The average American's response to this is not going to be to vote Trump. Its more likely to be along the lines of "Fuck you, no foreigner is going to tell me who to vote for! I'm With Her!"

Or, like much of North Korea's bluster, this is intended primarily for internal consumption.

[The Romulan Republic]

And yes, I think its getting to the point where we need to start thinking of Russia in the same terms that we do NK- as a combination of a failed state, a lunatic with a detonator, and bad joke.

[Gerald Tarrant]

Perhaps we should be more concerned, after all:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/putin ... ar-n665376

MOSCOW — Americans should vote for Donald Trump as president next month or risk being dragged into a nuclear war, according to a Russian ultra-nationalist ally of President Vladimir Putin who likes to compare himself to the U.S. Republican candidate.

Vladimir Zhirinovsky, a flamboyant veteran lawmaker known for his fiery rhetoric, told Reuters in an interview that Trump was the only person able to de-escalate dangerous tensions between Moscow and Washington.

By contrast, Trump's Democratic rival Hillary Clinton could spark World War Three, said Zhirinovsky, who received a top state award from Putin after his pro-Kremlin Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) came third in Russia's parliamentary election last month.


Many Russians regard Zhirinovsky as a clownish figure who makes outspoken statements to grab attention but he is also widely viewed as a faithful servant of Kremlin policy, sometimes used to float radical opinions to test public reaction.

"Relations between Russia and the United States can't get any worse. The only way they can get worse is if a war starts," said Zhirinovsky, speaking in his huge office on the 10th floor of Russia's State Duma, or lower house of parliament.


"Americans voting for a president on Nov. 8 must realize that they are voting for peace on Planet Earth if they vote for Trump. But if they vote for Hillary it's war. It will be a short movie. There will be Hiroshimas and Nagasakis everywhere."

<snip>

"Trump will have a brilliant chance to make relations more peaceful ... He's the only one who can do this," he said, adding that Trump could even win a Nobel peace prize.

Related: U.S. Publicly Blames Russian Government for Hacking

In contrast, Zhirinovsky described Clinton as "an evil mother-in law" and said her record as secretary of state under Obama in 2009-2013 showed she was unfit to lead her country.

"She craves power. Her view is that Hillary is the most important person on the planet, that America is an exceptional country, as Barack Obama said," said Zhirinovsky. "That's dangerous. She could start a nuclear war."

<snip>

Though Putin and Trump have never met, Zhirinovsky said he believed they could establish a close working relationship, adding: "Victory for Trump would be a gift to humanity. But if Hillary Clinton wins it will be the last U.S. president ever."

Also posted in the election thread, but it seemed just as relevant here.

In summary, a Russian legislator aligned with Putin has just made an explicit threat/ultimatum of nuclear war with America if Trump is not elected. This is in his words, reported by a mainstream media organization.

At this point I need to point out several things to you.
1. That's not what Zhirnovsky said. You either read this poorly, or have poor literacy. Check the areas I bolded. Zhironovsky was claiming that Clinton was likely to start a war herself.
2. Legislators pass laws, they don't set foreign policy (although sometimes they can ratify it), if Sergei Lavrov, or someone else with authority starts talking like this it means something.

My thoughts are that its more likely brinksmanship/scare tactics than a sincere declaration of intent to start a war on or shortly after November 8th. But it is still appallingly inflammatory and irresponsible, and downright dangerous.

I disagree, your lack of reading comprehension is irresponsible, and inflamatory. Zhirnovksy's statement is just obnoxious, his casual sexism is offensive, and his opinion annoys me, but to reiterate, he's not stating Russia will strike if Hillary's elected, he's stating, Hillary's probably going to start World War 3.

It also makes me almost wonder if, all evidence to the contrary, Russia is actually trying to elect Clinton. Because if they think this will actually help Trump at all, they have zero understanding of American psychology. The average American's response to this is not going to be to vote Trump. Its more likely to be along the lines of "Fuck you, no foreigner is going to tell me who to vote for! I'm With Her!"

Or, like much of North Korea's bluster, this is intended primarily for internal consumption.

It's possible that this is what the Kremlin wanted Zhirnovsky to say, it's also possible that he is almost identical to Trump in temperament, and if you stick a Mic or a reporter in front of him, you shouldn't be surprised at the shit that comes spewing out. Moreover if you read your own damn article you'll see that Zhinovsky and Trump seem to pretty much agree on plenty of policy.

