News

meet the ~~spy~~ krasnov

A world at peace, true peace based on justice and happiness not enforced by oppression and brainwashing, is my hope. It's what humans need. It's what I need :-) I would prefer democracy, votes, laws, regulations, social norms all coming together to deliver that. Right now, it is others who are 'moving fast and breaking stuff' so my puzzle is how to slow 'em down and mend stuff before it goes too far to save anything good. Can I do that without violence or not? I prefer not but is it my choice? I am not the powerful one here, it's the guys with guns and nukes who are running this show, and they seem hell-bent on violence. Do I let them roll over me or take a stand, however token? I am old enough to remember Tiananmen Square protests and that guy standing in front of a column of tanks asking the soldiers to go back to barracks and not brutalise peaceful protesters. I witnessed the Hong Kong pro-democracy protests. I ask myself have I the guts to do as much? Will I be a coward and let the tanks roll? Just being honest and thinking aloud. And worried, very worried, about where things are headed.

Interesting... Thanks for that info. I am a Brit, I wonder what plans our secret services have prepared for different scenarios (Russia, China, North Korea ... and now USA). Looks like world is going back to Macchiavelli (if we ever really left).

Beware the Ides of March, huh?

If I recall, Shakespeare's Caesar says to Antony:

*Let me have men about me that are fat,

Sleek-headed men and such as sleep a-nights.

Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look,

He thinks too much; such men are dangerous.*

Trump certainly has plenty of fat men around him. I just thought it was a coincidence rather than a strategy but maybe he has some well-read people in his security team? Nah, on reflection, I think it's just a coincidence.

I mean, plenty tried to kill Hitler. He was just really good at not getting assassinated. Frequent last-minute changes to planned public appearances helped a lot

I know too little about Russia to know who is a contender to replace Putin or if when he goes the system that created him will go too. I am trying to educate myself on that.

As for China, I know a bit more but I am no expert. Given my limited insight, I am surprised that Xi is still in power. I expected the Communist Party to have 'neutralised' him, not necessarily bumped him off but to have taken away his power and reduced him to a figurehead, especially after he mishandled the pandemic and has struggled to fix China's economic woes. He is basically a thug. If all you have is a hammer, every problem is a nail. But you cannot beat a pandemic with a hammer nor fix inflation or unemployment or pollution with one. You must have as many tools as possible - Chinese perfected the toolkit of government over thousands of years. Sophisticated people in Chinese government must think Xi is an ignorant lout. I suspect they keep him in place because its better for the people who really run China to have a useful idiot as a puppet than to go through the uncertainties of replacing him - more or less how they handled the Kim regime in North Korea until lately. Putin and Kim collaborating on Ukraine must have really angered China which is probably why Chinese are considering sending 'peace-keeping' troops to Ukraine. Xi is a pig in a drawing room and the real government is just working around him.

It is hard to tell how much of the reportage about Xi is 'smoke and mirrors'. I recently saw a viral report on Reddit and in The Guardian newspaper (probably going around all the news outlets) about Chinese military exercises and some special navy vessels (biggest of their kind! etc) they had which were supposed to provide support for amphibian landings of tanks etc. Every report spins this as 'China war games is preparation for invading Taiwan - shock!'. I am very sceptical. Xi is apparently the driving force behind sabre-rattling rhetoric against Taiwan and building up PRC military might (his new bigger hammer), but I reckon most of Chinese government are not interested in a war with anyone least of all Taiwan - I think they expect to recover Taiwan eventually, by peaceful means, and are happy if it takes a century cos that long timescale is how Chinese think. So, given this split between Xi and the rest, I have the sense this whole media story is just a performance - whether it is to fool the world about China's military aggressiveness (advertising Xi's policy) or is some part of Chinese administration doing this to fool Xi he's still in charge (covert anti-Xi policy), I cannot tell. I just don't have enough facts to judge what these military manouvres tell us about Chinese government or, on the bigger scale, what real difference it would make if Xi was not around.

We (in UK) get 24/7 coverage of Trump's idiocies but not real information on other political leaders. I am European and I could not name five European political leaders, let alone predict the outcome if one were assassinated. As for politics in rest of globe, I am just clueless for the most part but I do try to educate myself. I have to create my own news feeds because the MSM is worthless.

The Chinese would certainly just appoint a new president, no problem. Xi might be in charge, but the Chinese communist party isn't some vestigial organ. Russia, however... Putin's been exclusively in charge for long enough and with no immediately clear successor that I'm almost certain that his death is going to result in a power struggle and civil war.

Creating bigger problems. Exactly why I ponder if assassination does any good or just recoils on you. But I think that its usefulness is contingent on who kills whom.

I guess that is why there are so few assassinations of elite figures - it threatens the stability that protects the elite so the elite do not assassinate each other.

However, assassinating non-elite people - terrorists and revolutionaries is routine. The elites (governments of nation states, their sub-contractors) have even mechanised assassination by using remote-controlled drone attacks. This stabalises their control.

So, if elites assassinate those that threaten them, it typically works in their favour. But if non-elites do it to elites, does it empower them or not? If it causes chaos and instability amongst the elite, and the chaos spreads to wider society, and does harm to bystanders or even brings about war, is this a price worth paying, or even a good and necessary outcome?

Honestly, I am still struggling with these questions. Part of me thinks 'sauce for goose, sauce for gander' and the tyrants deserve to die by their own methods turned back on them. Another part of me knows war is terrible, especially for 'ordinary people' and for the environment, and should be avoided. But there is such a thing as 'a just war' and armed struggle can be morally good or even our duty.

So, I go back and forth.

That’s not even the worst of it. Several rooms full of documents were found at his property and, though everyone seems to focus on the toilet one, IMO the worst is the one of a storage room full of classified documents plus a scanner/printer.

Yes that's one of the actual pictures from the indictment they brought against him. He apparently had like 300 different documents of varying levels of classified status. There's a couple more iirc of different places like a bedroom and a ballroom stage too. Basically it seems like he had his goons just hide anything he could get his hands on in random boxes of what were supposed to be just irrelevant personal effects

He was only indicted specifically for like 30 of them but my understanding is they specifically chose ones they were willing to have potentially entirely exposed.