back to article Germany warns Moscow will splash cash on pre-election propaganda and misinformation spree

Germany's intelligence agency has accused Russia of hacking its politicians and election systems under the guise of online activism. Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) chief Hans-Georg Maassen says Russia is intending to “weaken or destabilise the Federal Republic of Germany”. Germany's national …

Page:

  1. GrumpyKiwi

    They're under our beds!

    Reds! REDS! There's goddamn REDS everywhere. Under our beds, in the walls, on the train, orbiting overhead, putting fluoride into our drinking water and sapping our manly manliness.

    Oh wait, it's not the 1950's.

    But apparently the populace of Germany is so stupid that one fake story on Facebook about Merkel sacrificing children to Islamic Satan will be enough to drive them all to vote for Hitler's reanimated corpse (driven by Russian Zombieski Technology and powered by Putinonium).

    1. redpawn Silver badge

      Re: They're under our beds!

      Not one story Grumpy. They are far more sophisticated than that. Any email which makes the target politician look bad will be spread around on the real news services via activist sites such as Wikileaks. Even you probably have sent or received emails which would if published out of context make you unelectable.

      When one party gets a pass and the other gets their personal information leaked and published, it influences and election. It is not fool proof, but there are enough people like you GrumpyKiwi to tilt an election. The fake news stories will only add to the problems faced by the target politicians.

      1. GrumpyKiwi

        Re: They're under our beds!

        Pretty much every email I have sent would make me unelectable. On the other hand, nor have I ever in public proposed starting WW3 to stroke my own ego.

        As for "people like me" which is a lovely stereotype BTW, I don't vote at all. It only encourages the bastards.

        1. Primus Secundus Tertius

          Re: They're under our beds!

          @Grumpy / 2

          Pretty much everything political that I put in comments here makes me unelectable. My record is 42 downvotes, beating even the occasion I criticised Saint Snowden. I am gateful to the 4 who supported me against the 42.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: They're under our beds!

        "When one party gets a pass and the other gets their personal information leaked and published, it influences and election."

        redpawn, you ever stop to think why that is? Could it be that Democrats were just a whole lot dirtier this time? And besides, Trump got creamed again and again by nearly every news source out there. Heck, they showed him talking about grabbing pussy! And yet, somehow he was (as you say) 'given a pass.' Funny thing tho, it was the American voters giving him the pass and retching at the prospect of Ma Clinton getting into the driver's seat.

        Besides, would you prefer Hillary's cheating to defeat Bernie not have been revealed? That she 'get a pass' on that? Do you condone a powerful politician secretly using the party apparatus to crush a legitimate challenge from below like she clearly did? Hmmm?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "Democrats were a whole lot dirtier this time"

          I don't buy it. I think the kind of shenanigans the DNC was pulling to push her to the nomination and dump Bernie happen often. And I think the republicans do it too. Heck, there was a movement to try to deny Trump the nomination that was out in the open...who knows what sort of emails were passed around the RNC? The main reason that effort failed IMHO is that the republican establishment finds Ted Cruz at least as distasteful as Trump if not worse, and there was no one else who could conceivably win the nomination by the time they started fretting over it.

          As for her corruption I've got three words for you: Bush Iran Contra. Whole lot dirtier than the email thing and killed more US servicemen than Bengazi. Politics is a dirty business, but the public mostly doesn't want to see the sausage being made - they only tolerate it when it is the other guy's sausage getting exposed.

          Sure, Russia tried to tilt the playing field a bit in favor of Trump because they felt they could get what they want from him more than easily than from Clinton. But in 2020 it could be China favoring the democrat nominee, so this type of interference in the US election process (or Germany's or any country's) should be opposed by both sides and not ignored because it worked in your favor this time around.

          And yes, I'm aware of the irony given how much the US has meddled in other country's political process (something both parties are equally guilty of) Hopefully more Snowden style leaks will come and expose that sort of dirty business as it happens and make it harder for us to get away with.

          1. 9Rune5 Silver badge

            Re: "Democrats were a whole lot dirtier this time"

            But Hillary was not running against Bush this time around, now was she?

