anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So how much do you think Putin is worth? 100bn, 50bn, 25bn, 10bn, 5bn, 1bn, 0,5bn, 0,1bn? Nothing can be explained for the salary of a civil servant, which Putin has been all his "official" life.

Why don't you focus on counting your own money? What's your business how much is Putin worth? Given his approval ratings in Russia, his Russian voters are happy with him regardless how much he is worth. The rest is none of your business (assuming you aren't a Russian citizen of course). And yes - he is entitled to a lot, as any President - use state-owned residences (Kremlin, Moscow, Sochi) for living and work, assistants, etc. Salary of course - but given all entitlements he hardly gets to use any.

Dutchy wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So how much do you think Putin is worth? 100bn, 50bn, 25bn, 10bn, 5bn, 1bn, 0,5bn, 0,1bn? Nothing can be explained for the salary of a civil servant, which Putin has been all his "official" life.

Why don't you focus on counting your own money? What's your business how much is Putin worth? Given his approval ratings in Russia, his Russian voters are happy with him regardless how much he is worth. The rest is none of your business (assuming you aren't a Russian citizen of course). And yes - he is entitled to a lot, as any President - use state-owned residences (Kremlin, Moscow, Sochi) for living and work, assistants, etc. Salary of course - but given all entitlements he hardly gets to use any.

Because it shows he is the Oligarch in chief stealing money from Russians and using the Russian state to consolidate his own wealth. Why don't Russians care more about it? How come you react like you were stung by a bee? Is he entitled to bn's of Dollars, just because he is President?

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

March 1, 2014: President Putin got the green light (by Russian Federation council), to deploy Russian troops in Ukraine (an act of war!).
March 6, 2014: Crimean Parliament decided by decree that the Crimea will be part of Russia
March 11, 2014: Independence is declared
March 16, 2014: Referendum is held
March 18, 2914: Crimea is annexed by Russie

And - let's review the timeline.
March 1, 2014: Yes, he got the green light - so what? Inside the country they can talk anything they want. Obama in Libya, Syria didn't bother with any green lights from Congress at all.
March 6, 2014: Crimean Parliament voted - as legitimate representative of Crimean people, they could have done that. There was no Lenin of some sort to "issue a decree".
March 11, 2014: Independence is declared
March 16, 2014: Referendum is held
March 18, 2914: Crimea is not annexed - Russia recognized independence of Crimea, based on referendum results and decision of legitimately and democratically elected regional parliament, and signed union treaty.

Dutchy wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So how much do you think Putin is worth? 100bn, 50bn, 25bn, 10bn, 5bn, 1bn, 0,5bn, 0,1bn? Nothing can be explained for the salary of a civil servant, which Putin has been all his "official" life.

Why don't you focus on counting your own money? What's your business how much is Putin worth? Given his approval ratings in Russia, his Russian voters are happy with him regardless how much he is worth. The rest is none of your business (assuming you aren't a Russian citizen of course). And yes - he is entitled to a lot, as any President - use state-owned residences (Kremlin, Moscow, Sochi) for living and work, assistants, etc. Salary of course - but given all entitlements he hardly gets to use any.

Because it shows he is the Oligarch in chief stealing money from Russians and using the Russian state to consolidate his own wealth. Why don't Russians care more about it? How come you react like you were stung by a bee? Is he entitled to bn's of Dollars, just because he is President?

Whataboutism.....

to the illegal annexation of the Crimea

and the destabilization of eastern Ukraine

and a direct result of the killing of 298 people, including 198 of my fellow countrymen

we need to get rid of fossil fuels asap

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

The flaw in that argumentation is the following: neither does Russia. It is not up to Putin's Russia to decide what the Crimeans want. What a free and legitimate referendum is, is well established by now. And what "Crimean parliament" did, wasn't it. You only have to look at the timeline:

March 1, 2014: President Putin got the green light (by Russian Federation council), to deploy Russian troops in Ukraine (an act of war!).
March 6, 2014: Crimean Parliament decided by decree that the Crimea will be part of Russia
March 11, 2014: Independence is declared
March 16, 2014: Referendum is held
March 18, 2914: Crimea is annexed by Russie

OSCE isn't western, there are 57 member states, including Russia.
Council of Europe isn't western, there are 47 member states, including Russia.

