8 ms·

To me the ongoing 'Russia rigged elections' smells like propaganda from the other side. And maybe russia did release the DNC emails, but Assange said that wasn'

To me the ongoing 'Russia rigged elections' smells like propaganda from the other side. And maybe russia did release the DNC emails, but Assange said that wasn't the case and I feel he's more likely to be telling the truth than state players. And even if they did release these emails it's hardly rigging an election. Comneys email announcement at the 11th hour about reopening email investigation was probably a deciding variable and that was hardly Russian lead. Your question of 'why' seems to be the scariest. US lead activities have been encircling Russia and pressing influence right to their borders for some time. For me I feel its too far and they are cornering the bear. Probably there is too much resource in the 'spy' world and they have to do something to justify their position, hence the older generation keep the pressure on Russia from their cold war agenda or they are looking to pick a fight. The latter being very scary. ...but really I'm no expert and just wonder why countries can put more effort to looking after their own populations needs. All this spy/military expenditure seems so wasteful.

threeseed 10y ago
Nobody said Russia rigged the election. The issue was the attempts to influence the election which Russia has a long, documented history of doing so. And the US had an obligation to respond which they did with minimal effect. So claiming all of this was about propaganda really makes no sense given the facts on the ground. And please remember why Russia's relations with almost all of the world deteriorated in the first place. It's because they annexed Crimea (unprecedented for our generation) and allowed soldiers and weapons to flood into Ukraine which then resulted in Flight 117 being shot down. Nobody is looking for a fight with Russia but capitulating and doing nothing is not an answer either. Diplomatic sanctions have been the correct response and I don't see anyone asking for an escalation of that.
- Natsu 10y ago
  > Nobody said Russia rigged the election. Nobody sensible said that, but I've seen more than a few comments along those lines on various sites, enough to believe that general sentiment is commonplace. As for Comey, I'd say he let her off easy. Take a look at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ Then look at the PDF attached here of an email between Colin Powell and Hillary Clinton and ask whether this looks intentional or not: https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324
  - lern_too_spel 10y ago
    How did Comey let her off easy if she didn't break any laws?
    - Natsu 10y ago
      Comey claimed not to have charged Clinton because there was a lack of intent. Gowdy is calling him on that, saying that this makes zero sense and going over all the ways they have to prove intent. His point at the end about "negligence" underscores the fact that the entire line of reasoning is nonsensical: intentional negligence is a contradiction in terms. That which is intentional cannot be negligent and vice versa. The law in question is against negligence (which does not require any intent whatsoever). Just to underscore that, I just linked to a document where Colin Powell describes in detail how they're subverting the law: https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 "However, there is a real danger. If it is public that you have a BlackBerry and it [is] government and you are using it, government or not, to do business, it may become an official record and be subject to the law. Reading about the President's BB rules this morning, it sounds like it won't be as useful as it used to be. Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that captured the data." I don't think it's reasonable to let our politicians get away with this. Inasmuch as people are worried about Russian influence, it seems strange to me that there's no worry about the very leaders to jeopardize our OPSEC with their hubris. Here is Colin Powell, again, saying things that should make HN readers cringe: "Now, the real issue had to do with PDAs, as we called them a few years ago before BlackBerry became a noun. And the issue was DS would not allow them into the secure spaces, especially up your way. When I asked why not they gave me all kinds of nonsense about how they gave out signals that could be read by spies, etc. Same reason they tried to keep mobile phones out of the suite. I had numerous meetings with them. We even opened one up for them to try to explain to me why it was more dangerous than say, a remote control for one of the many tvs in the suite. Or something embedded in my shoe heel. They never satisfied me and NSA/CIA wouldn't back off. So, we just went about our business and stopped asking. I had an ancient version of a PDA and used it. In general, the suite was so sealed that it is hard to get signals in or out wirelessly." If the law is so toothless that high ranking people of either party (Powell is a Republican) can deliberately subvert them, then we're always going to be at the mercy of every country with half-decent spies. This is a problem in its own right, independent from whatever partisan considerations we have here. === Note: The square brackets in the quote are me fixing typos in the original.
- 3131s 10y ago