            No, she faced somebody with a reasonably clean slate. Then somebody tried to muddy the waters by accusing the donald of being a sexist pig, an accusation that would land half of congress in trouble, not to mention Hillary's own hubby. “Never wrestle with pigs. You both get dirty and the pig likes it.”.

            At least her campaign team realized that her bid for the white house would require lots and lots of money. But in my book that is hardly a big plus.

          2. veti Silver badge

            Re: "Democrats were a whole lot dirtier this time"

            The tragedy of this last election was that the RNC had a plan to stop the real dangerous candidate - Ted Cruz. They had a whole campaign of ads against him, they had journalists briefed, audiences primed, a large troop of great and good ready to cast subtle aspersions on his competence, character and sanity. It was a good plan, and it worked a treat.

            They didn't think they needed one to stop Trump.

            And why should they? After all, surely the religious right couldn't support him, and anyone who calls themself a "conservative" certainly couldn't. Heck, the man has never even pretended to be anything but a lecherous, corrupt, vacuous, ignorant spendthrift. So he'd be bound to lose the race, right? Worst case, they'd lose the presidency - and they could certainly live with that, so long as they get to keep Congress.

            Unfortunately, they underestimated just how mindlessly partisan the base is.

            1. Naselus

              Re: "Democrats were a whole lot dirtier this time"

              "Unfortunately, they underestimated just how mindlessly partisan the base is."

              Honestly, I'm pretty sure Trump had a plan to stop Trump, and the base managed to overcome it.

    2. Captain DaFt

      Re: They're under our beds!

      Well, what'd you expect to happen?

      The OMG! TERRORISM! spiel has about run its course, since it's been so heavily over played, NK is a joke to everyone but its own citizens, and China's a valued trading partner.

      So it's time to fall back on the good old OMG! COMMIES! RUSSIA! until a new boogeyman comes along.

      1. redpawn Silver badge

        Re: They're under our beds!

        Seems you like the results of the US election and don't mind if Germany goes the same way.

        1. GrumpyKiwi

          Re: They're under our beds!

          I regard it as a 50.0000025% win overall. Trump at least didn't propose shooting down Russian aircraft over Syria to create "no fly zones". No WW3 is a win for me and pretty much the rest of humanity. Your standards on the other hand may vary and regard nuclear war as better than having a sexist in the White House.

          Beyond that and as far as Germany is concerned I think that anyone else, left, right or centre could do a better job than Merkel. But I don't get all sanctimonious about it.

          1. redpawn Silver badge

            Re: They're under our beds!

            Grumpy,

            Did you even look up who got the higher percentage of the vote? If you did, you would know it wasn't Trump by well over two million votes.

            1. GrumpyKiwi

              Re: They're under our beds!

              Yes I did. I saw that the highest percentage was "none of the above" with 100 million voters not bothering. Now I feel in the majority. None of which matters in reference to my 50.000025% comment above which was a reference to humanity winning by not having a warmonger start WW3.

              However if you'd prefer to look at it in terms of votes cast, then it was "Not Clinton, no way, no how" with Trump, Johnson, Stein and Evans together easily outnumbering those voting for Clinton.

              1. redpawn Silver badge

                Re: They're under our beds!

                Just sophistry. Good day!

              2. Dr Scrum Master

                Re: They're under our beds!

                I saw that the highest percentage was "none of the above" with 100 million voters not bothering.

                Excuse me, but not voting most certainly does not count as "none of the above". Not voting counts as "any of the above".

                At least with actual paper ballot papers one has the chance of spoiling one's vote, the numbers of which are also recorded - another thing that electronic (or even manual) voting machines prevent... or were those "hanging chads" craftily spoilt ballots?

                1. Lusty

                  Re: They're under our beds!

                  "Excuse me, but not voting most certainly does not count as "none of the above". Not voting counts as "any of the above"."

                  That may be the case. We therefore need a "not these people" box which triggers a re-election with all different candidates. It's the only way to genuinely fix the democratic system as far as I can see. It would be expensive on the first go as the nation would need to reject wave after wave of career politician and rich nut jobs but eventually honest people would get the idea that they could make a difference...

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: They're under our beds!