So with this timeline and with all the turmoil, illegal Russian troops, a declared independence (no referendum about that), how can anyone feel that this Pinocchio referendum was legit? What were the OSCE and Council of Europe supposed to do? You cannot have a free debate when the territory is invaded by Russia and the timeline is 10(!) days. So the OSCE and Council of Europe did the only sensible thing, keep away otherwise, like you claim here, they are implicit in the outcome. Perhaps most people would have voted for annexation, but what is the point if the run-up to this Pinocchio referendum wasn't fair and thus from the outset wasn't democratic.

So the grounds to call it a Pinocchio referendum, and thus question its legitimacy, lies within the timeline and the occupational forces. May I ask why you - and other Putin defenders - consistently call it legit?

First flaw with your argument is using the sentence "Crimean parliament" in quotes. Crimea since Soviet times had its own regional parliament. The Parliament that made the decision about the referendum was legitimately and democratically elected according to Ukrainian legislature; there were international monitors during its election, the results were internationally recognized. That Parliament does have all the mandate to represent the will of Crimean people, including that decision of that referendum for cessation from Ukraine.

OSCE and Council of Europe's mandates, as they themselves put it, "monitor the respect for human rights". OSCE - even sillier. It stands for "Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe". And you are saying that the decision to stay away in a situation with "troops and turmoil" is sensible? By their mandate and very reasons of existence, they should have been the first ones to seek entry there, not even waiting to be invited. They didn't have to express any opinion as to legitimacy of the territory changing hands, or recommendations for recognition of such decision even.

Based on your own words, most people voted to enter Russia. Any discussions regarding being in Ukraine had been held for the preceding 2 decades. Given turnout on the vote and its results, nearly all Crimeans see it as perfectly legitimate, and important to them. If people somewhere deem an election or a poll illegitimate - they simply won't go there. Example - Ukrainian elections slightly later that year; turnout in Southern and Eastern regions was very low. And what was the "free discussion" there like - with roaming Nazi gangs, mass killings a-la Odessa and trowing people into garbage tanks?

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

.
Yeah, but nobody found any trace of these 200bn. But whether they exist at all?

Such a shame you don't understand English, you are missing out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0utzB6oDan0

So how much do you think Putin is worth? 100bn, 50bn, 25bn, 10bn, 5bn, 1bn, 0,5bn, 0,1bn? Nothing can be explained for the salary of a civil servant, which Putin has been all his "official" life.

Nothing can be explained for the salary of a civil servant, which Putin has been all his "official" life

LOL, you don't even know that in Russia the content of the President or the Prime Minister entirely by the state. None of the residences of Putin does not belong to him - they all state, intended for the President of the Russian Federation.

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Such a shame you don't understand English, you are missing out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0utzB6oDan0

So how much do you think Putin is worth? 100bn, 50bn, 25bn, 10bn, 5bn, 1bn, 0,5bn, 0,1bn? Nothing can be explained for the salary of a civil servant, which Putin has been all his "official" life.

Nothing can be explained for the salary of a civil servant, which Putin has been all his "official" life

LOL, you don't even know that in Russia the content of the President or the Prime Minister entirely by the state. None of the residences of Putin does not belong to him - they all state, intended for the President of the Russian Federation.

Point being, Putin = Russian state. And besides that the estimates of his personal wealth, that is beside the state own properties is somewhere between 40bn - 200bn.

Scorpius wrote:

And yet, Putin has no billion dollars. It is an outright lie of Western media.

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

And yet, Putin has no billion dollars. It is an outright lie of Western media.

Perhaps, but how do you know? You acknowledge that the oligarchs have stolen billions from the Russian people, why would Putin be exempt?

It seems to me much more reasonable to assume that Putin also took his share of the billions, then to assume that everyone around him took billions and he didn't get anything. Ah well, we have indirect evidence because people around him have millions and millions, like a cello player, just look at the paradise papers etc. And I know you have read them, since you know Queen Elisabeth was named in those papers as well.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

And yet, Putin has no billion dollars. It is an outright lie of Western media.

