As I said, you need to be a bit more specific - what exactly you don't believe and what exactly do you believe.
What are Putin's Options for Revenge that he has promised?
- Thread starter Donald H
- Start date
Have you been banned from Google?
Novichok is a group of military-grade nerve agents developed by the Soviet Union in the 1970s and 1980s. The name, meaning "newcomer" in Russian, refers to a series of fourth-generation chemical weapons. These agents are designed to be more toxic than other nerve agents, like VX or sarin, and can be delivered in liquid, powder, or aerosol form. Novichok agents work by inhibiting the enzyme acetylcholinesterase, leading to a buildup of acetylcholine and causing a range of symptoms including muscle spasms, breathing difficulties, and seizures.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
- Development: Novichok agents were part of the Soviet Union's "Foliant" program.
- Toxicity: They are considered very potent, with some variants potentially five to eight times more toxic than VX.
- Delivery: Novichoks can be delivered in liquid, powder, or aerosol forms.
- Mechanism of Action: They act as nerve agents by inhibiting acetylcholinesterase, an enzyme that regulates nerve impulses.
- Symptoms: Symptoms can include nausea, breathing difficulties, seizures, and coma. If exposure is severe, it can lead to death from asphyxiation or other complications.
- Detection: Methods for detecting Novichok agents include analyzing blood samples for the presence of the agent bound to acetylcholinesterase.
- Recent Use: Novichok agents have been implicated in several high-profile poisoning cases, including the 2018 attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury, England, and the poisoning of Alexei Navalny in 2020.
- Binary Weapons: Some Novichok agents are binary weapons, meaning they are created by mixing two inert precursors.
- International Response: The use of Novichok agents has prompted calls for tighter controls on chemical weapons and increased efforts to detect and counter their use, according to the American Chemical Society.
- Delivery: Novichoks can be delivered in liquid, powder, or aerosol forms.
The German government says Russia's opposition leader, Alexei Navalny, has been poisoned with a Novichok nerve agent.
The Shelling of Mainila (Finnish: Mainilan laukaukset, Swedish: Skotten i Mainila), or the Mainila incident (Russian: Майнильский инцидент, romanized: Maynilskiy intsident), was a military incident on 26 November 1939 in which the Soviet Union's Red Army shelled the Soviet border village of Mainila (Russian: Майнило, romanized: Maynilo) near Beloostrov. The Soviet Union declared that the fire originated from Finland across the nearby border and claimed to have had losses in personnel. Through that false flag operation, the Soviet Union gained a great propaganda boost and a casus belli for launching the Winter War four days later.
Historians have now concluded that the shelling of Mainila was a fabrication carried out by the Soviet NKVD state security agency.
The Russians had to save their puppets from the people.
Delusional.
We don't consider it our property, you consider it yours.
No proves. Just empty words of British storytellers.
Obvious German lie.
And this is a plain lie, too. It was a Finnish attack.
Those "puppets" were the legal governments of those countries. So, it weren't "aggression" in any meaningful sense
Name even one.
Local people consider it their (and our). And thats why NATO backed Banderlogs want to kill them and take their land.
Deny, deny, deny. That seems to be all you got and why Russia has little support in the West.
You've confused cause and effect.
Of course we deny the empty and proveless slander. As you would deny, say, Russian accusations that Donald Trump is a daughter of Satan. They are not real, and they are not even "realistic" by the standarts of the fiction literature. Your propaganda depict Russians as a horde of meaningless zombies - stupid and evil by their nature, and Putin is depicted as a Dark Lord who mentally control this horde, and responsible for every move the Russians do.
You propaganda attributes to Russian absolutely meaningless, irrational and illogical behaviour, as some kind of absolute evil. It is a well payed campaign and it has it reasons. Americans are practical men. (At least I hope so.) Why do they invest that money in the totally unbridled campaign of denigration and slander, which, among other things, decrease your own wealth and safety (for making accusations you can't prove is really bad for the international PR)? Given that all those accusations are absolutely false (and they are obviously false), why do the Americans make them? I see two possible explanations: 1) Americans (at least significant part of their decision-makers) are Satanists who hate "Holy Russia" exactly because Russians are The Choosen Nation, The Third Rome, The Last Stronghold of the True Christianity and they, Americans, want to crush the last stronghold of Christianity to allow antichrist came in our World. (And, to achieve this goal they are ready and may be wish to sacrifice the USA). In practical terms it means that deterrence doesn't work, American suicidal out of blue counter-value attack is possible and Russia have no other option but to eliminate American nuclear forces (as much as possible) by the first strike. No demonstration of force (or slow raising at the ladder of escalation) are necessary, vice versa, this attack should be sudden - no threats, no demonstrative actions.
