55 years ago, on June 16, 1963, the first female cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova flew into space on the Vostok-6 spacecraft. She became the tenth person in the world to make a space flight. Until now, she remains the only woman who made a single space flight.

The U.S. Definitely launched a woman into space... she just didn't make it in one piece.

Jouhou wrote:

The U.S. Definitely launched a woman into space... she just didn't make it in one piece.

Sally Ride flew into space 20 years after Tereshkova, in 1983. But she was only the third woman to take a space flight.
A year earlier, in 1982, as part of the crew of the Soyuz T-7 Svetlana Savitskaya flew to the orbital station Salyut-7. In the same flight, she made a spacewalk, where she conducted welding work as part of the experiment. She was the first woman to make a spacewalk.

There has been plenty of women in space since then. I think Scorpius meant Valentina Tereshkova went only once. And the reason is that she was a propaganda tool and the USSR couldn't risk it (on top of preferring men do the job).

Aesma wrote:

There has been plenty of women in space since then. I think Scorpius meant Valentina Tereshkova went only once. And the reason is that she was a propaganda tool and the USSR couldn't risk it (on top of preferring men do the job).

"Russia" and "true" just don't belong in the same sentence; it is an oxymoron.

"Russia" and "propaganda"... now that is a fit!

What is the current Russian government altitude on climate change? I briefly recall the Soviet regime investigated defrozing Siberia via the use of climate change. Is this kind of concepts still of interest to the current Russian government?

Aesma wrote:

There has been plenty of women in space since then. I think Scorpius meant Valentina Tereshkova went only once. And the reason is that she was a propaganda tool and the USSR couldn't risk it (on top of preferring men do the job).

Tereshkova was not an instrument of propaganda. Yesterday was a significant date-55 years from the date of her flight-a worthy occasion to mention her feat.

Scorpius wrote:

c933103 wrote:

What is the current Russian government altitude on climate change? I briefly recall the Soviet regime investigated defrozing Siberia via the use of climate change. Is this kind of concepts still of interest to the current Russian government?

Oh, the concept of climate change in Siberia during the Soviet era was quite risky. It included, among other things, changing the course of the Siberian rivers through a chain of nuclear explosions. At the moment, this idea was abandoned, because they considered it too risky. Now they prefer to pay attention to minimizing human impact on nature, carrying out reclamation activities, restoration of forests, animal populations, fish resources. They are also trying to reduce the discharge of polluted waters into rivers and seas.

Except when it comes to oil exploration. Doing that in the north pole region is no problem.

c933103 wrote:

What is the current Russian government altitude on climate change? I briefly recall the Soviet regime investigated defrozing Siberia via the use of climate change. Is this kind of concepts still of interest to the current Russian government?

Oh, the concept of climate change in Siberia during the Soviet era was quite risky. It included, among other things, changing the course of the Siberian rivers through a chain of nuclear explosions. At the moment, this idea was abandoned, because they considered it too risky. Now they prefer to pay attention to minimizing human impact on nature, carrying out reclamation activities, restoration of forests, animal populations, fish resources. They are also trying to reduce the discharge of polluted waters into rivers and seas.

Scorpius wrote:

c933103 wrote:

What is the current Russian government altitude on climate change? I briefly recall the Soviet regime investigated defrozing Siberia via the use of climate change. Is this kind of concepts still of interest to the current Russian government?

Oh, the concept of climate change in Siberia during the Soviet era was quite risky. It included, among other things, changing the course of the Siberian rivers through a chain of nuclear explosions. At the moment, this idea was abandoned, because they considered it too risky. Now they prefer to pay attention to minimizing human impact on nature, carrying out reclamation activities, restoration of forests, animal populations, fish resources. They are also trying to reduce the discharge of polluted waters into rivers and seas.

Oh, how about the view of doing so via the climate change caused by global industrial activities?

Aesma wrote:

There has been plenty of women in space since then. I think Scorpius meant Valentina Tereshkova went only once. And the reason is that she was a propaganda tool and the USSR couldn't risk it (on top of preferring men do the job).