Zhirinovsky likes to shock liberal public opinion and he has frequently heaped scorn on the West, which he and other Russian nationalists regard as decadent, hypocritical and corrupted by political correctness.

His combative style, reminiscent of Trump's, ensures him plenty of television air time and millions of votes in Russian elections, often from the kind of blue-collar workers who are the bedrock of the U.S. Republican candidate's support.

Zhirinovsky once proposed blocking off mostly Muslim southern Russia with a barbed wire fence, echoing Trump's call for a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico.

Zhirinovsky, who said he met Trump in New York in 2002, revels in his similarities with the American businessman — they are the same age, favor coarse, sometimes misogynistic language and boast about putting their own country first. Zhirinovsky has even said he wants a DNA test to see if he is related to Trump.

So maybe Trumpovsky there is being the mouthpiece of the Kremlin and it's part of some weird unfathomable Kremlin plan, or maybe Trumpovsky has no brain-mouth filter just like Trump. Based on the description of him in your source, it looks like the latter, to summarize, stop being alarmist about stuff that doesn't merit it. There are concerning about tensions with Russia, but the shit you quoted is noise, and I'd rather read the serious stuff not your alarmist nonsense.

[The Romulan Republic]

As I said, I don't really think that Russia is planning to declare war if Clinton wins.

However, to make a definite statement that war will occur is Clinton wins, as Mr. Zhirnovsky said (would you like me to quote it for you separately?) goes rather further than speculation that Clinton could cause a war. It is certainly not unreasonable to interpret it as a threat. It is, at the very least, inflammatory and, given the context, an attempt to use fear to manipulate US voters.

As to weather Mr. Zhirnovsky is speaking for the Kremlin... maybe, maybe not, but at the very least, his close ties to the Kremlin suggest a great deal of sympathy between his views and Putin's. Putin is not a man who tolerates a great deal of decent from within his ranks. I think we can all agree on that. So I do take his views as likely at least in the same ball park as the Kremlin's.

Does that clarify my position for you?

[Broomstick]

MOSCOW — Americans should vote for Donald Trump as president next month or risk being dragged into a nuclear war, according to a Russian ultra-nationalist ally of President Vladimir Putin who likes to compare himself to the U.S. Republican candidate.

Right... um, is this like taking advice from David Duke? (For those of you too young to remember, the first paragraph of the Wiki is a nice summary: "David Ernest Duke (born July 1, 1950) is an American white nationalist, politician, antisemitic conspiracy theorist, Holocaust denier, and former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan")

"Relations between Russia and the United States can't get any worse. The only way they can get worse is if a war starts," said Zhirinovsky, speaking in his huge office on the 10th floor of Russia's State Duma, or lower house of parliament.

You mean... worse than during the height of the Cold War when the Kremlin and Washington had no direct communication whatsoever and had to go through intermediaries to communicate at all? Seriously? Worse than the infamous Khrushchev shoe-pounding-on-the-table-we-will-bury-you speech? Worse than during the Cuban Missile Crisis?

Naw - not that bad yet. And even when it was that bad we weren't shooting at each other.

If anything, Trump is more likely to start a war than Clinton (not that it's impossible for that to happen under Clinton, just less likely I think).

Zhirinovsky likes to shock liberal public opinion and he has frequently heaped scorn on the West, which he and other Russian nationalists regard as decadent, hypocritical and corrupted by political correctness.

Well, maybe - I mean, the US might arguably be decadent, hypocritical, and corrupt. So was Ancient Rome. And... so? What does that matter?

Zhirinovsky sounds like the Russian version of Trump.

"He (Trump) won't care about Syria, Libya and Iraq and why an earth should America interfere in these countries?

Oil.

"She craves power.

Well, yeah, Hillary is a politician. You don't play that game on the national level without craving power, in any country.

said Zhirinovsky. "That's dangerous. She could start a nuclear war."

So could a lot of other people at this point, and I'm more worried about some of the others. Hillary likes her creature comforts, too, and those will be in short supply post nuclear war.

"Most Americans should choose Trump because men have been leading for millions of year. You can't take the risk of having one of the richest, most powerful countries led by a woman president," he said.

Right, because no world power has ever been ruled by a woman, especially not Russia... oh, wait...

Asked about lewd comments Trump made about women in 2005 that have harmed his campaign, Zhirinovsky defended the Republican: "Men all round the world sometimes say such things that are just for their comrades. We must only consider his business (and political) qualities."