2) Americans are not Satanists, they are just want to genocide Russians to take access to Russian resources. But they are not ready to sacrifice themselves, rational discussion is possible and the deterrence might work. In practical terms it means that Russia should step by step escalate the situation, starting with resuming of nuclear testing, nuclear drills and limited usage of tactical nukes and eventually Americans will f#ck off and roll back (without terrible losses from both sides).
So, help me to find out the truth. What do you think - will you roll back if Russia resume nuclear testing?
I wrote deny, deny, deny. I would have been more accurate to say delusional, delusional, delusional.
The 'slander' is well documented, at least outside of Russia. As for Trump, of course I'd deny it. Son maybe, daughter, no.
Russian are not stupid and they love their country but they have no familiarity with democracy. They went from a Czar to a Stalin to a Putin. They admire strong leaders (we too have that problem, i.e., Trump) and I'm told Stalin is still admired by many.
Because they are NOT obviously false. How many Russian journalists have fallen from windows?
So you'd kill millions for 'holy Russia'? And you wonder why Americans hold Russia in such low esteem.
Yes we want Russian resources but we want to BUY them from Russia, not go to war over them.
Not a chance. The US would go on high alert and start building Trump's Golden Dome (missile defense system). We have the money, Russia does not and the military arms race brought the end of the USSR.
You say "delusional" simply because you believe delusional accusations of western media.
I've read it. Total nonsense.
Exactly daughter. He is a five year old girl, who wears pink dresses and have two blonde pig-tails. That's the level of "western analitic" about Russia. Obviously stupid and even unrealistic delusional BS.
Of course we have familiarity with both democracy and "democracy".
How many American journalists did? Given the nonsense they write - even those who survived got terrible PTSD or lobotomy.
I'm a pragmatical man and I'm an atheist. I don't believe neither in Christ, nor in Satan, not in Holy and God-chosen nations and countries (But I do believe in existence of Christians, Satanists, Russian and American exeptionalists). But most of Russians believe. And I'm quite selfish. If there is the choice between allowing NATO soldiers kill me and killing them (all of 976 mln of them, including innocent men, women and children) I'd rather kill them. Why should I care about them, if they don't care about me?
It doesn't seem that you want to buy them. In fact, you deny to buy them. Looks like you want to kill us all and take our resources for free.
As the matter of fact, only Russia have a really working ABD system (of the Moscow region) and effective civil defence system. And I don't tell about arms race (while the arms race with both Russia and China might easily brought the end of the USA, either). First of all, I tell you about the possibility of the nuclear war.
If you don't roll back after resuming of nuclear testing, the next step of the escalatory ladder is a demonstrative nuclear attack (may be proxy attack) against a single military base. Or, if the Russian decision makers believe that America is run by "radical Satanists" it will be a massive counter-force and decapitation strike against the US nuclear forces and "Satanic leadership".
Putin is just a man. He is just a little part of the system, and, as any part, he is expendable.
Denial
Denial
Delusion
Delusion
None so far as I know. Delusion
NATO will kill you ONLY if you force them.
Or we just don't want to help you fight Ukraine. Russia has lots of resources but advanced technology is not one of them so whatever resources we need we can buy them from some other 3rd world country.
Russians aren't stupid, they see how poorly their military has performed, so I doubt they will want to depend on them to defend them from anything.
Back to delusions.
Yep. And people of Odessa, forced NATO's proxies to kill them, just by demanding their right to speak their language. Say nothing about millions of other men, women and children in many places in the world killed by the soldiers of NATO's countries.
That's exactly what I mean.
So, you don't want to buy our resources and hired Ukrainians to kill Russians and take their resources for free.
May be our military is not perfect (nobody's are), but gambling with nuclear war gives us much better chances than hoping for the mercy of Americans and Europeans who already declared our genocide as their goal.
You can dismiss this as US propaganda but you should accept that it accurately reflects the views of most in the West.
Justifying Invasion: A Case Study in Russian Propaganda
By Captain Alexander Nastas, U.S. Air Force
June 2025
Proceedings
Vol. 151/6/1,468
Featured Article
Body
“For eight years they bombed Donbas!” This phrase echoed across Russian media just before Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The Kremlin’s messaging before and during the conflict flows through social media platforms such as Telegram and approved publications from RIA Novosti to TASS. It has included amplifying the Russian Orthodox Church Patriarch’s blessing of the war and falsely claiming Ukrainian political leaders are Nazis.
