Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Military

Russian State TV Anchor: Russia Could Turn US To "Radioactive Ash" 878

Posted by samzenpus
from the lighten-up-francis dept.
An anonymous reader writes with a Ukraine news roundup. "'Russia is the only country in the world realistically capable of turning the United States into radioactive ash,' anchor Dmitry Kiselyov said on his weekly news show on state-controlled Rossiya 1 television. ... His programme was broadcast as the first exit polls were being published showing an overwhelming majority of Crimeans voting to leave Ukraine and join Russia. He stood in his studio in front of a gigantic image of a mushroom cloud produced after a nuclear attack, with the words 'into radioactive ash.' ... Kiselyov has earned a reputation as one of Russia's most provocative television news hosts, in particularly with his often blatantly homophobic remarks. But he is also hugely influential with his weekly news show broadcast at Sunday evening prime time. Putin last year appointed Kiselyov head of the new Russia Today news agency that is to replace the soon to be liquidated RIA Novosti news agency with the aim of better promoting Russia's official position. — Russia has threatened to stop nuclear disarmament treaty inspections and cooperation. Russian troops are reported to have seized a natural gas terminal in Ukraine outside of Crimea. There are reported to be 60,000 Russian troops massing on Russia's border with Ukraine."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Russian State TV Anchor: Russia Could Turn US To "Radioactive Ash"

Comments Filter:
  • by ackthpt (218170) on Monday March 17, 2014 @10:44AM (#46506475) Homepage Journal

    I see the Putin Propaganda Machine is in full-Stalin mode.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 17, 2014 @10:50AM (#46506537)

      Certainly I'd be more worried about their intentions to sink the US dollar by selling all their reserves held in that currency. A lot cheaper than firing several ICMBs, and much more effective...Regarding the economic warfront, I don't see any tactical advantages for the US here. Imagine the Russians selling all their US dollars, China following them, and bringing the value of a dollar bill cheaper than paper toilet...

      • by Opportunist (166417) on Monday March 17, 2014 @10:58AM (#46506635)

        Well, considering that conventional warfare is a nono, and nuclear warfare is a BIG NONO, but economic warfare is fair game, I'd say you have a point.

        • by mikael (484) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:00AM (#46506665)

          But once you have done that once, that's it, the economic weapon has been used, and you've got nothing left. Of course, there's always the threat of using it, or selling off a few million dollars of shares every now and again just to prove the point.

          • by Opportunist (166417) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:25AM (#46506983)

            Economic "weapons" are not single use. They're actually usually used in a very long, drawn out way. Kinda like siege warfare. Think of Cuba. They're not really in a bad economic position right from the start, but we "besieged" them after they turned Communist, shutting them off essentially from international trade. And that in turn does hurt a country. Not immediately, but over time.

            What Russia could do is dump a bit of its dollar reserves, then hang the Damocletian sword of dumping the rest over the world economy. That would be far more devastating than them simply dumping their reserves, since that would hurt them, too, considerably. Instead, they now make the rest of the world consider not only dumping what they have in USDs but also trying to switch to other currencies and diversify so a single cash dump can't have such an impact.

            Now ponder that impact on the USD when the whole world wants to get out of it.

            • by Hodr (219920) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:41AM (#46507233) Homepage

              I'm not sure I understand all of this talk of "dumping", or maybe it's the people proposing the action that don't understand it. They can only do 3 things with those bonds, cash them in, sell them to someone else for a loss (dumping?), or burn them.

              The first option does nothing, as claiming matured bonds is what you are supposed to do. The third option is awesome, free money.

              The second option, if they had enough to kill the world market (which I don't think they do) for US bonds might have an impact, but only if they price very low and somehow managed to keep the US itself from buying them.

              The fact of the matter is, as soon as they post 100B in US T-Bills for substantially lower than the market rate someone will buy them all instantly and they will no longer exert pressure on the market for new debt.

              If they doled them out slowly, there isn't enough to cause an issue.

              • by rahvin112 (446269) on Monday March 17, 2014 @03:50PM (#46510377)

                I always laugh when someone suggests dumping 162 billion in bonds could crush the US economy. That's literally like 3 days worth of auctions. As you said, they dump them all at once and someone pays 72 billion for them, and over a period of a month doubles their money. Now if they owned the 1.3 trillion that china does they could probably hurt the dollar for a month or two while turning their trillion dollars into a 100 billion. And in the process China would destroy their own export economy as the dollar fell and the trade deficit imploded as US imports stopped.

                See that's the problem, they try to "crash" the market and they are guaranteed to lose massive amounts of money on the bonds. And in the long run the bonds recover and there is no long term issue. In the short term it may actually help the US economy by devaluing the dollar short term and harming imports.