Nope. He meant that she was the only woman to fly solo.

EU extends Crimea sanctions for another year

The European Union today rolled over for another year tough sanctions imposed over Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea from Ukraine.

The measures prohibit certain exports and imports, and ban investment and tourism services by EU-based companies in Crimea.

"The Council (of EU member states) extended the restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by Russia until June 23, 2019," the bloc said in a statement.

Source: https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 469_1.html

This is also part of Russian news. Current news.

Dutchy wrote:

EU extends Crimea sanctions for another year

The European Union today rolled over for another year tough sanctions imposed over Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea from Ukraine.

The measures prohibit certain exports and imports, and ban investment and tourism services by EU-based companies in Crimea.

"The Council (of EU member states) extended the restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by Russia until June 23, 2019," the bloc said in a statement.

Source: https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 469_1.html

This is also part of Russian news. Current news.

This is only an indicator of the duplicity of the Western countries Dutchy. Because no one takes sanctions against Kosovo, against Turkey for Northern Cyprus, against Israel for the Golan heights and Palestine. No one has taken sanctions against the US for the invasion of Panama, Syria, Iraq. No one took sanctions against the US when they shot down Iran's passenger plane.
In fact, we now see that the Warsaw Pact Organization should not have been dissolved, and Germany and the GDR could not be allowed to unite. Russia at one time went to these unfavorable steps for her - and that's what "gratitude" we are now seeing. Well, we'll take that into account in the future, no doubt, Dutchy. As we recall, the Netherlands actively cooperated with the Nazis during the Second world war, and now again take the side of our enemies.
Nothing personal, just rational.

Jouhou wrote:

The U.S. Definitely launched a woman into space... she just didn't make it in one piece.

I don't understand. To which woman/which flight do you refer to?

Scorpius wrote:

In fact, we now see that the Warsaw Pact Organization should not have been dissolved, and Germany and the GDR could not be allowed to unite.

What?

Yeah, sure. Ask the old East Germans, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians, etc, etc if they'd rather they were still under the boot of Russia.

You'd have been right at home in Stalin's Russia. What's up, are you missing the "good old days" of Russian hegemony?

You should try to move on and accept what you can't change.

N14AZ wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

The U.S. Definitely launched a woman into space... she just didn't make it in one piece.

I don't understand. To which woman/which flight do you refer to?

Hmm:
Judith Resnik and Christa McAuliffe died in the Challenger disaster ( STS-51-L, they never reached space )
but:
first US woman in space was Sally Ride ( 3rd overall ). returned alive from STS-7.

N14AZ wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

The U.S. Definitely launched a woman into space... she just didn't make it in one piece.

I don't understand. To which woman/which flight do you refer to?

Probably referring to Christa McAuliffe, would have been the first "ordinary civilian" in space. A school teacher whom got killed in the Challenger disaster.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shu ... r_disaster

I actively remember that one. It was a shock, I was in primary school at the time.

Dutchy wrote:

N14AZ wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

The U.S. Definitely launched a woman into space... she just didn't make it in one piece.

I don't understand. To which woman/which flight do you refer to?

Probably referring to Christa McAuliffe, would have been the first "ordinary civilian" in space. A school teacher whom got killed in the Challenger disaster.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shu ... r_disaster

I actively remember that one. It was a shock, I was in primary school at the time.

Yes. From my state.

scbriml wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

In fact, we now see that the Warsaw Pact Organization should not have been dissolved, and Germany and the GDR could not be allowed to unite.

What?

Yeah, sure. Ask the old East Germans, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians, etc, etc if they'd rather they were still under the boot of Russia.

You'd have been right at home in Stalin's Russia. What's up, are you missing the "good old days" of Russian hegemony?

You should try to move on and accept what you can't change.

If OVD continued to exist, the opinion of all these people would be different. All this talk about Russia is the result of Western propaganda. The actual material you do not own. Eastern Europe did not live as bad as you are now told.