  > Nobody said Russia rigged the election. Obama and Josh Earnest have not gone as far as using the word "rigged" but they have essentially implied as much. Other large media outlets have done the same and yes, some have used the word "rigged" directly [1] (and if I dug through CNN / MSNBC / ABC reels I am positive I could find many more examples). Lesser known media outlets and internet commentators have been using the word "rigged" profusely, so it's not "nobody". > Diplomatic sanctions have been the correct response and I don't see anyone asking for an escalation of that. Hillary Clinton herself is on video calling for an escalation of that in the form of a military response, shortly after some saber-rattling about the US nuclear arsenal [2]. > And please remember why Russia's relations with almost all of the world deteriorated in the first place. It's because they annexed Crimea (unprecedented for our generation) And you should remember the unprecedented actions that have caused the United States' relations with almost all the world to deteriorate. Claims of influencing foreign elections (c.f. the entire history of the CIA) and widespread hacking (c.f. the NSA essentially pwning the world) are particularly hypocritical. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/07/opinion/how-to-rig-an-election.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/07/opinion/how-to-rig-an-elec... The election was rigged by Russian intelligence, which was almost surely behind the hacking of Democratic emails, which WikiLeaks then released with great fanfare. [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ahr0-KpvLM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ahr0-KpvLM
  - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
    As a non-American, the long history of the US meddling in elections may make the claims hypocritical, but it makes me very open to suggestions that Russia would do it too.
    - knz 10y ago
      Are you European by chance? If so, don't worry, your country also likely has a long history of meddling on local affairs either through colonialism or parts of the cold war, especially if you are British! Yes, the US has meddled in international affairs but let's not pretend that US is unique in doing so or that Russia is some benign country that has no history of actively working against the interests of Europe/US/NATO or that Russia doesn't have its own agenda. For all of the faults of the US/Europe I'm glad I grew up in the "west" rather than behind the Iron curtain. I also don't see millions of people who fled western nations to Russian states - the single direction of political and economic migrants over the last 70 years speaks for itself.
- whitemale 10y ago
  > So claiming all of this was about propaganda really makes no sense given the facts on the ground. Where are those facts? please show hard evidence. So far I haven't seen any hard evidence that proves it was the state of Russia who orchestrated the hacks. > And please remember why Russia's relations with almost all of the world deteriorated in the first place. It's because they annexed Crimea (unprecedented for our generation) and allowed soldiers and weapons to flood into Ukraine which then resulted in Flight 117 being shot down. If you believe that Russia is absolutely bad and the US and Ukraine are infinitely good and righteous, then you might want to look at what the other side says: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KHCNk9BYy4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KHCNk9BYy4 The fact that the majority of the Crimean population is Russian, should give you a hint that maybe there is more to this story than what the Western media says. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Demographics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Demographics I have yet to see Putin making an aggressive announcement, however US officials continuously keep making threats and sanctions. > Nobody is looking for a fight with Russia but capitulating and doing nothing is not an answer either. Diplomatic sanctions have been the correct response and I don't see anyone asking for an escalation of that. Destroying diplomatic relations and throwing sanctions sound like looking for a fight to me. I fail to see anything good coming out of this.
  - Isinlor 10y ago
    "You don't understand, George, that Ukraine is not even a state. What is Ukraine? Part of its territories is Eastern Europe, but the greater part is a gift from us." Said by Putin in 2008, Boekarest -> 2014, Crimea annexation and Ukraine in war. Polish president in 2008 was saying "Today Gorgia, tomorrow Ukraine, the day after Baltic States and then maybe even Poland". He died in Russia in airplane accident in 2010 when going for anniversary of the Katyn massacre, a mass murder of Polish intellectuals, politicians, and military officers by the Soviets during World War II. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre I'm from Poland and I can tell you that having USA military bases in Poland is a big win for every political force in my country. Left, right, liberal, socialists agree - we want to keep Russians as far as possible. Last Russian tanks left Poland in 1993 and I don't want to see them back. Not in my life time nor after I'm gone. I'm happy to go with Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, George W. Bush or whoever will be elected by the American nation, just to stay as far as possible from Russians. And it's not that we are that big fans of Americans, we just know the history way too well - we are affected by it till this day. If you want to see what happens when a person like Putin starts to say that the last peace agreements are bad and borders need to be changed then look at the second world war and the Polish history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- PKop 10y ago
  Google the term Russia "hacked the election". It's all over the place. There's no subtlety or nuance in how this issue is reported in the media. DNC and Podesta email hacks have been turned into Russian hacking of the entire election, and (not accidentally) many are inferring that Russia likely hacked actual voting machines. Many people seem to be looking for a fight with Russia. Look around on twitter. See the desire for escalation in Syria. Remember the desire for a no fly zone in Syria supported by Hillary Clinton. As General Dunford testified, this would have required war with Russia.
SixSigma 10y ago
Using Mind Control to make Donna Brazile get fired from CNN for giving HRC Debate Questions was genius hacking. Using Mind Control to make Debbie Wasserman Schultz quit as DNC chair for rigging thr Primaries and then same day get a new job with HRC was genius hacking. It's like poeple think the only thing shady was Comey the Weasel!