Like losing nearly a billion dollars? The failed businesses? The complete lack of tact and diplomacy?

[Lord Revan]

I wonder if these people want to forget about Catherine the Great as not only was she female ruler of Russia but also tried reforming the rather badly corrupt feudal system Russia was under during that time (one can argue how successfull those reforms were but still).

[Gerald Tarrant]

As I said, I don't really think that Russia is planning to declare war if Clinton wins.

That's good, it allows me to put an upper bound on your stupidity and alarmism.

However, to make a definite statement that war will occur is Clinton wins, as Mr. Zhirnovsky said (would you like me to quote it for you separately?) goes rather further than speculation that Clinton could cause a war.

Yes please quote it. I'm curious how poorly your formal education has served you. I'm going to preempt you a little and explain why the quote I think you're going to use is moronic. Here are Zhirnovsky's statements on Clinton,

"an evil mother-in law" and said her record as secretary of state under Obama in 2009-2013 showed she was unfit to lead her country.
"She craves power. Her view is that Hillary is the most important person on the planet, that America is an exceptional country, as Barack Obama said," said Zhirinovsky. "That's dangerous. She could start a nuclear war."

By contrast, Trump's Democratic rival Hillary Clinton could spark World War Three, said Zhirinovsky, who received a top state award from Putin after his pro-Kremlin Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) came third in Russia's parliamentary election last month.

"Most Americans should choose Trump because men have been leading for millions of year. You can't take the risk of having one of the richest, most powerful countries led by a woman president," he said.

Obviously these are all snipped from all over your article, and here's one more on his view about Trump

Vladimir Zhirinovsky, a flamboyant veteran lawmaker known for his fiery rhetoric, told Reuters in an interview that Trump was the only person able to de-escalate dangerous tensions between Moscow and Washington.


"He (Trump) won't care about Syria, Libya and Iraq and why an earth should America interfere in these countries? And Ukraine. Who needs Ukraine?," said Zhirinovsky, who once counted himself a friend of Iraq's Saddam Hussein and Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi and whose deaths he still laments.

Clearly arguments in favor of Trump. I'll summarize/paraphrase them "We won't have conflicts with President Trump, President Trump won't have any principles to offend." Now if all you had were quotes about "Electing Hillary could cause WW3", or that scare quote about "There will be Hiroshimas and Nagasakis everywhere." I would agree it looks like an ultimatum. But this article is peppered with Zhirnovsky's reasons to think Trump would be better, including Zhirnovsky's misogyny, so you can't just look at that quote in isolation, frankly all the supporting statements are an essential part of that quote, they give it context. All the other quotes saying "We can get along with Trump so we won't have any conflict"; and Hillary will start WW 3; and women can't lead; are essential parts of the argument that a vote for Hillary is a vote for WW3. So taking any single quote in isolation, no matter how ominous it is in isolation, is moronic.

It is certainly not unreasonable to interpret it as a threat.

I disagree. The article is laden with claims by Zhirnovsky that Hillary will be responsible for it, ignoring those is unreasonable.

It is, at the very least, inflammatory and, given the context, an attempt to use fear to manipulate US voters.

Yes and no, people use fear all the time persuasively, they say vote against Romney or your social security checks will vanish, and that's an argument about fear. So partly yes, this is an argument that Hillary Clinton will cause bad things to happen, and then our descendants will pick through the radioactive bones of a shattered world. It is very much an argument about fear. But as I argued above this isn't an ultimatum, it's an argument about Hillary starting WW3, and Trump not starting WW3.

As to [sic]weather Mr. Zhirnovsky is speaking for the Kremlin... maybe, maybe not, but at the very least, his close ties to the Kremlin suggest a great deal of sympathy between his views and Putin's. Putin is not a man who tolerates a great deal of [sic]decent from within his ranks. I think we can all agree on that. So I do take his views as likely at least in the same ball park as the Kremlin's.

Certainly possible. But there's an alternate explanation, and it's the one I already offered,

Zhirinovsky, who said he met Trump in New York in 2002, revels in his similarities with the American businessman — they are the same age, favor coarse, sometimes misogynistic language and boast about putting their own country first. Zhirinovsky has even said he wants a DNA test to see if he is related to Trump.

Zhirnovsky is speaking like this because he's Russian Trump, or maybe Trump is American Zhirnovsky. If you've got evidence that Zhirnovsky's taking orders from the Kremlin that would be great, otherwise the simplest explanation is usually the best. Zhirnovsky's an authoritarian nationalist, and sees a kindred spirit in Trump.