To be fair to Scorpius.

I think he/she meant to say 'Solo female spaceflight' rather than 'single', in which case he/she is perfectly correct.
Valentina Tereshkova, was the first woman in space, is still youngest woman to have flown in space and the only woman to have flown solo into space.

Scorpius wrote:

In fact, we now see that the Warsaw Pact Organization should not have been dissolved,

How do you keep an alliance together when its members do not want to be its members and the only military action WarPac ever materialized in was an invasion of one of its members?

Scorpius wrote:

and Germany and the GDR could not be allowed to unite.

You are being ungrateful... Germany is trying sooo hard to sideline NATO, even provides you with means and cash to carry out your "pipeline diplomacy" in Central and Eastern Europe. It seems thier sympathies are just a one-way street... is anyone in Germany paying attention to that (paging Putinversteher Wiederling)?

Scorpius wrote:

If OVD continued to exist, the opinion of all these people would be different.

What's OVD? Why do you think direct historical experience is not enough to form people's opinion?

Scorpius wrote:

Eastern Europe did not live as bad as you are now told.

You are funny. How do you know? From the whitewashed history of the "glorious" USSR you are being shown in state controlled media and schools? You were born just before the Soviet Evil Empire and its foothold in Central& Eastern Europe just collapsed, I lived back then.

Scorpius wrote:

As we recall, the Netherlands actively cooperated with the Nazis during the Second world war,

Netherlands was occupied by Germany. Russia cooperated with the nazis and started the WW2 togerter out of its free will.

salttee wrote:

What you call the "Munich Pact" was Chamberlain's final concession to the Nazi's. He made that concession because he had no other choice. Britain had no military means of resisting the German occupation of Czechoslovakia, to resist would have been futile

You got it all wrong. There was no demand for deployment of British forces to Czechoslovakia. Czechoslovakia had a bilateral alliance treaty with France which I believe had an accessory traty in the UK. Had they honored these treaties, Hitler would wage war on two fronts from Day 1.
It is also worth noting that the Munich Treaty was effective until 1942 and was declared void only after Heydrich's liquidation.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

EU extends Crimea sanctions for another year

The European Union today rolled over for another year tough sanctions imposed over Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea from Ukraine.

The measures prohibit certain exports and imports, and ban investment and tourism services by EU-based companies in Crimea.

"The Council (of EU member states) extended the restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by Russia until June 23, 2019," the bloc said in a statement.

Source: https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 469_1.html

This is also part of Russian news. Current news.

This is only an indicator of the duplicity of the Western countries Dutchy. Because no one takes sanctions against Kosovo, against Turkey for Northern Cyprus, against Israel for the Golan heights and Palestine. No one has taken sanctions against the US for the invasion of Panama, Syria, Iraq. No one took sanctions against the US when they shot down Iran's passenger plane.
In fact, we now see that the Warsaw Pact Organization should not have been dissolved, and Germany and the GDR could not be allowed to unite. Russia at one time went to these unfavorable steps for her - and that's what "gratitude" we are now seeing. Well, we'll take that into account in the future, no doubt, Dutchy. As we recall, the Netherlands actively cooperated with the Nazis during the Second world war, and now again take the side of our enemies.
Nothing personal, just rational.

Oh how I love your twisted mind full of whataboutisms. For example, America took responsibility for the Iran Air shot down, there was never any doubt that the Navy shot it down. But indeed no sanctions. There are no sanctions against Russia because of the shooting down of MH17. Perhaps there will in the future if Russia continues to deny it, but not now. And indeed all those annexations are without sanctions. As there were no sanctions against Russia for the two times semi-annexation of Georgia. Now the EU and America drew the line with Crimea. Simple as that, the world aint perfect, but that doesn't legitimize annexation. But on the other hand it is a clear indication that Russia is a regional power and not a world power.