knz 10y ago
This is too sinple. Russia is actively pushing an agenda as well - the invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea were not a response to US/NATO aggression. A new cold war has also been pushed domestically for the political benefit of Putin et al. If Trump had done basic things like released his tax returns (to show no massive conflict of interest with Russian loans etc) or stopped praising Putin on a regular basis then it would be a lot easier to dismiss concerns about his relationship with Putin and whether they stand to benefit by Trump's election. Russia/Putin has a history of crushing domestic political dissent (including assassinations) and exploiting xenophobia for political gain. There is NOTHING for the US or any NATO member to admire about Putin or the Russian political system. Edit. I forgot to mention the proxy war in Syria! Russia has everything to gain by tipping the scales in favour of a politician that upsets that status quo in the US.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
  The invasion of Crimea was a direct response to US/NATO aggression. 1) The US helped plot to overthrow the Ukranian government in 2014. 2) Russia was not keen on NATO pushing for Ukraine to become a member, which would literally put the Russians major warm naval port under NATO hands. 3) Crimea has been a part of Russia for centuries, the only reason Crimea became a part of Ukraine after the breakup of the Soviet Union is because the SSR transferred Crimea from the Russian state to the Ukraine state in 1954 to celebrate the 300th Anniversary of the Ukraine as part of Russia. 4) The vast majority of the population of Crimea has been for hundreds of years of Russian ethnicity and language. 5) Crimea voted to rejoin Russia The State of Politics are much deeper than you seem to admit. Edit: Russia's support for Syria has more to do with the strategic location of Syria and the transportation of Russia's Natural Resources through that territory.
  - sgc 10y ago
    Many of your points are valid. However pointing to an "election" with no real choice while occupied by a foreign power undermines your position significantly.
AJ007 10y ago
Trying to avoid all political topics here - If there were security holes in such a high profile organization, I would assume multiple intelligence agencies may have made interceptions of the data. The US intercepts communications of even friendly foreign governments, it certainly should be expected that a hostile government is going to try to intercept communications of the US government and related private organizations. If Julian Assange is to be believed, which I think is fair, my guess is Russia hacked the DNC and RNC, yet the DNC dump came from someone else, internal or external. Everything about the Russia stories are reminding me of a few years ago when ever hack was caused by China. Of course, because hackers are routing traffic through China and thats where the trail ended! I've written this here before, but while there is the appearance that the United States Government is unified and trying to do one thing, this is not the case. There are specific individuals, within places such as the State Department and Central Intelligence Agency, who have very intentional strategies and agendas which in some cases are totally at odds with the Department of Defense or the Department of Justice. They have done enough to keep long, multi-Presidential administration careers and gain influence in those organizations while avoid being ousted, but they are wielding outsized influence on US foreign policy. If one tries to explain what the US is doing without acknowledging or understanding the strong opposing forces within the US government, things start sounding really wacky. Most certainly others within the US government including elected officials are guilty of this too, at least in their public statements (which like propaganda can have long term destructive counter-effect of eventually causing the majority of your supporters to fight for made up stories rather than what you were originally intending to do.)
lern_too_spel 10y ago
How would Assange know who released the DNC emails? They were publicly released by Guccifer 2.0. Assange merely downloaded the public dump and indexed it on WikiLeaks.
- Toe-Rag 10y ago
  Guccifer 2.0 released different material from Wikileaks. He/she/it did not release emails.
normaljoe 10y ago
> but Assange said that wasn't the case and I feel he's more likely to be telling the truth than state players. Why? He already has a distain against the US and Clinton. He has no more reason to tell the truth the the state players do. > Comneys email announcement at the 11th hour about reopening email investigation was probably a deciding variable and that was hardly Russian lead. This I completely agree with. I think the DNC leaks may have impacted a hundredth of a percent, but Comney contributed in a tenth of a precent. Why would he not intervene? He was almost certainly aware that he would have been job hunting shortly after a Clinton win. He already has shown us his true nature in the whole Apple phone mess which really was more a litmus test then trying to gather real intelligence. Still at the same time if indeed we had foreign actors engaged in election manipulation that is something we, nor any nation, should not tolerate. And yes we should also look inward as I am fairly certain that we have been guilty of this in the past. Maybe, although I doubt this is enough, we and others can quit this ongoing manipulation. The US has proved it backfires multiple times in the middle east. Other nations can hopefully learn from our mistakes. I almost hate to bring it up, but.. "Why can't we all just get along". The answer is simple in that folks want to keep jobs and power. > I'm no expert and just wonder why countries can put more effort to looking after their own populations needs. If they did then that reduces the fear of those against us. That fear seems to be the driving force of politics in 2016 globally.

