quote:

Originally posted by Lilith Does the US still maintain some sort of 'Well regulated militia' independantly organised defence forces in a sense or has that been more or less rolled in with the local reservist type forces? (National Guard I think theyre called) It's been quite awhile since I spoke to any of the US gun-nuts. On principle of personal security I've owned firearms all my life except when I lived in England for awhile and was little, even then there where shotguns and stuff about the farm. Still do own a couple, if I was in the US I'd probably be consider being self-armed a practical part of life.

The only "militias" are small bands of possibly a few hundred people who like to get together and wear camoflage and shoot guns. They are rarely (if ever) organized in such a way as to have any real command or tactical unit structure.

In fact, most of the ones that are well known have a deep white-supremacist undertone and are more concerned with protecting the 'purity' of a small subset of society.

Timothy McVeigh was associated with one known as "the Michigan Militia".


As far as what the National Guard does, they are run by and funded primarily by the individual states though they can (and increasingly of late are) called up to serve as active duty 'regular' military forces overseas by the pentagon. Their chartered goal is to provide civil defense and disaster assistance in each state. Oddly enough (and one of the reason why a large amount of guard troops are in Iraq) due to the privitization of large parts of what used to be jobs handled by uniformed military personnel put into high gear by the Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz/Pearle leadership, the national guard is the only place where large numbers of personnel have training in policing. There are just a handful of MP units left in the 4 branches.


MrS

___________________
Click the sig to see MrSquirrel

-"Reality" is the only word in the language that should always be used in quotes.

quote:

Originally posted by MrSquirrel star-traveller apparently follows the word of the almighty Putin above all else, where Democracy is a loosely defined concept (at best).

loosely defined concept? well at least it's better defined than in the US.

Putin is a very democratic leader, I agree. His problem is that he is a pussy when it comes to rooting out corruption, mafia, crime and illegal immigration. But when he tries to crack down on criminal elements, the western media portrays it as clampdown on democracy, as in Berezovskiy case. Russia has produced strong enough against Berezovskiy that even Interpol has issued a warrant for his arrest now.

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

It's probably because no one trusts a former spook.
A lot of the ex-KGB people went on to fund highly successful business's on both sides of the law so it has painted the entire structure with a bit of a black mark. After all, they where (probably still are) the worlds most efficient and highly successful intelligence services around with long reaching and murky contacts most everywhere.
Very clever
Trustworthy, never.

As for how 'democratic' he is, there tends to be a bit of messing with that process as well, like how he replaced the direct federal election of regional presidents and governers by being popular nominee's. To having them either approved or disapproved by presidential decree, after that was done he can more or less push through anything he wants when it comes to the governer's proposals, they arent disapproved.
That to me at least seems to encourage neopotism at the highest levels.
Sure, it might get things done very efficiently but I would worry, what is being done exactly to moderate things going through with no opposition at all.

We're also very leery of what is happening to Russian reporters and journalists over there, quite a lot of them get murdered, and by quite a lot, I mean a lot get killed when they go nosing around anything contraversial or corrupt.

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith It's probably because no one trusts a former spook. A lot of the ex-KGB people went on to fund highly successful business's on both sides of the law so it has painted the entire structure with a bit of a black mark. After all, they where (probably still are) the worlds most efficient and highly successful intelligence services around with long reaching and murky contacts most everywhere. Very clever Trustworthy, never. As for how 'democratic' he is, there tends to be a bit of messing with that process as well, like how he replaced the direct federal election of regional presidents and governers by being popular nominee's. To having them either approved or disapproved by presidential decree, after that was done he can more or less push through anything he wants when it comes to the governer's proposals, they arent disapproved. That to me at least seems to encourage neopotism at the highest levels. Sure, it might get things done very efficiently but I would worry, what is being done exactly to moderate things going through with no opposition at all. We're also very leery of what is happening to Russian reporters and journalists over there, quite a lot of them get murdered, and by quite a lot, I mean a lot get killed when they go nosing around anything contraversial or corrupt.

I agree with you on the governor appointing system, I was never a fan of it, though I suspect it has its good things and bad things. I like the positive aspects of it, but these give the government more power, and I am for government control of essential sectors like health care, petroleum/hydrocarbons industries, education - I want these to be governnment controlled and not in provate hands where oligarchs make all the money (at least the state can use some of the money to put back into the country).

Look at Canada. Health is in government control. I love it. So should some others be too, but thats a different topic.

