Why the American media are so pathologically anti-Russian

[Saras]

Originally posted by The Vagabond


Yes, I have. First, I am not quite sure that Americans don't keep certain assets as strategic and unsellable, that they don't somehow control foreign purchases of their assets.

Well well. You're NOT SURE. Ergo, they DO keep certain assets unsellable.

Seriously, if RosOboronExport wanted (assuming they had the billions of dollars) to buy Lockheed I think there would be som problems

You just bought into their propaganda, naive Lithuanian.

Second, given the enormous number of their assets, any one of them can hardly be considered strategic. Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that a rival, non-Western entity will ever be able to buy out an essential chunk to make it strategic. In Russia, such a giant oil company as Yukos is responsible for up to 10% revenues of the federal budget. You see the difference? Can we entrust American companies, which were eager to buy Yukos, with the assets providing such a huge chunk of the budget. I am afraid not.

Why not? Western corporates usually are more diligent tax payers than you regular Ivan Oligarchovich, they reinvest more into the business and they treat their employees better.

Russia, as a country that can solely rely in itself for survival in a hostile environment (unlike e.g. Lithuania, which lives truly in 'greenhouse' conditions)

What 'greenhouse conditions'?

[Combat Ingrid]

Originally posted by Saras
Ivan Oligarchovich

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Saras


Well well. You're NOT SURE. Ergo, they DO keep certain assets unsellable.

Seriously, if RosOboronExport wanted (assuming they had the billions of dollars) to buy Lockheed I think there would be som problems

So the notion of a strategic asset is not alien to Americans, as expected. What do you think, if Rosneft had the bucks to buy Exxon and wanted to, would it be allowed to? I have some doubts.

Perhaps I shouldn't have said this, sorry. At least, not on that occasion.

Why not? Western corporates usually are more diligent tax payers than you regular Ivan Oligarchovich, they reinvest more into the business and they treat their employees better.

It would be more difficult to deal with them in the times of crisis. Besides, they are less likely to reinvest inside the country. In addition, it is the sacrosanct natural resourses we are talking about after all.

What 'greenhouse conditions'?

In other words, just a regime of maximum favoritism from the West in all possible respects.

You're even worse that those idiots that were against liberalisation of land sales to non-residents of Lithuania. Omfg, teh Russians will buy all of Lithuania and ENSLAVE US AGAIN!

Lithuania already got its cushy place in the West. It has nothing to fear. So those people are really idiots. Russia is a different story, as I have already explained.

[Heresson]

In other words, just a regime of maximum favoritism from the West in all possible respects.

nah, I think Russia gets more attention and help from the West than Russia.

And if Russia tried hard enough, it could be a member of NATO, EU or anything it wished.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Heresson


nah, I think Russia gets more attention and help from the West than Russia.

And if Russia tried hard enough, it could be a member of NATO, EU or anything it wished.

You are very mistaken about NATO and the EU.

Attention, perhaps. But what help are you talking about? So all this permanent vilification campaign in the media we are discussing in this thread is help?? It costs huge bucks to the country in economic terms, not to mention the moral damage, etc. Or perhaps you mean the enormous geopolitical pressure and tightening a new iron curtain around Russia? Another minor detail: Poland was forgiven all communist-era debts, whereas Russia has to pay all the debts of the whole former Soviet Union in full.

[Heresson]

Poland was NOT forgiven communism-era debts.
I thin Russia did receive economic help.
What do you mean by "enormous pressure and tightening a new iron curtain around Russia"?

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Heresson
Poland was NOT forgiven communism-era debts.

Poland was forgiven a huge chunk of debt. If it was not communist-era one, then what was it?

I thin Russia did receive economic help.

Even if it is possible to say that Russia received any, it is still uncomparable to what Poland received. In addition to help, Russia also receieved a lot of damage.

What do you mean by "enormous pressure and tightening a new iron curtain around Russia"?

Expanding NATO, EU, agression against Yugoslavia, new visa barriers, trampling on Russia's vital interests in the former USSR, ignoring human right violations against Russians in Latvia and Estonia, strenuous vilification campaign in the press, etc.

[Heresson]

Originally posted by The Vagabond


Poland was forgiven a huge chunk of debt. If it was not communist-era one, then what was it?

Poland was forgiven part of the debt, lots remain. We'll be repaying the debt for decades to come.
I doubt Russia was not forgiven any part of its debt.

Even if it is possible to say that Russia received any, it is still uncomparable to what Poland received.

I don't recall we received any

In addition to help, Russia also receieved a lot of damage.