Perhaps, but how do you know? You acknowledge that the oligarchs have stolen billions from the Russian people, why would Putin be exempt?

It seems to me much more reasonable to assume that Putin also took his share of the billions, then to assume that everyone around him took billions and he didn't get anything. Ah well, we have indirect evidence because people around him have millions and millions, like a cello player, just look at the paradise papers etc. And I know you have read them, since you know Queen Elisabeth was named in those papers as well.

As long as there is no specific data on the specific accounts of Putin elsewhere, the assertion that he is the owner of any billion is nothing more than speculation.
As far as I know - nobody still has not provided any evidence of the existence of Putin such accounts. Here, even the Queen of Britain found - and Putin has no accounts found.

Scorpius wrote:

LOL, you don't even know that in Russia the content of the President or the Prime Minister entirely by the state. None of the residences of Putin does not belong to him - they all state, intended for the President of the Russian Federation.

Russia banned from 2018 Winter Olympics over systematic doping after historic decision by IOC

The IOC also handed a lifetime ban to the country's deputy prime minister, Vitaly Mutko, preventing him from having any involvement in the Olympics.

WIederling wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

LOL, you don't even know that in Russia the content of the President or the Prime Minister entirely by the state. None of the residences of Putin does not belong to him - they all state, intended for the President of the Russian Federation.

Actually an old trick. ( declare as $badguy's private property what in reality is public property and will stay that way. )

In Iraq any official building was a "Saddam's Palaces" thingy.
( these pervasive intentional misrepresentations for partisan purposes really get my goat )

Dutchy wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

LOL, you don't even know that in Russia the content of the President or the Prime Minister entirely by the state. None of the residences of Putin does not belong to him - they all state, intended for the President of the Russian Federation.

Actually an old trick. ( declare as $badguy's private property what in reality is public property and will stay that way. )

In Iraq any official building was a "Saddam's Palaces" thingy.
( these pervasive intentional misrepresentations for partisan purposes really get my goat )

Are you one of the people whom actually believe that Putin is clean but only his entourage is durty as hell?

Dutchy wrote:

Are you one of the people whom actually believe that Putin is clean but only his entourage is durty as hell?

Dutchy wrote:

Lol. The independence was never on the baled, hence even in the Pinocchio referendum, it was never decided as such on independence. And you are perfectly fine with this timeline? And you are perfectly fine that Putin's Russia got the ok to invade another country and to annex part of it.

That tells me you aren't a democrat and despite what you claim here, you don't care about Crimeans at all.

WIederling wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Actually an old trick. ( declare as $badguy's private property what in reality is public property and will stay that way. )

In Iraq any official building was a "Saddam's Palaces" thingy.
( these pervasive intentional misrepresentations for partisan purposes really get my goat )

Are you one of the people whom actually believe that Putin is clean but only his entourage is durty as hell?

As Mr. former Chancellor Schroeder put it: "ein echter Demokrat" -> he is about as clean as the rest of the bunch. But not distinctly dirtier )
Most GOP US politician I'd put well below Putin. real varmin.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Lol. The independence was never on the baled, hence even in the Pinocchio referendum, it was never decided as such on independence. And you are perfectly fine with this timeline? And you are perfectly fine that Putin's Russia got the ok to invade another country and to annex part of it.

That tells me you aren't a democrat and despite what you claim here, you don't care about Crimeans at all.

Timelines are up to Crimeans, not up to anyone else. They are the ones who set them. And - nobody "annexed" any part of any country - the part in question seceded from one country based on its own free and democratically expressed will, and joined Russia.

Kiwirob wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Why don't you focus on counting your own money? What's your business how much is Putin worth? Given his approval ratings in Russia, his Russian voters are happy with him regardless how much he is worth. The rest is none of your business (assuming you aren't a Russian citizen of course). And yes - he is entitled to a lot, as any President - use state-owned residences (Kremlin, Moscow, Sochi) for living and work, assistants, etc. Salary of course - but given all entitlements he hardly gets to use any.

Because it shows he is the Oligarch in chief stealing money from Russians and using the Russian state to consolidate his own wealth. Why don't Russians care more about it? How come you react like you were stung by a bee? Is he entitled to bn's of Dollars, just because he is President?