                    A logical idea, Lusty, but of course they've got that covered. The person wasn't far wrong who pointed out that if voting made any real difference, it would be illegal. If a new set of candidates were required, the established parties could easily find them. There are armies of hack politicians just waiting to be put in harness.

                    What always amazes me about these discussions is how so many Americans - and British people too, apparently - seem to believe that there is any significant difference between the established parties. So they waste all their time and energy arguing about whether "Hillary" is worse than "Trump", and whether Obamacare is worse than the previous system... instead of standing back a little and allowing themselves to notice that the entire political setup is carefully designed to prevent voters from having any impact whatsoever (other than cosmetic). That's why David Cameron is so utterly disgraced - he found a way of letting the British people exert some influence on their fate, by holding the Brexit referendum. He thought it was safe enough, the proles would never be able to escape their brainwashing - but they did.

                    Haven't you seen the classic study by Gilens & Page of Princeton that conclusively proves the USA is an oligarchy, not a democracy? Or Gilens' book "Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America"? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746

                    It's about 40 years since Gore Vidal summed up the American political system. "There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party… and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt – until recently… and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties".

                    Incidentally, what brilliant portraits of Trump ("a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism") and Hillary and her friends ("cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt – until recently… and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand").

                    As Gilens and Page have proved - and everyone who knew anything about American politics has understood for centuries - there is no important difference between the parties, and Presidents, when elected, mostly do what they are told. (Exceptions like John Kennedy get eliminated).

                  2. John H Woods Silver badge

                    Re: They're under our beds!

                    " We therefore need a "not these people" box which triggers a re-election with all different candidates" --- Lusty

                    Agreed --- and compulsory voting. In fact the boxes should have rankings, and the no-vote boxes should have the following flavours:

                    a) I don't care

                    b) I care but don't feel I have enough information to make a choice

                    c) I have enough information but do not want to vote for any of these people

                    1. Anonymous Coward
                      Anonymous Coward

                      Re: They're under our beds!

                      I'd rather see a ballot with major policy issues separated out. National Economy, Global Economy, Environmental, Education, etc...

                      Randomize the order, so it isn't one party as the first choice.

                      Remove the "party" vote from the presidential portion, only to apply to other positions.

                      Sum up the total votes for each policy and apply that to the applicable candidate.

                      Leaders should be chosen, not by who they are, but what they will do. (or.. at least.. what they say they'll do...)

              3. HausWolf

                Re: They're under our beds!

                That's funny, because as horrendous as Hillary was it seems as if there was a no trump, no way , no how, vote greater than your no Clinton vote.

                As for your none of the above, US voter participation has not been high for decades. While one can argue it is because of the candidates running, it is probably because of apathy in general.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: They're under our beds!

              Er, have you ever read about the US Constitution? The one that says it's the Electoral College, not the raw majority of popular votes, that decides?

              If British elections were decided by raw majorities, UKIP would have about one-third of the MPs in the House of Commons.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: They're under our beds!

                "If British elections were decided by raw majorities, UKIP would have about one-third of the MPs in the House of Commons."

                That would not be the case even if we had PR (UKIP got 12.6% of the vote).

                I don't think there's any sane way of cutting the cake that gives UKIP a "raw majority".

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: They're under our beds!

            "No WW3 is a win for me and pretty much the rest of humanity".

            It's an uphill battle, isn't it GrumpyKiwi? At least four readers of The Reg think that "no WW3" isn't a win for us and the rest of humanity.

          3. Tom Paine

            Re: They're under our beds!

            If you think Trump is less likely to involve the US (and possibly the rest of the world) in a big horrible war, I've a great bridge for sale here. One previous owner, retired lady vicar, only 7000 miles on the cllock. Oh, a couple of scratches yes, they'll buff right out, and -- ah, this model is famous for having paint colours on different panels that don't quite match, and sills with a little kink in them.

            1. fajensen Silver badge
              Thumb Up

              Re: They're under our beds!

              If you think Trump is less likely to involve the US (and possibly the rest of the world) in a big horrible war,

              Based on Hillarys well-documented track record of war-mongering and unfailing Inverse Midas Touch while a-mongering (even email blows up right in her face) I didn't think any reasonable person could actually think otherwise. But, there you are selling a bridge.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: They're under our beds!