As for jurnalists in Russia getting murdered - yet again shows how biased Western media is. Why? Well, of course journalists are dying in Russia. But what western media doesnt show to you is that many bankers, government officials, even police officers and tax collectors get murdered for christ's sake. But I absolutely love the western media's coverage of Russia, showing front-page all week the murder of a great Russian journalist Politkovskaya, while completely ignoring the big story in Russia at the same time when top Russian government official on charge of making sure there's no banking corruption gets murdered in the hail of bullets along with his driver, read ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrey_Kozlov ). He could not be bribed, so they killed him. So much for the fairest western media coverage in the world. Yay. AND, AS ALWAYS, Putin is blamed. Putin this, Putin that.

Its getting really annoying how EVERYTHING that has to do with Russia always gets blamed on Russia. First, the radioactive poisoning (no proof it was Russia as of yet), gas disputes, journalists murder, etc)

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

Well I'm not biased or a part of the western media.
Just the simple fact is that when you do a head count, theres a lot being killed and while that in of itself is something of an occupational hazard it seems depending on where you are in the world, it indirectly affects other journalists there who quickly come to the conclusion that there are some things you shouldnt touch. Or you will get killed or otherwise 'evaporate', some things should be covered but the people who are sticking their necks out to do it are getting killed if they do.

Bit more poking in my travels also reveals that of the 3 main television networks in Russia, 3 are owned by people who are directly loyal to Putin which would also make me question the quality of the media services there.
Berezovsky is interesting in this point as well because he once owned one of those TV networks and regardless of what he may or may not have done, its not my place to judge, that same said network ended up in the hands of a Putin loyalist.

Interesting indeed.

It's all very well to mock the US and its Freedom of Information, Press and it's journalistic 'integrity' but all's not well in Russia either.

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith Well I'm not biased or a part of the western media. Just the simple fact is that when you do a head count, theres a lot being killed and while that in of itself is something of an occupational hazard it seems depending on where you are in the world, it indirectly affects other journalists there who quickly come to the conclusion that there are some things you shouldnt touch. Or you will get killed or otherwise 'evaporate', some things should be covered but the people who are sticking their necks out to do it are getting killed if they do. Bit more poking in my travels also reveals that of the 3 main television networks in Russia, 3 are owned by people who are directly loyal to Putin which would also make me question the quality of the media services there. Berezovsky is interesting in this point as well because he once owned one of those TV networks and regardless of what he may or may not have done, its not my place to judge, that same said network ended up in the hands of a Putin loyalist. Interesting indeed. It's all very well to mock the US and its Freedom of Information, Press and it's journalistic 'integrity' but all's not well in Russia either.

Many Russians support Putin, just like I do. I mean I love him and hate him at the same time. He's the moderate. There's no decent replacement for Putin for president right now. He spent 7 years now rebuilding the country and the economy and united the country again, and for th first time in many years Russia is not at war with anybody. There's a sense of relief. When Putin's gone, what many worry about is another turf war like in Yeltsin era, and that everything might slide back.

Yeah you might claim Yeltsin was more democratic. But what good did he achieve? He sold away the whole country. His management of the country resulted in many disasters like the brain-drain of the mid 1990s, the economic crash of 1998, horrible war in Chechnya 1994-1996 that even I CRITICISED.

Putin put some disclipline back into the officials and oligarchs, though I presume he didnt go anywhere as far as many Russians like me hoped. He nationalized the most vital sectors like gas/oil industry and even though he's not pumping all the money back into the country he has establlished a huge money surplus that needs to be used.

He passed many great laws like for example the Mother's Capital (I guess thats the best translation). This law, effective this past January 1, will give mothers 250,000 roubles for the third and 1 million roubles for the 4th and other children because the demographic problem in Russia is huge. The money could be used for child's medicines, buying a house, paying off debt, higher education etc. (its a big chunk of money).
-----
United States, however, is sliding into a different direction, I see a corporate takeover of the country in the future and an attempt to suspend the constitution might be inevitable. Civil war in USA is inevitable. Surely the things arent perfect in Russia, but in my opinion the situation with democracy is far worse in USA than in Russia because the slide is worse.

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

Well I guess thats a roundabout way of ignoring facts on media ownership if ever there was.

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith Well I guess thats a roundabout way of ignoring facts on media ownership if ever there was.

Have to love the mental gymnastics performed by people who are enthralled in a burgeoning personality cult, eh?


MrS

___________________
Click the sig to see MrSquirrel

-"Reality" is the only word in the language that should always be used in quotes.

I don't understand Lilith, what's a problem with media ownership?

FOX is owned by some corporation and they loyal to the White House, I don't see anybody complaining on that.

I don't see who else want and have enough resources to invest into Russia media now.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Putin is a very democratic leader

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King i listen to trance becuase it is beautifully composed like a classical piece of music.... but with beats in it...

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium I hardly if ever acknowledge sarcasm from a person I dont know because I ran into serious problems on an undisclosed buying website before.