That's a completely different breakdown of Russia than I've encountered before, and I've worked with other Russian engineers before. Thanks for posting.
Edward Tufte is one of the best at portraying data visually, and the Napoleonic invasion of Russia is a classic. You can see how the French started with a seemingly overwhelming force and by the time they retreated back to France, were utterly decimated. This is the Russian method.
I passed along the link to this article to a Ukrainian-American business associate and asked if he would like to provide any comments or rebuttal to the article.
Rebuttal? From a Ukrainian-American business associate and friend…
"Rebuttal requires a debate, there is none here. this blog is a summary of the Russian version of history. The history of the region unfortunately has been dominated and written and re-written by Russians.
Having said that I'll point out a thing or two:
-Kiev was never the capital of Russia. It was the capital of Kievan Rus, not to be confused with Russia.
-the comment that Kiev was the capital of modern day Russia is just stupid, and begs the question of the legitimacy of the modern Russian state.
-the city-state on the Moscow river emerged hundreds of years after the Kievan Rus started forming.
-the languages are different, and have always been.
Sadly, it's part of the Russian psyche that suffering is good; it's a peasant/tsar mentality, and the blogger is proud of that.”
I spoke with him on the phone before and after forwarding the article. I have known this gentleman to be an intelligent, honest, trustworthy businessman for over 25 years.
Being Ukrainian – American he “would like to reserve the right to tell Mr. Putin to “go to hell.”
I am no expert on either nation or their foreign affairs, so I don’t really have a strong opinion that I would back with expertise. Having no axe to grind, I don’t really have a horse to back one way or the other… For what it is worth… Respectfully, O.A.
OA I appreciate you and your friend's comments. I'm no expert either. I thought it was a provocative article with a viewpoint seldom, if ever, found in the US press. Our press, especially on foreign affairs, appears to increasingly hew to a single party line, not just about Russia, but the Middle East as well. That said, the writer of the piece is a Russian-American and he clearly favors the Russian perspective. I have a good friend who is Latvian and despises Russia and the Russian perspective, and I think that holds true for most of the people in most of Russia's neighboring countries. However, making allowances for that perspective, I think Orlov's main point--that what we are doing in Russia will backfire--is valid, and I think he's probably right. However, I always treat my opinions and conclusions as subject to future revision, especially in foreign affairs and intelligence matters, where the ultimate "truth" is usually difficult or impossible to ascertain. So I'll keep my eyes and mind open to a variety of foreign sources and views, especially with the dominance of the mainstream US media's "story lines" with what I regard as essentially government propaganda. Thanks for checking out the link.
Indeed. The sign of objectivity. :) I too appreciate the insight offered regarding the Russian psyche. If one is to deal/negotiate effectively, it is wise to consider their perspective.
Whether the author has a bias or not seems immaterial. He has captured a good portion of the Russian mentality. This mentality is one of the reasons for the creation of the Soviet Union. They really didn't give a rip about the nations between Russia and Europe, they merely wanted a buffer zone to absorb any invasion.
I think the oil and natural gas dependency of Europe will be the undoing of NATO.
http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/posters...
Edward Tufte is one of the best at portraying data visually, and the Napoleonic invasion of Russia is a classic. You can see how the French started with a seemingly overwhelming force and by the time they retreated back to France, were utterly decimated. This is the Russian method.
I passed along the link to this article to a Ukrainian-American business associate and asked if he would like to provide any comments or rebuttal to the article.
Rebuttal? From a Ukrainian-American business associate and friend…
"Rebuttal requires a debate, there is none here. this blog is a summary of the Russian version of history. The history of the region unfortunately has been dominated and written and re-written by Russians.
Having said that I'll point out a thing or two:
-Kiev was never the capital of Russia. It was the capital of Kievan Rus, not to be confused with Russia.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topi...
-the comment that Kiev was the capital of modern day Russia is just stupid, and begs the question of the legitimacy of the modern Russian state.
-the city-state on the Moscow river emerged hundreds of years after the Kievan Rus started forming.
-the languages are different, and have always been.
Sadly, it's part of the Russian psyche that suffering is good; it's a peasant/tsar mentality, and the blogger is proud of that.”
I spoke with him on the phone before and after forwarding the article. I have known this gentleman to be an intelligent, honest, trustworthy businessman for over 25 years.
Being Ukrainian – American he “would like to reserve the right to tell Mr. Putin to “go to hell.”
I am no expert on either nation or their foreign affairs, so I don’t really have a strong opinion that I would back with expertise. Having no axe to grind, I don’t really have a horse to back one way or the other…
For what it is worth…
Respectfully,
O.A.
I appreciate you and your friend's comments. I'm no expert either. I thought it was a provocative article with a viewpoint seldom, if ever, found in the US press. Our press, especially on foreign affairs, appears to increasingly hew to a single party line, not just about Russia, but the Middle East as well. That said, the writer of the piece is a Russian-American and he clearly favors the Russian perspective. I have a good friend who is Latvian and despises Russia and the Russian perspective, and I think that holds true for most of the people in most of Russia's neighboring countries. However, making allowances for that perspective, I think Orlov's main point--that what we are doing in Russia will backfire--is valid, and I think he's probably right. However, I always treat my opinions and conclusions as subject to future revision, especially in foreign affairs and intelligence matters, where the ultimate "truth" is usually difficult or impossible to ascertain. So I'll keep my eyes and mind open to a variety of foreign sources and views, especially with the dominance of the mainstream US media's "story lines" with what I regard as essentially government propaganda. Thanks for checking out the link.
I too appreciate the insight offered regarding the Russian psyche. If one is to deal/negotiate effectively, it is wise to consider their perspective.
I think the oil and natural gas dependency of Europe will be the undoing of NATO.