As a Russian-speaking U.S. intelligence officer, I found the propaganda clunky and not overly effective. But the intended audience is the average Russian citizen, who gets his or her news mostly from government-sponsored media. As the war in Ukraine goes on, it is important to try to understand how the Russian government used its state-run media to justify the invasion to its domestic audience.
Background and Context
To understand the frame within which the Kremlin presents its message, recall the political atmosphere in Ukraine in May 2014. A popular uprising to oust then-Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich had succeeded in February. The movement known as Euromaidan began as a series of protests against Yanukovich’s turn away from an association agreement with the European Union in November 2013. The protests were brutally repressed by antiriot police, which led the protests to intensify. The politics of the time also generally questioned the legitimacy of the ruling class. According to the index of confidence in government in Europe, Ukraine ranked last (on a 10-point scale) in confidence in parliament (1.99); the judicial system (2.26); and the police (2.5). Yanukovich was the least popular head of state since the establishment of independent Ukraine in 1991.There was also a large ethno-linguistic divide. The southeastern portions of Ukraine, including Odessa, are largely Russian-speaking, and they largely had voted for Yanukovich in the previous election. Polling in April 2014, after Yanukovich fled to Russia and Russia annexed Crimea, showed that 70 percent of residents of southeastern Ukraine favored remaining in Ukraine, while 15 percent favored unification with Russia, with the nuance that respondents favored a federalized state with greater autonomy for the oblasts.
This period saw an increase in nationalist rhetoric from the new Ukrainian government and the start of so-called hybrid warfare—including cyber warfare, disinformation campaigns, and economic pressure—by Russia. Its value was captured by Colonel General Vladimir Zarudnitsky, then chief of the military academy of Russia’s General Staff, who declared, “It is easier to divide a state from within rather than conquer it with arms.”
Word Games
Russia’s political elite placed heavy emphasis on precise use of language during the hybrid-warfare phase against Ukraine. Nuanced phrases dug at the legitimacy of the Ukrainian government and the distinctness of the ethnic Ukrainian population. This emphasis on language goes back to the Soviet Union. The Stalin regime’s Russification policy systematically undermined Ukrainian national and linguistic identity, and many Russians today do not view Ukraine as a separate nation with its own history and traditions.1 As the relationship between the two countries soured after 2014, the language in the Russian media became more dismissive.Throughout legacy Russian media publications, one often finds the phrase “na Ukraine” translated as “on Ukraine,” as opposed to “v Ukraine” which means “in Ukraine.” The distinction is important. Russians use na when referring to a region and v when referring to a sovereign territory. Today Russian media almost exclusively uses the preposition na when referring to events in Ukraine. This is not an editorial mistake; it is a part of the campaign to undermine the Ukrainian nation.
Post-invasion, Russian politicians and the media used language to soften the reality of military actions. The invasion was labeled a “special military operation.” One its main goals, as stated by Russian President Vladimir Putin, was to disarm and “denazify” Ukraine. On several occasions, Putin referred to the Euromaidan protesters as Western-backed “neofascists” who committed “a coup d’etat in the full classical meaning of the word.”2 While most journalists referred to Russian actions as “bombing campaigns,” Russian media used the phrase “preemptive strikes.” After destroying the town of Bakhmut, which the Russian media called by its old Soviet name of Artemovsk, the Russian Ministry of Defense declared it “liberated.”
Odessa Tragedy
The tragedy in Odessa on 2 May 2014 is contentious because of the high death toll and the competing narratives from two sides of an intensifying hybrid war. The situation on the ground was tense. Russia’s annexation of Crimea, and the concurrent events in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, ruptured Ukrainian territorial integrity and directly challenged the new Ukrainian government’s authority. Two factions soon coalesced in Ukraine: pro-Maidan and anti-Maidan. The Ukrainian media labeled anti-Maidan protesters as separatists—despite evidence that most favored federalization—thus sparking even more animosity between the two factions.3On 2 May 2014, a pro-Maidan group of soccer fans was holding a rally after a match. They were attacked by an anti-Maidan group, and in the clash, six people were killed and dozens were wounded.4 Eventually, the anti-Maidan group was chased away and sheltered in the House of Trade Union building, from which they threw Molotov cocktails at the pro-Maidan group, which retaliated in kind5 The facility ignited, and as a result 42 people were killed and more than 200 injured.