threeseed 10y ago

Nobody said Russia rigged the election. The issue was the attempts to influence the election which Russia has a long, documented history of doing so. And the US had an obligation to respond which they did with minimal effect. So claiming all of this was about propaganda really makes no sense given the facts on the ground. And please remember why Russia's relations with almost all of the world deteriorated in the first place. It's because they annexed Crimea (unprecedented for our generation) and allowed soldiers and weapons to flood into Ukraine which then resulted in Flight 117 being shot down. Nobody is looking for a fight with Russia but capitulating and doing nothing is not an answer either. Diplomatic sanctions have been the correct response and I don't see anyone asking for an escalation of that.

Natsu 10y ago
> Nobody said Russia rigged the election. Nobody sensible said that, but I've seen more than a few comments along those lines on various sites, enough to believe that general sentiment is commonplace. As for Comey, I'd say he let her off easy. Take a look at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ Then look at the PDF attached here of an email between Colin Powell and Hillary Clinton and ask whether this looks intentional or not: https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324
- lern_too_spel 10y ago
  How did Comey let her off easy if she didn't break any laws?
  - Natsu 10y ago
    Comey claimed not to have charged Clinton because there was a lack of intent. Gowdy is calling him on that, saying that this makes zero sense and going over all the ways they have to prove intent. His point at the end about "negligence" underscores the fact that the entire line of reasoning is nonsensical: intentional negligence is a contradiction in terms. That which is intentional cannot be negligent and vice versa. The law in question is against negligence (which does not require any intent whatsoever). Just to underscore that, I just linked to a document where Colin Powell describes in detail how they're subverting the law: https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 "However, there is a real danger. If it is public that you have a BlackBerry and it [is] government and you are using it, government or not, to do business, it may become an official record and be subject to the law. Reading about the President's BB rules this morning, it sounds like it won't be as useful as it used to be. Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that captured the data." I don't think it's reasonable to let our politicians get away with this. Inasmuch as people are worried about Russian influence, it seems strange to me that there's no worry about the very leaders to jeopardize our OPSEC with their hubris. Here is Colin Powell, again, saying things that should make HN readers cringe: "Now, the real issue had to do with PDAs, as we called them a few years ago before BlackBerry became a noun. And the issue was DS would not allow them into the secure spaces, especially up your way. When I asked why not they gave me all kinds of nonsense about how they gave out signals that could be read by spies, etc. Same reason they tried to keep mobile phones out of the suite. I had numerous meetings with them. We even opened one up for them to try to explain to me why it was more dangerous than say, a remote control for one of the many tvs in the suite. Or something embedded in my shoe heel. They never satisfied me and NSA/CIA wouldn't back off. So, we just went about our business and stopped asking. I had an ancient version of a PDA and used it. In general, the suite was so sealed that it is hard to get signals in or out wirelessly." If the law is so toothless that high ranking people of either party (Powell is a Republican) can deliberately subvert them, then we're always going to be at the mercy of every country with half-decent spies. This is a problem in its own right, independent from whatever partisan considerations we have here. === Note: The square brackets in the quote are me fixing typos in the original.
3131s 10y ago
> Nobody said Russia rigged the election. Obama and Josh Earnest have not gone as far as using the word "rigged" but they have essentially implied as much. Other large media outlets have done the same and yes, some have used the word "rigged" directly [1] (and if I dug through CNN / MSNBC / ABC reels I am positive I could find many more examples). Lesser known media outlets and internet commentators have been using the word "rigged" profusely, so it's not "nobody". > Diplomatic sanctions have been the correct response and I don't see anyone asking for an escalation of that. Hillary Clinton herself is on video calling for an escalation of that in the form of a military response, shortly after some saber-rattling about the US nuclear arsenal [2]. > And please remember why Russia's relations with almost all of the world deteriorated in the first place. It's because they annexed Crimea (unprecedented for our generation) And you should remember the unprecedented actions that have caused the United States' relations with almost all the world to deteriorate. Claims of influencing foreign elections (c.f. the entire history of the CIA) and widespread hacking (c.f. the NSA essentially pwning the world) are particularly hypocritical. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/07/opinion/how-to-rig-an-election.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/07/opinion/how-to-rig-an-elec... The election was rigged by Russian intelligence, which was almost surely behind the hacking of Democratic emails, which WikiLeaks then released with great fanfare. [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ahr0-KpvLM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ahr0-KpvLM