      • by Ottawakismet (2798639) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:07AM (#46506735)
        Dont be stupid. Russia holds a mere $200b in treasury bills. Selling them would destabilize Russia more than the US. The US would buy that amount up in a few months. You have to understand the scale of debt - trillions in US debt exist, and 200$b is more like a little wave in a lake. China is opposed to Russia about the intervention, but they will not act on their opposition. The American economy is much larger than the Russian, and many other central banks hold way more US debt then the US.
      • by gtall (79522) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:18AM (#46506889)

        Really? As of last year, Russia held $225 billion in U.S. dollars. So, you think Russia will tank a $17 Trillion dollar economy with $225 billion. I find it helpful to have a sense of perspective when dealing with numbers.

      • by Kvasio (127200) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:38AM (#46507183)

        China has a choice here, as they could switch to Euro.
        Russia won't switch to Euro, so what would they buy instead? Gold? they are gold supplier. Would make no sense. Yen? They did not end WW2 yet.

        And TV idiot forgot, that in global nuclear conflict there are no winners. With the possible exception for rats, cockroaches and tardigrades.

      • by Xest (935314) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:42AM (#46507281)

        China wont join Russia because if it sells it's US dollars then it just means it's tanked the main country in the world it's dependent on for exports meaning it'll kill it's own economy.

        Russia doesn't have enough dollars to matter.

        Economically, Russia finds itself on the losing side of history once again here if it tries to push it's luck.

    • Well.... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:04AM (#46506705)

      He's not Stalin at all, he's Putin it into top gear!

    • by GodfatherofSoul (174979) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:23AM (#46506947)

      It doesn't help that certain segments of Congress keep talking up Putin like he's the second coming of Alexander the Great. Russia is a broke EX world power. Pushing around pissant satellite states and a spigot on a pipeline are about the extend of their power. We need to treat them that way and stop giving them far more credit than they deserve. All we're doing is emboldening Putin.

      The dude goes around shirtless. That should be clue enough he's an attention whore and we all know what happens when you give an attention whore more attention.

    • Cool, a return to cold war science funding. Bring on the threats, bluffs, and talks of nuclear Armageddon. Maybe they are developing secret weapons that are better than our secret weapons. We need to spend trillions on research or be left behind.

    • by s.petry (762400) on Monday March 17, 2014 @12:09PM (#46507669)

      And US propaganda is different how exactly? Because you think the US Government is on the same team as you perhaps?

      Issues like this are not singular, but if you are going to call out Russian propaganda then call it out on both sides. US propaganda is portraying Russia in Crimea like the US invasion of Iraq, but it's not even close. I keep waiting for US media to start falsely claiming that Russians are out murdering everyone in the Ukraine and that actually started happening today when reporters were telling stories about people disappearing.

      First, look at Crimea from a military strategy point. Russia has had military and naval bases there for decades. If the Philippines had a revolt you are telling me the US would sit and do nothing to protect their military bases there? Come now, you and I both know we would and should. We have those bases for the same reason Russia has bases in Crimea. In fact the US has over 800 [globalresearch.ca] bases (depending on the source over 1,000) and is exerting pressure on not just Russia but China. You would be well suited to read that whole article by the way, since it backs most of my statements.

      The US denounces military expansion by other countries, but we continue to expand ourselves. This is in addition of course to drone strikes in dozens of countries, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, and funding and providing weapons for the majority of colored revolutions which caused lots of death and destruction.

      Next, Crimea was about to be an independent autonomous country free of the Ukraine in May. They tend to side with Russia since Russia has lots of military there, and until Nikita Khrushchev gave the land to the Ukraine was part of Russia. This part gets magically lost by any US media discussing Crimea. I work with many people from Russia, Georgia, and the Ukraine. They tend to laugh at how bad US propaganda is, and how it portrays very little truth. Eastern Ukraine is pro Russian, and Western Ukraine not so much. What you hear in the US is the Western spin, and what you hear in Russia is Eastern spin. Somewhere in the middle is the population of the Ukraine and Crimea, who want both sides to leave them alone and let them decide their own future.

      Let me be very clear, I'm not backing Russia nor do I think Russia is necessarily correct. At the same time, I'm not backing the methods the US has been using for imperialism either.

      Didn't we see the most growth in Democracy during times of peace where the US was the example for other countries to follow? We were founded with expressly that concept in mind, we are not supposed to invade or go to war. We are supposed to defend ourselves and be an example for other countries to follow.