The Warsaw Pact was dissolved because the people wanted something different than the repressive autocratic communistic regime backed by the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union broke up, so it had no future. It isn't what Russia does allow or doesn't allow, Russia doesn't have that kind of power anymore, simple as that.

And don't know what you mean with "the Netherlands actively cooperated with the Nazi's", the Dutch were occupied, in part thanks to the USSR not attacking the Nazi's and taking part of Poland.

Scorpius, all this enemy thinking I just don't subscribe to that. It is so 1950-'80ish thinking. I understand that the Putin regime needs it to legitemize itself, but com'on you kind of sound like an at least partly educated guy, so you can think for yourself and don't need to continue barking the party line.

L410Turbolet wrote:

salttee wrote:

What you call the "Munich Pact" was Chamberlain's final concession to the Nazi's. He made that concession because he had no other choice. Britain had no military means of resisting the German occupation of Czechoslovakia, to resist would have been futile

You got it all wrong. There was no demand for deployment of British forces to Czechoslovakia. Czechoslovakia had a bilateral alliance treaty with France which I believe had an accessory traty in the UK. Had they honored these treaties, Hitler would wage war on two fronts from Day 1.
It is also worth noting that the Munich Treaty was effective until 1942 and was declared void only after Heydrich's liquidation.

It took Hitler about two weeks to secure "the Sudetenland" and in the fall of 1938 it wouldn't have taken much longer to secure France even with Britain's help. Chamberlain's army at the time consisted of about one and a half divisions total and the Air arm had no Spitfires. The navy was in equally bad shape, lend lease hadn't happened yet, so Britain was even short on destroyers. The end result would have been for Britain to have lost what little military muscle it had.

Scorpius wrote:

If OVD continued to exist, the opinion of all these people would be different. All this talk about Russia is the result of Western propaganda. The actual material you do not own. Eastern Europe did not live as bad as you are now told.

That's some amazing virtual reality you have going on there. I can't decide if it's hilarious or tragic that you believe this nonsense.

What happened when the Hungarians started rebelling against their Soviet masters? Oh yes, send in the tanks and crush them.

What happened when the Czechs started to get a taste for freedom from Soviet domination? Oh yes, send in the tanks again.

The simple reality is, as soon as the opportunity to be rid of their Soviet enslavers arose, it was grabbed with both hands. Yeah, things were so good, they couldn't wait to leave.

I asked the following in the previous thread but id love to know how it was during the Soviet Union era.

Growing up in the USSR, was it possible/easy for the people to travel, international or domestic? How much exposure did you guys have to western media/culture? How did the Soviet people perceive the USA and the NATO countries? Were the people kept up to date on relations within the Soviet Bloc/sphere of influence including USSR/North Korea relations?

I learned Russian in college and it is a fascinating language and culture! Everyone I know questioned why I did it and at the time I wanted to work for the State Department at a diplomatic mission there in addition to loving Russian (especially 20th century; mostly stemming from my dad being in the USAF at the time) history and the language.

I'd also like to know the Russians public perception of the North Korea situation today.

c933103 wrote:

What is the current Russian government altitude on climate change? I briefly recall the Soviet regime investigated defrozing Siberia via the use of climate change. Is this kind of concepts still of interest to the current Russian government?

Very much so. They're counting on it to open up northern shipping lanes.

TWA772LR wrote:

I asked the following in the previous thread but id love to know how it was during the Soviet Union era.

Growing up in the USSR, was it possible/easy for the people to travel, international or domestic? How much exposure did you guys have to western media/culture? How did the Soviet people perceive the USA and the NATO countries? Were the people kept up to date on relations within the Soviet Bloc/sphere of influence including USSR/North Korea relations?

I learned Russian in college and it is a fascinating language and culture! Everyone I know questioned why I did it and at the time I wanted to work for the State Department at a diplomatic mission there in addition to loving Russian (especially 20th century; mostly stemming from my dad being in the USAF at the time) history and the language.

I'd also like to know the Russians public perception of the North Korea situation today.