Like what?

[quote]
Expanding NATO, EU
[quote]

And that's harming Russia?
Of course eastern Europe wants to be in NATO because it fears Russia. But Russia only strenghtens that fear. Because why did it object NATO enlargement if it didn't think the protection of Poland, Lithuania etc is not what it wants?

agression against Yugoslavia

It's not "agression". Have Serbia not persecuted Albanians in Kosovo, there'd be no affair at all.
How was it directed against Russia?

, new visa barriers,

These are not new. EU enlarged and so, the old rules are applied to the new boarder. It's hardly directed against Russia. Russia gets special treatement, in fact.

trampling on Russia's vital interests in the former USSR,

You'd have to specify. But a note: Russia is not the only country that has interests in this region and there are no reasons why its interests should be protected more than anyone else's. It's a free game.

ignoring human right violations against Russians in Latvia and Estonia

I thin EU is doing something about it. And as far as I remember, Russians could get citizenship as long as they learned the local language and info about the state.

strenuous vilification campaign in the press, etc.

Oh c-mon. Do You think image of Poland in western press is good? Every country, especially similar yet poorer, as Poland or Russia in comparison to the West, gets bashed.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
So the notion of a strategic asset is not alien to Americans, as expected. What do you think, if Rosneft had the bucks to buy Exxon and wanted to, would it be allowed to? I have some doubts.

Yes, the government has allowed huge companies to be bought by foreign multinationals. Chrysler was one of the world's largest automakers and so could be considered a natiojnal asset but the truth is the company is stronger and better off since its merger with Mercedes. They now have more resources and make better cars while workers didn't lose anything. The factories haven't moved, are unlikely to be moved in the near future, and the number of jobs are much more secure. In short the company, and thus the nation, are now stronger competitors because of the foreign investment.

Loads of oil companies, engineering companies, and even national landmarks (like the Empire State Building) have been sold to foreigners. Almost always it makes economic sense, creates more jobs, and results in net capital being brought into the country. In the 1980's nationalists in the US were upset that their old WW2 enemy the Japanese were allowed to buy the Empire State building but the Japanese were willing to pay top price so the company sold. A few years later the Japanese realestate market crashed and the company had to sell the Empire State Building in order to pay off debts back in Japan. The result was the Japanese lost hundreds of millions of dollars and the old owner rebought the building at a fraction of what the Japanese paid.

Foreign investment really does help a nation develop and become more competitive. Both the US and China have figured this out but it seems the Russian government is more worried about cronism then real economic growth.

[Saras]

Taking where Oerdin left off - the Americans consistently take Japs for a ride on their asset booms, just look up Pebble Beach Golf resorts

[Saras]

Originally posted by The Vagabond


So the notion of a strategic asset is not alien to Americans, as expected. What do you think, if Rosneft had the bucks to buy Exxon and wanted to, would it be allowed to? I have some doubts.

There is a difference between Exxon and Lockheed which you unfortunately failed to notice I think it'd be fine and dandy as far as US Government is concerned if Rosneft wanted to buy Exxon. Or Goldman Sachs. Or Citicorp. As long as they play fair, ie, no Russian-style tricks such as competitor killings, dodging taxes etc

Perhaps I shouldn't have said this, sorry. At least, not on that occasion.

Its not that I was insulted, its more of a "man, YOU call me naive and then advocate limiting sales of "strategic" assets to Kremlin cronies in the name of NATIONAL SECURITY?"

It would be more difficult to deal with them in the times of crisis. Besides, they are less likely to reinvest inside the country. In addition, it is the sacrosanct natural resourses we are talking about after all.

What crisis? If they start operating these companies in a way that serioysly undermines your national security (i.e., running a spy ring or something), you just nationalise them. Eminent domain, man.

In other words, just a regime of maximum favoritism from the West in all possible respects.

I'd beg to differ. We have a witholding tax, a blatant violation of the principles on which EU was founded.

Russia is a different story, as I have already explained.

How is it different? How can teh evil west enslave mother Russia by buying her assets?

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Heresson


Poland was forgiven part of the debt, lots remain. We'll be repaying the debt for decades to come.
I doubt Russia was not forgiven any part of its debt.

Russia was not forgiven any part of the debt (some part was only restructured). Poland was, and it was a huge part. You just fail to enlighten us on the matter.

I don't recall we received any

You are very unthankful.

It's not "agression". Have Serbia not persecuted Albanians in Kosovo, there'd be no affair at all.