I don't believe Putin is worth anything close to what people think he's worth, besides what use is there for amassing this wealth, he's never going to be able to spend it, I doubt it would be inherited by his children so what's the point in it?

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Are you one of the people whom actually believe that Putin is clean but only his entourage is durty as hell?

We believe that there is nothing wrong neither with Putin nor with "entourage". His "entourage" is at least not worse than that in some other countries calling themselves "democratic".

Dutchy wrote:

Because it shows he is the Oligarch in chief stealing money from Russians and using the Russian state to consolidate his own wealth. Why don't Russians care more about it? How come you react like you were stung by a bee? Is he entitled to bn's of Dollars, just because he is President?

Dutchy wrote:

You claim the referendum was fair and free and is a good basis for what has happened and there Russia didn't annex another country. You claim that there can be a free and fair referendum in an area which was in turmoil, Russian troops present and all within two weeks. It is a ridiculous assessment.

Fine your assessment is that nobody annexed anything, the rest of the world disagrees with you. I will leave it with that because you are clearly too stubborn to do a real and clear assessment of these events, your assessment is cloudy by your desire to defend Russia.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Because it shows he is the Oligarch in chief stealing money from Russians and using the Russian state to consolidate his own wealth. Why don't Russians care more about it? How come you react like you were stung by a bee? Is he entitled to bn's of Dollars, just because he is President?

Well, if Russians don't seem to care - what's your business?

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

You claim the referendum was fair and free and is a good basis for what has happened and there Russia didn't annex another country. You claim that there can be a free and fair referendum in an area which was in turmoil, Russian troops present and all within two weeks. It is a ridiculous assessment.

Fine your assessment is that nobody annexed anything, the rest of the world disagrees with you. I will leave it with that because you are clearly too stubborn to do a real and clear assessment of these events, your assessment is cloudy by your desire to defend Russia.

Yes this is exactly what I am claiming. And so do Western journalists who were in Crimea at the time. Was there a turmoil really? Just a reminder - there is not a single shot fired during this whole thing.

Dutchy wrote:

So you put Putin as dirty as the rest of the Russian oligarchs? Or am I misinterpreting your statement?

WIederling wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So you put Putin as dirty as the rest of the Russian oligarchs? Or am I misinterpreting your statement?

you are going into broken record mode

Dutchy wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Lol. The independence was never on the baled, hence even in the Pinocchio referendum, it was never decided as such on independence. And you are perfectly fine with this timeline? And you are perfectly fine that Putin's Russia got the ok to invade another country and to annex part of it.

That tells me you aren't a democrat and despite what you claim here, you don't care about Crimeans at all.

Timelines are up to Crimeans, not up to anyone else. They are the ones who set them. And - nobody "annexed" any part of any country - the part in question seceded from one country based on its own free and democratically expressed will, and joined Russia.

You claim the referendum was fair and free and is a good basis for what has happened and there Russia didn't annex another country. You claim that there can be a free and fair referendum in an area which was in turmoil, Russian troops present and all within two weeks. It is a ridiculous assessment.

Fine your assessment is that nobody annexed anything, the rest of the world disagrees with you. I will leave it with that because you are clearly too stubborn to do a real and clear assessment of these events, your assessment is cloudy by your desire to defend Russia.

Dutchy wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Are you one of the people whom actually believe that Putin is clean but only his entourage is durty as hell?

As Mr. former Chancellor Schroeder put it: "ein echter Demokrat" -> he is about as clean as the rest of the bunch. But not distinctly dirtier )
Most GOP US politician I'd put well below Putin. real varmin.

So you put Putin as dirty as the rest of the Russian oligarchs? Or am I misinterpreting your statement?

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Timelines are up to Crimeans, not up to anyone else. They are the ones who set them. And - nobody "annexed" any part of any country - the part in question seceded from one country based on its own free and democratically expressed will, and joined Russia.

You claim the referendum was fair and free and is a good basis for what has happened and there Russia didn't annex another country. You claim that there can be a free and fair referendum in an area which was in turmoil, Russian troops present and all within two weeks. It is a ridiculous assessment.