          "Seems you like the results of the US election and don't mind if Germany goes the same way."

          Why yes, yes I do like the results, and if Germany wants to throw off their current far-left quasi-dictator, more power to them. Why, you got a problem because of who won? Or is that just my sophistry talking...?

          1. Hans 1
            Happy

            Re: They're under our beds!

            >far-left quasi-dictator

            Merkel, far left ? What are you smoking, Big John ? She is Christian Democrat, read it up on wikipedia.

            As for "quasi-dictator", The Federal Republic of Germany is a very democratic regime, much more so than the US or the UK ... again, what are you smoking ?

            Then again, if you are USian and think Hilary is far left, I somewhat understand (you're brain-washed), however, Merkel is more of a republican, even pushing for Christian bullshit ... for us Brits, more of a conservative with pro-Christian BS bolted-on.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: They're under our beds!

              "She is Christian Democrat, read it up on wikipedia".

              Yeah, sure, like May and Cameron are conservatives and Blair is Labour. And Hillary Clinton is a democrat. If you believe any of those statements I have a bridge to sell you.

              "The map is not the territory, the word is not the thing it describes". - Alfred Korzybski

            2. Anonymous Blowhard

              Re: They're under our beds!

              "for us Brits, more of a conservative with pro-Christian BS bolted-on"

              TM doesn't need to bolt on Christian BS, she has it built-in...

            3. Naselus

              Re: They're under our beds!

              "Merkel, far left ? What are you smoking, Big John ?"

              Bear in mind that Big John's main problem with Mussolini was that he was too much of a pinko hippie.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: They're under our beds!

                "Merkel, far left ? What are you smoking, Big John ?"

                I understand that Merkel has enabled or condoned more than a million Muslims moving into Germany (a Christian nation) in just the last year, and with no plans to slow it down any time soon. Try telling me that's a right-wing idea.

                1. fajensen Silver badge
                  Facepalm

                  Re: They're under our beds!

                  Try telling me that's a right-wing idea.

                  There is more than one right-wing. Crushing wages and working conditions all the way to 3'rd world conditions by mass immigration "Because Markets" is a right wing idea, from the kind of right-wing good-thinking that comes from appointment-only think-tanks and exclusive elite schools.

                  The other right-wing, those who does not think this is a good idea, are the right-wingers from the factory floors and bier-stuben on the receiving end of this grand plan.

                  It's a class thing more than a "left-right" thing; those affected protests against mass immigration, those who benefits support it by all means. The left-right thing is spun to make it appear like there are really different opposing political views, apart from the real issue with "us below" and "them on top". So far it has worked, but, not for so much longer I suspect.

          2. Arctic fox
            WTF?

            Re: "their current far-left quasi-dictator"

            Just how right-wing are you Big John if you regard Merkel in such terms? You regard Attilla and Ghengis as your homebois perhaps?

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: They're under our beds!

          What way is that? Away from the probability of thermonuclear war?

          It's not terribly difficult to understand. If there is a thermonuclear war, probably every human being will die - sooner or later - accompanied by most of the other species we have grown to know and love. The cockroaches or ants or whatever may thank us for stepping aside after they evolve intelligence, but that isn't important right now.

          The one almost certain way of bringing about a thermonuclear war is for one nation that has a huge thermonuclear arsenal to insist on provoking another such nation until war breaks out - as, if you study history, you will see that wars do almost spontaneously. Just raise the political and military temperature high enough - or turn up the voltage if you prefer - and soon enough - oooh look, a great big fat spark. Right into that tank of petrol! Who knew.

          American politicians, and some Europeans who ought to know better, like to say that Russia is "an existential threat". Leaving aside the ghastly abuse of the word "existential", which has a perfectly good meaning in philosophy and should be left there, the reason why Russia is "an existential threat" is that (obviously) it can destroy us all if it chooses. Just as we can destroy it if we choose. (Well, not "we", of course, but the US government).

          It seems to me that even an addled four-year-old could deduce from those simple facts one glaringly obvious idea.