1. Domestic tourism was quite well developed, and in General the population of the USSR was more mobile than today in Russia. People could afford to constantly go somewhere on vacation, although mainly within the USSR. It was also not a big problem to go to the countries of the socialist camp. There was even a saying " Chicken is not a bird-Bulgaria is not abroad." With trips to Western countries, everything was quite difficult. It was only possible to travel to the countries of the capitalist world with the special permission of the special internal security services. This was done mainly to prevent industrial and state espionage

2. Western culture was very poorly covered in the USSR, and it was usually critically covered. In particular, it was believed that the Western mass culture promotes the degradation of social relations, debauchery, drug addiction, drunkenness, violence. There was a special censorship Committee that monitored works of art and media and decided what could be published in the USSR and what should be banned. Unlike the liberal fairy tales now prevalent in the West, censorship in the USSR was intended to protect society from the corrupting influence of Western culture. I do not think that you will argue with me that some phenomena of mass Western culture really should be banned for distribution among the population.

3. The United States and NATO were perceived among the people as an absolute evil that is directed against the peaceful existence of humanity. It should be understood that even the official channels in the USSR shared the concepts of the state and the people. That is, the us people were not considered an enemy in the USSR. The USA as the state was recognized as the embodiment of evil. Actually, nothing has changed since then. US policy is still based on aggression and totalitarian suppression of dissent. And so far, the US continues to violate international law, invading the territory of other countries.
NATO, as an organization whose official goal was to confront the Eastern bloc, continues to be considered hostile. NATO's advance to the East, to the borders of Russia, is perceived as a direct and clear threat. In this regard, by the way, Russian politicians in some way are limited in their attempts to interact with the West. For example, the provision of an airfield for the so-called "Northern transit" for the needs of NATO, has caused a very negative reaction of the local population.

4. Regarding relations within the Eastern bloc: the citizens of the USSR were aware of only the General nature of relations between the countries of the bloc. At the same time, the peoples of the Warsaw Pact countries have always been called friendly. One of the ideas of communism: there is no division into nationalities and races, all the Nations of the world are brothers. This was promoted by the official media, in schools and universities.

5. On the situation with North Korea (and China): now in Russia, few people think about it. The same people with whom I spoke believe that the DPRK and China are going on some other ways, deviating from the classical way of building a Communist society. But they have the right to do so, because it is their way. Many people regret that the USSR did not act in its time as China in Tiananmen square - dispersal of protests and tough suppression of the dissatisfied would allow to save the country and avoid many millions of victims that were received as a result of the collapse of the USSR. The position of the world community towards the DPRK is considered extremely unfair. Sanctions will never lead to anything good. They will not force the political leadership to change its course, and the ordinary people will suffer because of the sanctions.

At the same time, in Russia of course there are people who consider the West a kind of Numenor (if you read Tolkien), and representatives of the West at least light elves, if not the Mayar. Such people often call themselves Russian liberals, and in General, society's attitude towards them is negative. It was the rule of liberals in Russia that was accompanied by the greatest economic disasters (which began with the perestroika under Gorbachev, and continued until the end of Yeltsin's rule - both of these policies were great friends of the West, and it was during the reign that Russia was in the greatest decline)

I hope I could give an explanation for Your questions, and thank you.

Scorpius wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

I asked the following in the previous thread but id love to know how it was during the Soviet Union era.

Growing up in the USSR, was it possible/easy for the people to travel, international or domestic? How much exposure did you guys have to western media/culture? How did the Soviet people perceive the USA and the NATO countries? Were the people kept up to date on relations within the Soviet Bloc/sphere of influence including USSR/North Korea relations?

I learned Russian in college and it is a fascinating language and culture! Everyone I know questioned why I did it and at the time I wanted to work for the State Department at a diplomatic mission there in addition to loving Russian (especially 20th century; mostly stemming from my dad being in the USAF at the time) history and the language.

I'd also like to know the Russians public perception of the North Korea situation today.