Does that clarify my position for you?

Your position was already clear, I reiterate, the problem I had is that you are misinterpreting simple text to make it more alarming than it is. Zhirnovsky (like Trump) is a jackass; but he didn't issue an ultimatum or threaten nuclear war, he claimed that Hillary was going to start a nuclear war.

[Grumman]

As I said, I don't really think that Russia is planning to declare war if Clinton wins.

However, to make a definite statement that war will occur is Clinton wins, as Mr. Zhirnovsky said (would you like me to quote it for you separately?) goes rather further than speculation that Clinton could cause a war.

Hillary Clinton has stated her support for committing an act of war against Russia and her allies. She might not see it that way, but that's what it means (and takes) to deny a sovereign state the use of its own airspace when they're in the middle of a war with a genocidal rape cult. Until Clinton recognises and publicly acknowledges that it is a stupid fucking idea it is not unreasonable to believe, given her history, that she is stubborn enough to go ahead with this stupid fucking idea.

[K. A. Pital]

I wonder if these people want to forget about Catherine the Great as not only was she female ruler of Russia but also tried reforming the rather badly corrupt feudal system Russia was under during that time (one can argue how successfull those reforms were but still).

Actually she did not reform the feudal system; that was the paradox of Catherine who posed as an "enlightened" autocrat creating universities, but at the same time she strengthened serfdom. Historians mostly agree that under Catherine, the position of the peasant serfs - and 90% of peasants were under serfdom - was one of the worst in history, almost as bad as plantation slavery. In fact, Catherine had a habit of calling the peasants "slaves", just as many other Russian nobles of the time did.

This also led to a peasant uprising led by Pugachev, which lasted three years and turned into full-scale civil war inside the nation.

Do not cut rulers some slack because they are women. In fact Catherine was one of the most cruel rulers and brutal oppression of the lower classes in her rule only intensified.

This concludes the OT distraction.

Zhirinovsky is a clown used to voice ideas by the Kremlin which are rather extreme. What he says is of no consequence.

That makes sense as an explanation. A horrible, horrible explanation.

It is actually not a horrible explanation. Russian officials are known to be notoriously corrupt and disloyal. They launder billions and send their rich fucking kids to the West to be 'sheltered' in case they are caught.

I hope every Russian official lives in Russia. They should live in hell, so that they would make it better. No rich fucker, no oligarch scum should be ever allowed to escape Russia.

[The Romulan Republic]

Because children should definitely be punished for their parents' (hypothetical) acts. And of course, you justify it with "they're rich", because like a good little Marxist, you evidently think that being born into a wealthy family in and of itself justifies punishment.

Yes, we all know how much you love collective punishment.

snip

Gerald Tarrant, I'm not going to go through this whole thing line by line, but to address what I think are the key points:

The quote I was referring to, directly threatening nuclear war, is this:

"Americans voting for a president on Nov. 8 must realize that they are voting for peace on Planet Earth if they vote for Trump. But if they vote for Hillary it's war. It will be a short movie. There will be Hiroshimas and Nagasakis everywhere."

You were clearly aware of this quote, as you referenced it yourself, and taken by itself, it certainly reads like a direct threat and ultimatum, as you acknowledged.

Taken in the larger context, I will concede that it can be read as a warning that war will happen if Clinton wins, blaming Clinton. I will even concede that I was probably overly alarmist, and that I could have been more careful and phrased my argument better.

However:

1. Mr. Zhirinovsky's claim, as quoted above, is still a dubious and alarmist conclusion.

2. It is worded in a highly provocative manner.

3. Its obvious intent is to intimidate.

4. Even if the Kremlin lost its marbles completely and preemptively nuked Washington DC tomorrow morning, I can safely bet that their final propaganda broadcast would blame the US for causing it.

Perhaps this is just some blowhard, some Russian counterpart of Trump as you suggest, spouting off his predictions. I certainly hope so. But in light of all of the above, and the larger context, including Mr. Zhirinovsky's ties to Putin and Russia's ties to Trump and his campaign, I do not think it is entirely unreasonable to regard the comment as a threat.

[K. A. Pital]

Because children should definitely be punished for their parents' (hypothetical) acts.