          WE OUGHT TO MAKE FRIENDS WITH THE RUSSIANS.

          It's not rocket science, folks - but if we go on poking the Russians, one day we will see rocket science in action. Coming towards us at 12,000 mph and carrying bloody great hydrogen bombs.

          You wouldn't like it.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: They're under our beds!

      I wish I could give an extra upvote for "Putinomium". An excellent coinage!

    4. Tom Paine

      Re: They're under our beds!

      If you were the Russian intel community, wouldn't you factor into your calculations the likely reaction of the left to accusations of Russian interference -- (1) "this is just a red scare", and (2) "but the CIA have interfered with lots of other countries elections, so it's fair enough"?

      Clue: yes, yes you would.

      Here are some interesting docs for readers interested in background rather than knee-jerk "of course I know what's going on, unlike everyone else in the world" reactions. This is very interesting and useful stuff from a very reliable source, whatever you think of the Trump / Russia / hacks stories.

      The Grugq on "Security, Cyber and Elections";

      Part 1: https://medium.com/@thegrugq/security-cyber-and-elections-part-1-cd04de8ed125#.ipy12ovoc

      Part 2: https://medium.com/@thegrugq/security-cyber-and-elections-part-2-ee6954bb587f#.gprvxrg4j

      Part 3: https://medium.com/@thegrugq/security-cyber-and-elections-part-3-9398f639aa28#.mee0fsk7f

      And: "Why Is Everybody Being So Red-Baity And McCarthyite And Mean To Poor Innocent Russia? A Wonksplainer":

      Read more at http://wonkette.com/609282/why-is-everybody-being-so-red-baity-and-mccarthyite-and-mean-to-poor-innocent-russia-a-wonksplainer#g33MSSUk44Qckm84.99

      http://wonkette.com/609282/why-is-everybody-being-so-red-baity-and-mccarthyite-and-mean-to-poor-innocent-russia-a-wonksplainer

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: They're under our beds!

        Here are some interesting docs for readers interested in background

        Heh - "The Wonkette" is very, very, screechy and loud, lots of emotion and name calling, very little reflection and information.

        The grugq "forgets" to mention the key security advice relevant for the Clinton campaigns failure: "Don't leave all of your dirt archived on servers accessible from the Internet and by countless minions, just ask your old friend Jeffrey Epstein about the value of proper physical archives".

        In fact, If you are a "person of interest" don't keep data around that you don't want your mum, wife, kids, girlfriend, boss to see.

  2. Dr.Flay

    Missinformation of missinformation

    Released hacked data is blamed on "State actors" because it is not offered for sale.

    It suits the Governments to put hackers into 2 brackets, either Criminals or State actors.

    This leaves out the majority of hackers that simply hack for fun and knowledge.

    If Russia were truly so well equipped and constantly hacking, why are they so low in the hacking list ?

    http://www.securityweek.com/many-web-attacks-come-united-states-sucuri

    Surely they can do better than that ?

    1. Pascal Monett Silver badge
      Trollface

      What ?

      Are you trying to inject some actual, verifiable DATA into our comfortable preconceived notions ? And that in a pre-election period no less ?

      This is the Internet ! We don't need your stinkiiiin data, we KNOW what want to know !

      (if your sarcasm meter isn't broken here, you need a new one)

    2. veti Silver badge

      Re: Missinformation of missinformation

      Well, in the first place, consider how those statistics were gathered. These were "attacks that were blocked by the Sucuri firewall". In other words, they were the most basic script-kiddie attacks, including nothing with a sophistication level exceeding the capacity of a 12-year-old.

      In the second place, consider the publisher. They're in the business of selling firewalls for Windows boxen whose most valuable asset is a Mastercard number. They're not in the business of providing high-end security for targets of serious state or political hackers, they're simply not interested in that market.

      So this survey is simply irrelevant. It's like saying "this guy can't be a murderer, he always returns his library books on time!"

    3. Naselus

      Re: Missinformation of missinformation

      "Released hacked data is blamed on "State actors" because it is not offered for sale."

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but the released hacked data was blamed on 'State actors' because it used methods that are known to be characteristic of two known state-backed Russian hacking outfits.