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  As a non-American, the long history of the US meddling in elections may make the claims hypocritical, but it makes me very open to suggestions that Russia would do it too.
  - knz 10y ago
    Are you European by chance? If so, don't worry, your country also likely has a long history of meddling on local affairs either through colonialism or parts of the cold war, especially if you are British! Yes, the US has meddled in international affairs but let's not pretend that US is unique in doing so or that Russia is some benign country that has no history of actively working against the interests of Europe/US/NATO or that Russia doesn't have its own agenda. For all of the faults of the US/Europe I'm glad I grew up in the "west" rather than behind the Iron curtain. I also don't see millions of people who fled western nations to Russian states - the single direction of political and economic migrants over the last 70 years speaks for itself.
whitemale 10y ago
> So claiming all of this was about propaganda really makes no sense given the facts on the ground. Where are those facts? please show hard evidence. So far I haven't seen any hard evidence that proves it was the state of Russia who orchestrated the hacks. > And please remember why Russia's relations with almost all of the world deteriorated in the first place. It's because they annexed Crimea (unprecedented for our generation) and allowed soldiers and weapons to flood into Ukraine which then resulted in Flight 117 being shot down. If you believe that Russia is absolutely bad and the US and Ukraine are infinitely good and righteous, then you might want to look at what the other side says: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KHCNk9BYy4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KHCNk9BYy4 The fact that the majority of the Crimean population is Russian, should give you a hint that maybe there is more to this story than what the Western media says. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Demographics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Demographics I have yet to see Putin making an aggressive announcement, however US officials continuously keep making threats and sanctions. > Nobody is looking for a fight with Russia but capitulating and doing nothing is not an answer either. Diplomatic sanctions have been the correct response and I don't see anyone asking for an escalation of that. Destroying diplomatic relations and throwing sanctions sound like looking for a fight to me. I fail to see anything good coming out of this.
- Isinlor 10y ago
  "You don't understand, George, that Ukraine is not even a state. What is Ukraine? Part of its territories is Eastern Europe, but the greater part is a gift from us." Said by Putin in 2008, Boekarest -> 2014, Crimea annexation and Ukraine in war. Polish president in 2008 was saying "Today Gorgia, tomorrow Ukraine, the day after Baltic States and then maybe even Poland". He died in Russia in airplane accident in 2010 when going for anniversary of the Katyn massacre, a mass murder of Polish intellectuals, politicians, and military officers by the Soviets during World War II. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre I'm from Poland and I can tell you that having USA military bases in Poland is a big win for every political force in my country. Left, right, liberal, socialists agree - we want to keep Russians as far as possible. Last Russian tanks left Poland in 1993 and I don't want to see them back. Not in my life time nor after I'm gone. I'm happy to go with Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, George W. Bush or whoever will be elected by the American nation, just to stay as far as possible from Russians. And it's not that we are that big fans of Americans, we just know the history way too well - we are affected by it till this day. If you want to see what happens when a person like Putin starts to say that the last peace agreements are bad and borders need to be changed then look at the second world war and the Polish history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
PKop 10y ago
Google the term Russia "hacked the election". It's all over the place. There's no subtlety or nuance in how this issue is reported in the media. DNC and Podesta email hacks have been turned into Russian hacking of the entire election, and (not accidentally) many are inferring that Russia likely hacked actual voting machines. Many people seem to be looking for a fight with Russia. Look around on twitter. See the desire for escalation in Syria. Remember the desire for a no fly zone in Syria supported by Hillary Clinton. As General Dunford testified, this would have required war with Russia.