And now all Serbs are expelled from Kosovo under NATO's watchful care.

How was it directed against Russia?

Agression in violation of the UN charter. Attacking our informal ally, despite others bahaved equally bad. In spite of our objections.

These are not new. EU enlarged and so, the old rules are applied to the new boarder. It's hardly directed against Russia. Russia gets special treatement, in fact.

Whatever it was, whatever explanation you can provide, the naked fact is that the visa wall came closer to Russia. It is the result that matters.

You'd have to specify. But a note: Russia is not the only country that has interests in this region and there are no reasons why its interests should be protected more than anyone else's. It's a free game.

Russia's interests there are more vital than the others'. And I wish it was recognized a 'free game' by the West, so that the Ukrainian people could hear.

In any event, my point here was just that all this puts a huge additional strain over Russia, a strain that Poland has the luxury not to have.

I thin EU is doing something about it.

Great. But it remains a fact that the EU admitted, against its own principles, countries committing blatant violations of human rights.

And as far as I remember, Russians could get citizenship as long as they learned the local language and info about the state.

They were already living there. It's a human right violation to deny them citizenship on any grounds. Newcomers, on the other hand, should be required to pass the language exam for citizenship indeed.

Oh c-mon. Do You think image of Poland in western press is good? Every country, especially similar yet poorer, as Poland or Russia in comparison to the West, gets bashed.

I'd love to see the same level of vilification in the Western press towards Poland. The problem is I don't see any.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Oerdin


Yes, the government has allowed huge companies to be bought by foreign multinationals. Chrysler was one of the world's largest automakers and so could be considered a natiojnal asset but the truth is the company is stronger and better off since its merger with Mercedes. They now have more resources and make better cars while workers didn't lose anything. The factories haven't moved, are unlikely to be moved in the near future, and the number of jobs are much more secure. In short the company, and thus the nation, are now stronger competitors because of the foreign investment.

Loads of oil companies, engineering companies, and even national landmarks (like the Empire State Building) have been sold to foreigners. Almost always it makes economic sense, creates more jobs, and results in net capital being brought into the country. In the 1980's nationalists in the US were upset that their old WW2 enemy the Japanese were allowed to buy the Empire State building but the Japanese were willing to pay top price so the company sold. A few years later the Japanese realestate market crashed and the company had to sell the Empire State Building in order to pay off debts back in Japan. The result was the Japanese lost hundreds of millions of dollars and the old owner rebought the building at a fraction of what the Japanese paid.

Foreign investment really does help a nation develop and become more competitive. Both the US and China have figured this out but it seems the Russian government is more worried about cronism then real economic growth.

Hey, guys, I never claimed that America was not selling its assets to foreigners, nor I argued against foreign investment in principle. The point is that it's up to each country to decide what kind of investment it welcomes, what kind of investment is overall (I underline this word!) beneficial for the country. The American gov makes such decisions all the time. Now Russia made a decision in what concerns development of its natural resources, and that decision seems wise to me.

Nonetheless, just a couple of more specific comments on what Oerdin said here.

1) Each of the American assets sold accounts only for a tiny fraction of the federal tax revenue. In contrast, the Russian company Yukos accounts for up to 10% of it.

2) Oerdin's examples are not related to the natural resources.

3) Japan and Germany are just Western allies, who are besides strategically dependent on America. I am not quite sure the Americans would feel equally dandy if their assets were purchased by companies of a potentially hostile world power.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
And now all Serbs are expelled from Kosovo under NATO's watchful care.

Strictly speaking this is incorrect. When NATO won the air war and Slobo agreed to move Yugoslav military forces out of Kosovo the Yugoslav media went into a feeding frenzy. Every Serb TV, newspaper, radio show in the country claimed Albanians were going to massacre Serbs and that NATO hated Serbs & so would not protect them. The result? 90% of the Serb population left before NATO troops even arrived. Once these refugees (if you can realy call them that) arrived in the richer parts of Serbia they didn't really want to go back. If you were living in the poorest, least devoloped, and most densely populated part of a country why go back after moving to the richest part?

The economy sucks in Kosovo but people still get by and if those Serbs wanted to come back the security situation isn't to bad. Other then the odd flair up things since 1999 have been pretty smooth but still those people don't come back. It seems they've found a place they like better.

[Saras]

I vaguely remember that Vneshtorgbank (or was it Vneshekonom...) secretly bought ~80% of US grain harvest via a simple hotel switchboard somewhere in late 970's

They then had to sell it at a loss, iirc

Did that in any way shake the USA? I don't think so.