This incident widened the divide in Ukraine, and within that maw lay an opening for the Kremlin. Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, stated as much in TASS: “Unarmed people to include women, were burned alive in the House of Trade Union building. Those who tried to escape, jumping out of windows, were fired upon. They were joking about the bodies. They were happy about the amount. They did not hide that they were happy for their victory over Russians. We became witnesses to a frank manifestation of fascism.”
What the Odessa tragedy showed is the Russian media’s ability to spin any tragic event into a one-sided outrage in which the side Russia chooses to favor somehow had no responsibility. The TASS article referred to the entire group of pro-Maidan supporters as “Right Sector” fascists, a terrorist group forbidden in Russia, and it made no mention of how the clash started. Independent reports from Council of Europe’s International Advisory Panel and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights found that both sides were guilty of violence.
The Odessa tragedy marks the moment Russian public opinion turned against Ukraine. The “Odessa Massacre” was often cited to support the self-declared Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics before the invasion or explain why some volunteered to enlist after the invasion.6
Popularization of the War in Russian Culture
The Russian government sought to popularize the war via cultural events—for which it enlisted the services of popular artists and bands—and through marketing the letter “Z” as a symbol of the special military operation. Russian outlets explained the letter Z as a symbol for “liberating” Ukraine from “nazis.” Initially, the letter Z signified the western direction of the invasion—Zapad means “West” in Russian—and was placed on military equipment such as tanks and armored personnel carriers. Eventually, the symbol became popular with civilians, with many drivers putting Zs on their vehicles to show their support of the war. The idea was popularized further, and government agencies even replaced the Cyrillic З character with the Latin character “Z.” Critics have a different perspective of the symbology, comparing it to the nazi swastika.The enthusiasm of artists is difficult to gauge. Most popular artists who opposed the war left the country or were severely sanctioned, effectively ending their ability to perform at home. One of the more prominent examples is Vladimir Urin, who resigned after 10 years as director of the Bolshoi Theater. Urin had signed an open letter opposing the invasion. Valery Gergiev, who was fired as director of the Munich Philharmonic Orchestra for refusing to condemn the invasion, was named his successor. Gergiev regularly played concerts in the separatist Donetsk and Luhansk republics, helping legitimize their status by bringing such a prestigious institution into their territory.
Soldiers on the front lines, however, are critical of Russian media and political elites promoting the war without taking any personal risks themselves. In his memoir ZOV, Pavel Filatyev, who participated in the invasion and, after injury, fled the country, put it this way: “I do not see the children of Skabeyeva, Solovyov, Kiselyov, Rogozin, Lavrov, Medvedev in the trenches. Yet I constantly hear calls to kill from them. Which son of a Duma deputy has been sent to war? Are their children more talented and intelligent than the children of workers and peasants?”7
This is only a brief glance at the Russian government’s efforts to justify to its domestic audience the invasion of Ukraine. From the research, it is evident the invasion of Ukraine does not enjoy the same popularity among the Russian population as did the annexation of Crimea and Russia’s support for the separatist republics in Donetsk and Luhansk.
Russia’s concerted propaganda effort was paired with a new set of draconian laws aimed at curbing free speech and silencing any criticism of the war. Russian celebrities had the stark choice of promoting the war or being shunned or exiled. The Russian Orthodox Church plays a large role promoting the war, bringing in a spiritual aspect: Patriarch Kirill labels it a “holy war” pitting the Russian army against the “degeneracy” of the West.
While a large portion of the Russian public will continue to support the government, it is revealing that the Kremlin feels the need for such extraordinary measures to prevent large-scale unrest at home. As the war continues, discontent in Russia likely will grow.
1. Anne Applebaum, Red Famine: Stalin’s War on Ukraine, Penguin History (London: Penguin Books, 2018), p. 364.
2. Olga Baysha, “The Dangerous Russian Other in Ukrainian Conspiratorial Discourse,” in Conspiracy Theories in Eastern Europe: Tropes and Trends, Conspiracy Theories (Abingdon, Oxon New York, NY: Routledge, 2021), p. 168.
3. Baysha, “The Dangerous Russian Other,” 171.
4. Baysha, 172.
5. Baysha, 172.
6. Baysha, 172.
7. ZOV: Inside Putin’s Corrupt War on Ukraine - An Exiled Soldier’s Story (Profile Books Lmtd, 2023), p. 62
You mean the Russians who were inside Ukraine trying to take their resources for free?