1. Domestic tourism was quite well developed, and in General the population of the USSR was more mobile than today in Russia. People could afford to constantly go somewhere on vacation, although mainly within the USSR. It was also not a big problem to go to the countries of the socialist camp. There was even a saying " Chicken is not a bird-Bulgaria is not abroad." With trips to Western countries, everything was quite difficult. It was only possible to travel to the countries of the capitalist world with the special permission of the special internal security services. This was done mainly to prevent industrial and state espionage

2. Western culture was very poorly covered in the USSR, and it was usually critically covered. In particular, it was believed that the Western mass culture promotes the degradation of social relations, debauchery, drug addiction, drunkenness, violence. There was a special censorship Committee that monitored works of art and media and decided what could be published in the USSR and what should be banned. Unlike the liberal fairy tales now prevalent in the West, censorship in the USSR was intended to protect society from the corrupting influence of Western culture. I do not think that you will argue with me that some phenomena of mass Western culture really should be banned for distribution among the population.

3. The United States and NATO were perceived among the people as an absolute evil that is directed against the peaceful existence of humanity. It should be understood that even the official channels in the USSR shared the concepts of the state and the people. That is, the us people were not considered an enemy in the USSR. The USA as the state was recognized as the embodiment of evil. Actually, nothing has changed since then. US policy is still based on aggression and totalitarian suppression of dissent. And so far, the US continues to violate international law, invading the territory of other countries.
NATO, as an organization whose official goal was to confront the Eastern bloc, continues to be considered hostile. NATO's advance to the East, to the borders of Russia, is perceived as a direct and clear threat. In this regard, by the way, Russian politicians in some way are limited in their attempts to interact with the West. For example, the provision of an airfield for the so-called "Northern transit" for the needs of NATO, has caused a very negative reaction of the local population.

4. Regarding relations within the Eastern bloc: the citizens of the USSR were aware of only the General nature of relations between the countries of the bloc. At the same time, the peoples of the Warsaw Pact countries have always been called friendly. One of the ideas of communism: there is no division into nationalities and races, all the Nations of the world are brothers. This was promoted by the official media, in schools and universities.

5. On the situation with North Korea (and China): now in Russia, few people think about it. The same people with whom I spoke believe that the DPRK and China are going on some other ways, deviating from the classical way of building a Communist society. But they have the right to do so, because it is their way. Many people regret that the USSR did not act in its time as China in Tiananmen square - dispersal of protests and tough suppression of the dissatisfied would allow to save the country and avoid many millions of victims that were received as a result of the collapse of the USSR. The position of the world community towards the DPRK is considered extremely unfair. Sanctions will never lead to anything good. They will not force the political leadership to change its course, and the ordinary people will suffer because of the sanctions.

At the same time, in Russia of course there are people who consider the West a kind of Numenor (if you read Tolkien), and representatives of the West at least light elves, if not the Mayar. Such people often call themselves Russian liberals, and in General, society's attitude towards them is negative. It was the rule of liberals in Russia that was accompanied by the greatest economic disasters (which began with the perestroika under Gorbachev, and continued until the end of Yeltsin's rule - both of these policies were great friends of the West, and it was during the reign that Russia was in the greatest decline)

I hope I could give an explanation for Your questions, and thank you.

No thank you, it was a great laugh again. And I must say this was the highlight:

It was only possible to travel to the countries of the capitalist world with the special permission of the special internal security services. This was done mainly to prevent industrial and state espionage

Yeah, they build this to prevent industrial and state espionage

Scorpius wrote:

55 years ago, on June 16, 1963, the first female cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova flew into space on the Vostok-6 spacecraft. She became the tenth person in the world to make a space flight. Until now, she remains the only woman who made a single space flight.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the helmet she is wearing says CCCP, a country that no longer exists, not Russia. Are you going to make the argument it was all a Russian accomplishment and no one else?

LMP737 wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the helmet she is wearing says CCCP, a country that no longer exists, not Russia.

Today's Russia is repackaged USSR.

