What's next?, next war Romanians could be part of

Very interesting article about Russia and the Chechen terrorist groups and their actions...
http://cristiannegrea.blogspot.com/2011/09...vertisment.html

... and about the "democratic" Russian Justice and "modern" army...
But I wonder where from does the author extract the data? Or does Mr. Negrea have so-to-say "blue eyes"?

Well, he portrays Russia and Transdnestra as enemies. If your "dujmani" are wicked, mean, ruthless, powerful, then that automatically makes your "side" the opposite of all that. It is the way characters are created in fairy tales: Fat Frumos would be nothing without Capcaun or Zmeu, Luke Skywalker would be nothing without Darth Vader, Batman would be nothing without The Joker/Penguin/Two-Face/Scarecrow.
By portraying Russia/Transdnestra as the "bad guy", that makes his "side" the "good guys" and therefore everything his "side" does is righteous and fair. Television taught us that if John McClane (good guy) kills a number of people, that is OK as long as the people he kills are "bad guys". Jean Claude van Damme can commit significant amounts of griveous bodily harm (or even kill) as long as the subjects of his wrath are "bad guys". Killing/maiming is no longer wrong if you do that to "bad guys"... The only problem is that that each "side" sees itself as "righteous" and the other side as "bad guys".

Either this man has an unhealthy fixation or we are witnessing brainwashing and manipulation in action. Either way, one needs to enter that website with a very open mind.

Radu

"Good" manipulation, as you already stated in an earlier post...
PS: Atenţie, dujmanii ascultă! (care este ei...) / Be careful, the enemys is listening (that is...)

Radu, if theoretically what you say may be true, in the particular case of Russia & Transnistria the situation is slightly different. Obviously I say it from my point of view... My arguments came from what I read and people I spoke (from Moldova especially) referring to Transnistria where the separatists leadership (pro-Russian) policy is obviousely full of persecution and even terror against those who oppose them (mostly moldavians). As Russia's state policy is clear to support illegal separatist leadership (I found it unnecessary to give examples that are found everywhere) it is difficult if not impossible to find much sympathy towards Russia in Romania those days. Many forget about Russia's aggression in 1992 in Moldova where Romania was also a target of Russia's war (propaganda war) not to mention the veiled threats of President&Prime Minister Putin addressed to our country...

At a superficial glance, yes, but on a closer look it's "my country, right or wrong". The fact that it is "my side" should make any question of righteousness secondary. Especially when my side lives in a world where many other sides compete with all means at their disposal, righteous or not. Do football fans boo when a penalty kick is given for their side although there was clearly no foul? No, the score is more important.

There is a clear difference between the sides though. The difference is that being aggressively critical of your side out of what are or you believe may be righteousness considerations is very prevalent in Romania, and it may even give you the status of "invitat permanent" (permanent guest) on some talkshows. Now try doing the same in Transdniester or Russia.

This post has been edited by Imperialist on October 14, 2011 11:26 pm

http://bogatu.voceabasarabiei.net/?p=1740

US Military after major successes : Libya and Iraq
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20111024-li...165a7fdcf51cb8b

Very instructive your post, ANDREAS, let me quote this:
World War II was nice in that it offered a clean end — unless, of course, you consider that the Cold War and the fear of impending nuclear war immediately succeeded it. Wars rarely end cleanly, but rather fester or set the stage for the next war. We can see that clearly in Iraq. The universal congratulations on the death of Moammar Gadhafi are as ominous as all victory celebrations are, because they ignore the critical question: Now what?

Indeed, after dead of Gaddafi, what is next?

I meet him once, and for sure he has brown eyes (or dark, for someones)

Mr. Negrea on my opinion is a very informed person (obviousely also talented, intelligent and with analytical sense) which does not necessarily mean he is in connection with secret services. I know people well informed on various topics (with a different training than the one in which they express their views) because they had a passion for these areas, therefore they read more, talk to many people, traveling for documentation so they are well informed. The only objection (the proper phrase would be "retinere in ceea ce il priveste") that I have about Mr. Negrea is around the military issues that I think are not very well mastered by him. That would be not a problem if his books were not be called "thriller politico-militar", but in these conditions he should be better documented about these issues. But beyond these objections I appreciate him very much!

Ah well, he does not need to belong to any "agenturili" to be manipulative. There is also ample evidence that he is clever. But there is no doubt that he is like a "popa care predica corului de maicute" (preaching to the converted). He is simply an artist with a well-rehearsed repertoire playing to an eager audience. He is Westlife to a bunch of hormonal teenage girls but many people like Skrillex...
Radu

U.S.-Russian relations...
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20111031-ru...878ce9564e6acbb

Just a diversion for the future elections or a well thought move?
http://www.realitatea.net/propunere-soc-re...ina_884235.html

Well, a referendum is the "will of the people". Nothing wrong with that. What makes all the difference is the question asked of the people. "Join Ukraine or maintain the status quo?" is significantly different from "Join Ukraine or join Moldova?" :-)
Something tells me that if they go ahead with the referendum, Smirov prefers the first question.
Radu
Radu