Fine your assessment is that nobody annexed anything, the rest of the world disagrees with you. I will leave it with that because you are clearly too stubborn to do a real and clear assessment of these events, your assessment is cloudy by your desire to defend Russia.

Saying "the rest of the world" - are you talking only about 34% of the population. 66% of the remaining do not support you.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

WIederling wrote:

As Mr. former Chancellor Schroeder put it: "ein echter Demokrat" -> he is about as clean as the rest of the bunch. But not distinctly dirtier )
Most GOP US politician I'd put well below Putin. real varmin.

So you put Putin as dirty as the rest of the Russian oligarchs? Or am I misinterpreting your statement?

You're misreading. Putin is not corrupt. At least not more than any other politician from the US or the EU. And key members of Putin - not the oligarchs, but the power structure, such as the FSB or army.
Those oligarchs who are close with Putin, agree to abide by the rules set by Putin not to support the West to invest in infrastructure in Russia and to pay taxes. I'm still unhappy with the fact of their existence, but it is a lesser evil compared to the Pro-Western oligarchs. Those are no rules - they are subject only to the amount of money in the accounts of his Western patrons.

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

You claim the referendum was fair and free and is a good basis for what has happened and there Russia didn't annex another country. You claim that there can be a free and fair referendum in an area which was in turmoil, Russian troops present and all within two weeks. It is a ridiculous assessment.

Fine your assessment is that nobody annexed anything, the rest of the world disagrees with you. I will leave it with that because you are clearly too stubborn to do a real and clear assessment of these events, your assessment is cloudy by your desire to defend Russia.

Saying "the rest of the world" - are you talking only about 34% of the population. 66% of the remaining do not support you.

Please explain your numbers.

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So you put Putin as dirty as the rest of the Russian oligarchs? Or am I misinterpreting your statement?

You're misreading. Putin is not corrupt. At least not more than any other politician from the US or the EU. And key members of Putin - not the oligarchs, but the power structure, such as the FSB or army.
Those oligarchs who are close with Putin, agree to abide by the rules set by Putin not to support the West to invest in infrastructure in Russia and to pay taxes. I'm still unhappy with the fact of their existence, but it is a lesser evil compared to the Pro-Western oligarchs. Those are no rules - they are subject only to the amount of money in the accounts of his Western patrons.

Please come with concrete numbers which show that Putin is not corrupt.

How come Russia is at number 131 of the corruption index, if Putin is not corrupt: https://www.transparency.org/news/featu ... 2016#table

If you are not able to provide objective numbers, it is a key example of whataboutism.....

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So you put Putin as dirty as the rest of the Russian oligarchs? Or am I misinterpreting your statement?

You're misreading. Putin is not corrupt. At least not more than any other politician from the US or the EU. And key members of Putin - not the oligarchs, but the power structure, such as the FSB or army.
Those oligarchs who are close with Putin, agree to abide by the rules set by Putin not to support the West to invest in infrastructure in Russia and to pay taxes. I'm still unhappy with the fact of their existence, but it is a lesser evil compared to the Pro-Western oligarchs. Those are no rules - they are subject only to the amount of money in the accounts of his Western patrons.

Please come with concrete numbers which show that Putin is not corrupt.

How come Russia is at number 131 of the corruption index, if Putin is not corrupt: https://www.transparency.org/news/featu ... 2016#table

WIederling wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

You're misreading. Putin is not corrupt. At least not more than any other politician from the US or the EU. And key members of Putin - not the oligarchs, but the power structure, such as the FSB or army.
Those oligarchs who are close with Putin, agree to abide by the rules set by Putin not to support the West to invest in infrastructure in Russia and to pay taxes. I'm still unhappy with the fact of their existence, but it is a lesser evil compared to the Pro-Western oligarchs. Those are no rules - they are subject only to the amount of money in the accounts of his Western patrons.

Please come with concrete numbers which show that Putin is not corrupt.

How come Russia is at number 131 of the corruption index, if Putin is not corrupt: https://www.transparency.org/news/featu ... 2016#table

you conclusion is a logical fallacy.

Note "Corruption Perceptions Index"

Then: who's perceptions
Ever looked who bankrolls TI in "strategically interesting" nations?