L410Turbolet wrote:

LMP737 wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the helmet she is wearing says CCCP, a country that no longer exists, not Russia.

Today's Russia is repackaged USSR.

There I have to disagree. Some characteristics are certainly the same, idolizing the autocratic regime, repressive media and repressive towards anyone whom doesn't fit the ideal. But otherwise Russia today is market capitalism on steroids, has nothing to do with communism.

LMP737 wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the helmet she is wearing says CCCP, a country that no longer exists, not Russia. Are you going to make the argument it was all a Russian accomplishment and no one else?

I believe Russia still launches most (if not all) space missions from Kazakhstan.

scbriml wrote:

LMP737 wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the helmet she is wearing says CCCP, a country that no longer exists, not Russia. Are you going to make the argument it was all a Russian accomplishment and no one else?

I believe Russia still launches most (if not all) space missions from Kazakhstan.

Correct, they are still using the Baikonur facilities form the USSR period. It is the sole launch site used for manned missions to the ISS. Russia rents the location for $ 115million a year till 2050.

LMP737 wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

55 years ago, on June 16, 1963, the first female cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova flew into space on the Vostok-6 spacecraft. She became the tenth person in the world to make a space flight. Until now, she remains the only woman who made a single space flight.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the helmet she is wearing says CCCP, a country that no longer exists, not Russia. Are you going to make the argument it was all a Russian accomplishment and no one else?

Today Russia is the only official successor of the USSR. Including after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has assumed all the obligations of the USSR, including obligations to pay foreign debt. Ethnic Russians accounted for 52-58% of the population. Two more branches, artificially separated from Russian (Belarusians and Ukrainians), made up another 21-25% of the population. In the total amount of Russians in the USSR was from 73% to 83%. Therefore, Yes - now it is Russia that has the most right to say that these were its achievements. At the same time, note that the location of the Baikonur cosmodrome in the territory of Kazakhstan was due solely to the requirements for the geographical location of the launch point of manned missiles. The same Russians built the cosmodrome.

Kazakhstan received the cosmodrome "inherited" because it was located administratively on the territory of the Kazakh SSR. At present, the Vostochny cosmodrome is being built in Russia to provide independent access to space from the territory of Russia, but until the end of its construction for about ten years. So far, there is an infrastructure for unmanned launches, a site for manned launches is planned to be built by 2022-2024, the third site will be designed for super-heavy rocket launches and is intended for launches to the moon and Mars, which Russia plans to perform after 2030.

scbriml wrote:

LMP737 wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the helmet she is wearing says CCCP, a country that no longer exists, not Russia. Are you going to make the argument it was all a Russian accomplishment and no one else?

I believe Russia still launches most (if not all) space missions from Kazakhstan.

Baikonur is not the only Russian cosmodrome. To date, the situation looks like this:
Orbital launches from Russian cosmodromes - 3225 (Baikonur - 1482, Kapustin Yar - 101, Plesetsk - 1621, Svobodny-5, rpksn*-3, Dombarovsky-10, Vostochny-3)
Launched satellites from Russian cosmodromes - 4192 (Baikonur - 1817, Kapustin Yar - 106, Plesetsk - 2137, Svobodny - 5, rpksn* - 4, Dombarovsky - 90, Vostochny-33)
However, Baikonur is now the only cosmodrome in the world from which manned launches to the ISS are carried out.

*rpksn - is a designation of space launches made from nuclear submarines of strategic purpose.

June 23 in St. Petersburg, the festival "Scarlet sails", dedicated to the graduation party in schools in Russia. The festival was held from 1968 to 1979. Subsequently, the tradition was renewed, and since 2005 every year in St. Petersburg.
Full video of the festival in 2018 is posted on YouTube:[url]https://youtu.be/Xpw2BldzfC8
[/url]

Quite a low bar to cross and apparently, Russia crossed it for Matt. Well done Russia for keeping your bloodthirsty hooligans in, your bears out of the city and not killing or poisoning Matt.