These are not hypothetical acts, you idiot. Russian officials have embezzled billions at the same time half of Russia's population was thrown into extreme poverty and children were malnourished, including many people I know personally; and this fact is well-known. Shove your ill-informed compassion for "golden youth" bastards in your ass, mr. See-No-Evil.

And of course, you justify it with "they're rich", because like a good little Marxist, you evidently think that being born into a wealthy family in and of itself justifies punishment.

No, idiot, I think that children of cleptocratic officials who became rich by stealing billions in public money through convoluted laundering schemes in the traditions of Third World banana republic fashion don't deserve to profit from that blood money. Dumbass. Would you also be compassionate to the kids of an arms dealer or blood diamond trader? If so, you are truly a moron.

Yes, we all know how much you love collective punishment.

What is "punishment" here? According to Russia propaganda, Russia is a magnificent country with top-notch education, glorious future and strong traditions, a wise leader and great infrastructure. Therefore it is no punishment to order the officials to live their sorry lives in Russia, and stop sending their children abroad using embezzled money. Do you even understand that with the official wages of Russian officials, they should not be able to pay the fucking tuition fees in Western private schools, where their bastards are learning? This is blood money. Those using it can very well try living in the country they robbed and are robbing to the death.

But in light of all of the above, and the larger context, including Mr. Zhirinovsky's ties to Putin and Russia's ties to Trump and his campaign, I do not think it is entirely unreasonable to regard the comment as a threat.

It is unreasonable. Zhirinovsky also claimed Iraq's Army would destroy the US army and that Russia can manipulate the Earth's geomagnetic field to sink the American continent. That person is long gone from the realm of the sane. He serves a particular function, as I have explained already.

[K. A. Pital]

Just a quick calculation shows that the official wages of Russian officials, including even the highest of them (President's Office in Moscow) fluctuate between 3000 and 2000 dollars per month! Before expenses! This is not nearly enough to afford tuition fees for foreigners which range from 25 000 dollars per year and upwards.

Average wage in Russia outside Moscow is around 400 dollars per month or less. Food intake used to be adequate before, but with the sanctions the situation has rapidly worsened.

Russian officials are thieves; those who do not steal, cannot afford to send their children abroad. The wage simply does not allow this. Thieves who steal from the poor must be punished. That is clear.

[Simon_Jester]

Because children should definitely be punished for their parents' (hypothetical) acts. And of course, you justify it with "they're rich", because like a good little Marxist, you evidently think that being born into a wealthy family in and of itself justifies punishment.

Yes, we all know how much you love collective punishment.

Bluntly, the only thing that could conceivably stop the handful of extremely powerful oligarchs from continuing to inflict ongoing ruin on Russia is if they fear the consequences for themselves. And/or for their descendant.

Also, in many cases the children of oligarchs are themselves adults who have or are likely to inherit political power, because that's how corrupt aristocracies work.

If the worst collective punishment that happens to such a group of people, over a long period of time, is that they are forced to continue living in the country they're plundering, then honestly I'd say that's a level of collective punishment the group deserves, because if it weren't for the actions of that group, it wouldn't even be a punishment, it'd be a blessing.

4. Even if the Kremlin lost its marbles completely and preemptively nuked Washington DC tomorrow morning, I can safely bet that their final propaganda broadcast would blame the US for causing it.

Perhaps this is just some blowhard, some Russian counterpart of Trump as you suggest, spouting off his predictions. I certainly hope so. But in light of all of the above, and the larger context, including Mr. Zhirinovsky's ties to Putin and Russia's ties to Trump and his campaign, I do not think it is entirely unreasonable to regard the comment as a threat.

Yes. One might reasonably ask, if Trump were running on an anti-Russian platform:

Suppose some brutish idiot supporter of his, said the following? Someone whose position of proximity to real power was comparable to Zhirinovsky's.

Suppose they said "If the Russians do XYZ, it will be war." Would we not regard that as a threat? Even if it is a threat unlikely to be carried out, the statement "if you pursue this course of action, my violence will occur" is almost by definition a threat.

[SolarpunkFan]

LOL no,thanks for posting no name BS spin news. This is about Putin's internal power, and announced a while ago as part of an 'anti corruption campaign'.

You're right. I didn't check beforehand whether it was sensationalism/spin before posting it.

I'm basically crossed with (I'm not being sarcastic by the way).

[His Divine Shadow]

Obviously, it's no secret that Putin would want to turn Europe into vassal states whose sole purpose is to keep the russian economy going even at expense of their own economy

Ah, they want to do what Germany accomplished with the euro.