Dutchy wrote:

If you really wanted an answer to these questions you could just go to the site which describes their methods. Asking this reveals you have a hidden agenda, could you reveal it please? Thanks

Scorpius wrote:

Please give specific evidence that you are not an agent of the Kremlin.

anrec80 wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Please give specific evidence that you are not an agent of the Kremlin.

Haha. Now we know what’s going on in Ukraine. There - everyone is an agent of Kremlin, until proven otherwise. And criteria for “proof” always change of course.

WIederling wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

If you really wanted an answer to these questions you could just go to the site which describes their methods. Asking this reveals you have a hidden agenda, could you reveal it please? Thanks

I went to the site.
What should I tell you that you could not find out on your own?

Note the "preceived" tag. gefühlte Temperatur. Mumpitz

Dutchy wrote:

If not, this is the best guess we have.

WIederling wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

If not, this is the best guess we have.

Said the inquisitor and lit the fire ,...

A known to be tainted carefully inserted false information cannot be accepted as "best guess". never.

Dutchy wrote:

Please show us how it is tainted with false information.

If not, you cannot back up your statements.

WIederling wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Please show us how it is tainted with false information.

you introduced this. IMU the onus is thus on you to show the validity.

WIederling wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

If not, you cannot back up your statements.

Yes. obivously. Now please bring up some reasonably objective assessment please.

and how do you judge "formalised corruption" that is deemed legal there but nowhere else like we see in the US

Scorpius wrote:

MH17 was shot down by Ukrainian air defense systems.
In fact, NO evidence of Russian guilt in the Downing of MH17 is not represented so far, despite the fact that the investigation has been going for two years.

anrec80 wrote:

Why don't you focus on counting your own money? What's your business how much is Putin worth? Given his approval ratings in Russia, his Russian voters are happy with him regardless how much he is worth. The rest is none of your business (assuming you aren't a Russian citizen of course). And yes - he is entitled to a lot, as any President - use state-owned residences (Kremlin, Moscow, Sochi) for living and work, assistants, etc. Salary of course - but given all entitlements he hardly gets to use any.

Dutchy wrote:

Perhaps, but how do you know? You acknowledge that the oligarchs have stolen billions from the Russian people, why would Putin be exempt?

It seems to me much more reasonable to assume that Putin also took his share of the billions.

Dutchy wrote:

Lol. The independence was never on the baled, hence even in the Pinocchio referendum, it was never decided as such on independence. And you are perfectly fine with this timeline? And you are perfectly fine that Putin's Russia got the ok to invade another country and to annex part of it.

Bostrom wrote:

The west doesn't hate Russia, even though that sometimes is the image that russian media tries to portray. But, we are not so fond of the current russian leaders, Putin is generally seen as an authoritarian leader doing his best to dismantle the last remains of democracy and turn himself into a dictator. But that doesn't mean I hate Russia and russians. Just as I don't hate the US just because I think Trump is not fit to be president.

Scorpius wrote:

One of my friends about it, even joke came up: "All the world’s a Kremlin,
And all the men and women merely agents"

Dutchy wrote:

Fine if all the facts are known and Russians don't care, but if people are naive and don't care, why shouldn't I speak out? You see the title of this thread right there.........

Dutchy wrote:

So if with a bank robbery no shots are fired, everything is fine?

So you are claiming you can have a free and fair life altering referendum organized in 10 days? That is just stupid. The UK needs 6 weeks to have a snap election and that is within a democratic framework where everything is well established in a save stable democracy. This is just the timeline, nothing else, just by the timeline it fails to meet any democratic standard of a free and fair election/referendum.

anrec80 wrote:

What's your business - is Putin "authoritarian" of some sort or not? And what does he do with Russian democracy? These questions are up to Russians to answer. Given their unconditional support of President Putin, they are OK with it. Please leave it up to them.

BawliBooch wrote:

Support to leaders should never be unconditional - that is inherently undemocratic. Our support for political leaders should be based on their pledged manifesto and their ability/desire to see that through. THAT is the democratic way.

We cannot tell you to stop "loving" Putin. We can however advise you that this love affair is going to leave you worse off!