I guess every country needs to be proud of something so they can ignore the big picture

alfa164 wrote:

"Russia" and "true" just don't belong in the same sentence; it is an oxymoron.

"Russia" and "propaganda"... now that is a fit!

LOL! You know thieves broke into the Kremlin last week? They stole the results of next year's elecions . . .

New Russian helicopter VRT500 began aerodynamic testing.

The reaction of fans to the victory of the Russian team in the 2018 world Cup quarter-finals.

Chisinau, Moldova:https://youtu.be/VQl-Q2ZkzfQ
Minsk, Belarus. Citizens celebrate Russia's victory over Spain: https://youtu.be/-z_kd2o3vUc
Almaty, Kazakhstan: https://youtu.be/rf78tJaQlgE
Sevastopol, Crimea: https://youtu.be/UUvAtMpw168

Scorpius wrote:

Because no one takes sanctions against Kosovo,

Who did Kosovo invade and occupy?

against Turkey for Northern Cyprus,

That you don't know about northern Cyprus is about as surprising as it is relevant for their existence. But i assume you know there are there and just chose to lie about it.

against Israel for the Golan heights and Palestine.

That you don't know about Israel sanctions is about as surprising as it is relevant for their existence. But i assume you know there are there and just chose to lie about it.

No one has taken sanctions against the US for the invasion of Panama, Syria, Iraq.

Last time I checked they didn't keep the territory, but nice attempt to mix up invading and annexation, on purpose I guess, since without making up arguments You have none.

No one took sanctions against the US when they shot down Iran's passenger plane.

Because the US didn't blame it on Iraqi SU-25s and because they ultimately reached an agreement with Iran.

, and Germany and the GDR could not be allowed to unite.

Ah... brilliant, self determination is only for Russians, not for all those other subhumans. You just lost the crimea argument forever.

Best regards
Thomas

Scorpius wrote:

The establishment's attempt to demonize Russia has failed spectacularly. Next they'll pretend some more Russian double agents have been poisoned. Oh, hang on a minute...

CarbonFibre wrote:

The establishment's attempt to demonize Russia has failed spectacularly. Next they'll pretend some more Russian double agents have been poisoned. Oh, hang on a minute...

Not yet. This time “it’s not highly likely”. And “alternate explanation” may still exist.

Scorpius wrote:

It is truly amazing the insight you can get in two weeks of drinking and watching football . . .

tommy1808 wrote:

No one has taken sanctions against the US for the invasion of Panama, Syria, Iraq.

Last time I checked they didn't keep the territory, but nice attempt to mix up invading and annexation, on purpose I guess, since without making up arguments You have none.



Best regards
Thomas

What is the obsession with that keeping or not keeping territory?

I think the locals care more about their lives and standards of living before and after.

And here the result is obvious: The US and western regimes created a shitstorm of a mess in Iraq and Libya and Syria leaving hundreds of thousands dead and millions in misery.

Pretty sure those people if given the option of Russian or western "interference" or invasion would pick the Russian one. You know, the one where the outcome is not chaos, misery and death?

tu204 wrote:

Pretty sure those people if given the option of Russian or western "interference" or invasion would pick the Russian one. You know, the one where the outcome is not chaos, misery and death?

LOL! Practicing for this year's Nashi Camp, I see.

tu204 wrote:

Pretty sure those people if given the option of Russian or western "interference" or invasion would pick the Russian one. You know, the one where the outcome is not chaos, misery and death?

Tell that to the Syrians.

VTKillarney wrote:

Tell that to the Syrians.

Who bankrolled and "imported" the IS to Syria? Hint: not the Russians.

All going well Syria will be the first to see meaningful restoration/rebuilding.

WIederling wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

Tell that to the Syrians.

Who bankrolled and "imported" the IS to Syria? Hint: not the Russians.

All going well Syria will be the first to see meaningful restoration/rebuilding.

Yes, the fellow dictator is very grateful to Putin for keeping him in power so he can go one to suppress his people.