      Forensic computing turns out to be more complicated that frantically googling 'are my stolen docs for sale anywhere plz?'.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Missinformation of missinformation

      It's a bit worse than that. The bulk of news outlets cannot package the "story" in the light of what is REALLY going on; the USA has been a plutocracy for many decades. The notion that we are a "two party system" is a gross oversimplified exaggeration. The bulk of the leaders in both parties are the same thing; rich people and their corporations all pissing out money to obfuscate the reality of the plutocracy in favor of something the morons en-mass can get their tiny heads around. i.e. mean old spendy libs, against successful (and therefore much "smarter") anti-science conservatives.

      These are the same assholes who take bribes, er lobbying gifts from the giant for-profit health care giants to keep the Affordable Health Care Act down. And down and down they went. The watered down version did make it to the light of day, but only after surviving close to 60 attacks from the entrenched assholes who could not accept any ideas from a black man. THAT is the reality. And the democrats and the republicans continue to waste time and money just getting that plumb government gig that does not pay much directly. It pays off in every other way. And THAT is the problem; we don't have a government for the people, by the people, we have a government that is bribery first, pocket lining second, and somewhere down in 12th or 18th place is the will of the people. But then, the stupid people elect the bigger crook.

      Is Hillary corrupt? You bet! And I still voted for her! Why? Because; 1) ALL politicians are crooks! Every. Single. One. And 2) She was an option that would lead to the destruction of the remainder of the republican party, and later on the people can break down the democratic party and rid ourselves of the "Citizens" United shithole, where corporations are somehow equal to citizens, but just to get more money into their party. AKA The Plutocracy. And WHAT a party! So, don't mind me while I rip off Red States. It's part of the plan, apparently. This is the new post-truth society, and I can plan that game too. Reset your router, early and often.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Missinformation of missinformation

        Everything Hillary does will backfire. Thanks to Hillary, the Republicans are replenished, Trump will be president and the Democrats will use all of the ressources of the state they still have access to, to run internecine wars and "regime change" operations against Trump.

        Blessed with the Luck of the Hillary, we will get to see Trump riding on top of a tank shelling Congress (or maybe the CIA headquarters), like Yeltsin did in Russia.

        Imagine that hair contrasted against camou, now, that would be something.

  3. Dr Scrum Master

    BAU

    Politicians from country A talk and act against country B.

    Government of country B then acts against politicians of country A.

    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge
      Mushroom

      Re: BAU

      So, USA, UK, Eu (inclusive of Germany) splashed cash and "(mis)informed the population" for 20 years. Russia finally does in return and they all start screaming murder.

      The closest analogy is a group of playground bullies abusing a kid smaller then them and then running to the principal crying after the kid blows a gasket and gives each of them a black eye.

      I do not have any sympathy for them in this case I am afraid. If you support regime change operations (either yours or by your closest allies) you should not complain if somebody regime changes you back.

      1. Adam 52 Silver badge

        Re: BAU

        We had a lecture at work from an expert in Russia week before last. He says that Russia has always been doing this.

        Apparently they see it as their duty to present a Eurasian view to counteract the North European view.

        Much like the US and UK feel obliged to interfere in the middle east elections, where there are any.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: BAU

          Fair enough, provided you acknowledge that the "Eurasian view" is just as legitimate as the "Atlanticist" view. (Actually, I think it has more to recommend it, because the Russians and Chinese adviocate a world order where all nations get influence and respect, whereas the Atlanticist view accepts the universal rule of Washington).

          1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

            Re: BAU

            In reality, the Eurasian view is

            'Do whatever Moscow and/or Bejing say'.

            Look at Tibet since the Chinese annexed it.

            Look at Georgia. The Russians took a good part of the country

            Look at Ukraine. Putin wanted the Crimea for its Naval base so he stirred up the locals and walked in pretending to be protecting the minority.

            Just like the USA in many respects.

      2. Rich 11 Silver badge

        Re: BAU

        you should not complain if somebody regime changes you back.

        But complaining about it is part of the game. It'll make a handful of your own citizens give a little more thought to what they read online, for a while anyway.

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021