Exactly who declared your genocide as their goal? Or are you just accepting what Russian media says about the Americans and Europeans want?
I know the views of the absolutely ignorant "experts" and gullible "majority" in the West.
I'm almost sure that he is not "Russian-speaking" in the narrow meaning of the word. That he can more or less fluently discuss Russian issues with the Russians (and, therefore, he can't actually understand Russians). Actually, I believe that his Russian is even worse than my English (and I don't pretend that I understand Americans). If CIA and other government agencies make stupid grammar mistakes even in their advertising banners it just demonstrates that their intelligence level is somewhere near zero.
And here is the first sign of his ignorance, prejudice and racism. "The Russians don't have neither freedom nor intelligence to get news from alternative sources". Depicting Russians as ignorant biomass and the herd of half-animals he ignores the obvious fact - most of Russians are intelligent and well-educated creatures, who do read foreign sources and discuss on the foreign borders.
The whole story below is also full of the same nonsense, ignorance and really degenerative propaganda (which can be consumed only by the worst representatives of the ignorant western community).
I'll comment just few of them, but the whole story is the nonsense.
Alex didn't ask himself why Yanukovich and significant part of Ukrainian society decided not to sign this agreement (which was suppose to make Ukraine another de-industrialised colony of the Europe).
When the polls were made by SBU (heir of KGB) it was quite clear why the Ukrainian society was divided not only on the basis of language (in fact, "Ukrainian" is a dialect of Russian) but also on the basis of smartness and honestness. Many of those 15% who were more honest than smart, lost their jobs or even lives. Actually, the smartest of them (like my cousin from Kherson) left Ukraine.
And he also forget about Lenin's and Stalin's far-left policy of "Rootenisation" (which in Ukraine became a form of Ukrainisation).
Oh, shit... In most of the Slavic languages (ask google translator) including Polish and Czech it is "na Ukraine" (like "on the plains") showing the fact that Borderlands (Ukraine) is not a state, but a territory.
Actually, even in Ukrainian language, the "classic" of Ukrainians literature, Taras Shevchenko, in his most famous poem had wrote: "Kak umru, pokhoronite na Ukraine miloy".
Writing "v Ukraine" is a part of the modern Ukrainian political jargon, supposed to create an illusion that Ukraine is an independent state.
Actually, those pro-Maidan groups of "soccer fans" was delivered in Odessa from Kharkov and Dniepropetrovsk and Kievan junta gave them carte blanche to act as they want and ordered police not to intervene (and even "protect the site of massacre") Deliver the group of well armed White Suprematists from a Texas on the BLM rally in California and gave them permission to do whatever they want.
What was even more important than the massacre itself, in the turning Russian society against NATO and their proxies was the reaction of the Kievan Junta and Western officials on the "tradegy". It was cheering and total justification of the actions of the murderers. "We allow every true American patriot to kill any freaking treasonous n-gger on the spot, if he opens his dirty mouth to sing his freaking n-ggers songs or even if he want to have some human rights". At this point all political discussions and open protest became impossible.
And of course, his ignorance about Russian culture is even more clear than his ignorance in political and economic matters (actually, latin Z and V letters are referring to the books of Lukyanenko and Pelevin, but US "intelligence officers" are definitely not intelligent enough to read Russian books).
GLASNOST
Platinum Member
Your English is pretty good.
The fact that you can see it demonstrates that your English is pretty good.
Deadstick
Platinum Member
You do when the fence is built of missiles pointing at the neighbour.
Deadstick
Platinum Member
As for so called Novichok other Countries also had the capability to have that stuff, the British research facility at Porton Down chemical and biological establishment run by the MOD is just down the road from where the Skripal incident took place, coincidence? also they tell us Novichok is the most deadly militry grade nerve agent known and yet no one died from a so called attack, i call the whole thing a fabricated propaganda stunt, by the way are the Skriplas still alive? i rather doubt it dead bodies can't talk.
GLASNOST
Platinum Member
You are wasting your time with that cherry-picking numbskull who has no notion of time line or who participated.
You never shared your credentials, are you a real expert?
Unless, of course, your neighbor already has missiles pointing at you.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Crime in DC has plummetted since Jan 2025, murder down 68%.- Started by ColonelAngus
- Replies: 3
-
-
sound, water bubbles, and flash of light- Started by trevorjohnson83
- Replies: 1
-
Is the Strait of Hurmuz a sliver lining for Climate Change?- Started by Raynine
- Replies: 3