SixSigma 10y ago

Using Mind Control to make Donna Brazile get fired from CNN for giving HRC Debate Questions was genius hacking. Using Mind Control to make Debbie Wasserman Schultz quit as DNC chair for rigging thr Primaries and then same day get a new job with HRC was genius hacking. It's like poeple think the only thing shady was Comey the Weasel!

knz 10y ago

This is too sinple. Russia is actively pushing an agenda as well - the invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea were not a response to US/NATO aggression. A new cold war has also been pushed domestically for the political benefit of Putin et al. If Trump had done basic things like released his tax returns (to show no massive conflict of interest with Russian loans etc) or stopped praising Putin on a regular basis then it would be a lot easier to dismiss concerns about his relationship with Putin and whether they stand to benefit by Trump's election. Russia/Putin has a history of crushing domestic political dissent (including assassinations) and exploiting xenophobia for political gain. There is NOTHING for the US or any NATO member to admire about Putin or the Russian political system. Edit. I forgot to mention the proxy war in Syria! Russia has everything to gain by tipping the scales in favour of a politician that upsets that status quo in the US.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
The invasion of Crimea was a direct response to US/NATO aggression. 1) The US helped plot to overthrow the Ukranian government in 2014. 2) Russia was not keen on NATO pushing for Ukraine to become a member, which would literally put the Russians major warm naval port under NATO hands. 3) Crimea has been a part of Russia for centuries, the only reason Crimea became a part of Ukraine after the breakup of the Soviet Union is because the SSR transferred Crimea from the Russian state to the Ukraine state in 1954 to celebrate the 300th Anniversary of the Ukraine as part of Russia. 4) The vast majority of the population of Crimea has been for hundreds of years of Russian ethnicity and language. 5) Crimea voted to rejoin Russia The State of Politics are much deeper than you seem to admit. Edit: Russia's support for Syria has more to do with the strategic location of Syria and the transportation of Russia's Natural Resources through that territory.
- sgc 10y ago
  Many of your points are valid. However pointing to an "election" with no real choice while occupied by a foreign power undermines your position significantly.

AJ007 10y ago

Trying to avoid all political topics here - If there were security holes in such a high profile organization, I would assume multiple intelligence agencies may have made interceptions of the data. The US intercepts communications of even friendly foreign governments, it certainly should be expected that a hostile government is going to try to intercept communications of the US government and related private organizations. If Julian Assange is to be believed, which I think is fair, my guess is Russia hacked the DNC and RNC, yet the DNC dump came from someone else, internal or external. Everything about the Russia stories are reminding me of a few years ago when ever hack was caused by China. Of course, because hackers are routing traffic through China and thats where the trail ended! I've written this here before, but while there is the appearance that the United States Government is unified and trying to do one thing, this is not the case. There are specific individuals, within places such as the State Department and Central Intelligence Agency, who have very intentional strategies and agendas which in some cases are totally at odds with the Department of Defense or the Department of Justice. They have done enough to keep long, multi-Presidential administration careers and gain influence in those organizations while avoid being ousted, but they are wielding outsized influence on US foreign policy. If one tries to explain what the US is doing without acknowledging or understanding the strong opposing forces within the US government, things start sounding really wacky. Most certainly others within the US government including elected officials are guilty of this too, at least in their public statements (which like propaganda can have long term destructive counter-effect of eventually causing the majority of your supporters to fight for made up stories rather than what you were originally intending to do.)

lern_too_spel 10y ago

How would Assange know who released the DNC emails? They were publicly released by Guccifer 2.0. Assange merely downloaded the public dump and indexed it on WikiLeaks.

Toe-Rag 10y ago
Guccifer 2.0 released different material from Wikileaks. He/she/it did not release emails.

normaljoe 10y ago

> but Assange said that wasn't the case and I feel he's more likely to be telling the truth than state players. Why? He already has a distain against the US and Clinton. He has no more reason to tell the truth the the state players do. > Comneys email announcement at the 11th hour about reopening email investigation was probably a deciding variable and that was hardly Russian lead. This I completely agree with. I think the DNC leaks may have impacted a hundredth of a percent, but Comney contributed in a tenth of a precent. Why would he not intervene? He was almost certainly aware that he would have been job hunting shortly after a Clinton win. He already has shown us his true nature in the whole Apple phone mess which really was more a litmus test then trying to gather real intelligence. Still at the same time if indeed we had foreign actors engaged in election manipulation that is something we, nor any nation, should not tolerate. And yes we should also look inward as I am fairly certain that we have been guilty of this in the past. Maybe, although I doubt this is enough, we and others can quit this ongoing manipulation. The US has proved it backfires multiple times in the middle east. Other nations can hopefully learn from our mistakes. I almost hate to bring it up, but.. "Why can't we all just get along". The answer is simple in that folks want to keep jobs and power. > I'm no expert and just wonder why countries can put more effort to looking after their own populations needs. If they did then that reduces the fear of those against us. That fear seems to be the driving force of politics in 2016 globally.