      We are failing in that regard today, and the increases in turmoil all over the world is in great part due to US meddling and instigating conflicts. Imperialism has changed, where instead of the US taking over a whole territory US and US Friendly businesses take over instead. No need for troops when you control the economy, but making millions off people poor causes lots of resentment.

  • So..... (Score:4, Funny)

    by segedunum (883035) on Monday March 17, 2014 @10:45AM (#46506483)
    Kind of like a Russian Sarah Palin then?
    • Kind of like a Russian Sarah Palin then?

      Exactly. Idiot says somthing stupid. State-controlled news at eleven.

  • by ranton (36917) on Monday March 17, 2014 @10:49AM (#46506521)

    I would be surprised if someone like Rush Limbaugh hasn't said something similar about Russia on their US based cable/radio news programs in the past few weeks. I'm sure both of our nations have their own crackpot news agencies.

    • by Dan East (318230) on Monday March 17, 2014 @10:52AM (#46506559) Homepage Journal

      The difference is that Limbaugh doesn't speak for a state-controlled news agency, and thus Limbaugh's opinions are only that of a single man with a microphone and do not represent the government of an entire country.

      • by supersat (639745) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:03AM (#46506691)
        In Capitalist America, news agencies control the state!
      • The difference is that Limbaugh doesn't speak for a state-controlled news agency, and thus Limbaugh's opinions are only that of a single man with a microphone and do not represent the government of an entire country.

        I would say that one of the major problems of having state-controlled media is having too few people determining the content. In that sense, at least, shows like Limbaugh's suffer from the same problem.

        Of course the main problem is that in places with strong state-media there is typically no mainstream alternative, which makes dissent or even mild criticism of the regime very difficult to get across.

        But actually, in that sense, most media outlets that are more or less partisan have a similar problem -- as l

      • by Rockoon (1252108) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:23AM (#46506949)
        Exactly.

        When speaking with an Egyptian co-worker (a Christian who finally got the rest of his family out of Egypt only recently) he had remarked that the reason that most people in the world take what Americans say on television so seriously because in most of the world (Egypt for example) you cannot say things on television that the State doesnt agree with without getting into serious trouble, so they myopically assume that the same must also be true in America. If Timmy Talking Head says that he hates Muslims on American T.V, and the American government didnt arrest him immediately, then most of the world assumes that the official State position of America must be to hate Muslims.

        Now here we have some myopic American assuming that the rest of the worlds media is just like American media. Its not.

        Now as far as Putin, NPR recently had an interview with chess Grand Master Gary Kasparov who has for a long time been outspoken against Putin. He pointed out that the KGB had a file on Putin long before he became the glorious leader which included a personality profile. The KGB had determined that Putin had an unusually low sense of danger, the kind of guy that thinks he can get away with just about anything, and that might include launching a nuclear first strike against America.
      • by X.25 (255792) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:26AM (#46507013)

        The difference is that Limbaugh doesn't speak for a state-controlled news agency, and thus Limbaugh's opinions are only that of a single man with a microphone and do not represent the government of an entire country.

        Wait - you believe that something being said on state owned TV station is in the name of government and entire country?

        What is wrong with you people?

        You probably never lived in a country with 'state owned TV' if you can make statements this retarded. Sigh.

  • by bkmoore (1910118) on Monday March 17, 2014 @10:50AM (#46506535)
    For as long as Putin and his cronies are in power, the U.S. and the rest of the western world should offer any law-abiding Russian citizen who wants to leave an automatic green card, work permit, etc. We cannot realistically or morally change Russia from the outside. The most powerful weapon against fanaticism would be allowing regular law-abiding Russians to vote with their feet. We could always use some more scientists and engineers anyway...
    • by Erikderzweite (1146485) on Monday March 17, 2014 @10:59AM (#46506649)

      The Crimeans have just voted with their feet. A pity that they took the whole peninsula with them :-)

      • by Ottawakismet (2798639) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:10AM (#46506779)
        a fake vote where supposedly all the ukrainians and tatars also wanted to join Russia. Ya right. 97% approval is the kind of election result dictatorships produce, honest elections never get that result. Support for separation was 40%, so its a total lie that suddenly everyone wants separation.
        • by Erikderzweite (1146485) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:24AM (#46506973)

          Keep in mind that the new Ukrainian government has announced massive austerity program. Pensions in Russia are about four times higher and the economy is much healthier compared to the Ukraine. Besides, massive economic support was promised by Russia.

        • by Xest (935314) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:39AM (#46507217)

          To be fair support for separation was higher (roughly 50%) but support for joining Russia was only 41% before Putin's thugs turned up armed and en-masse to rig the vote.

          You're right though, the referendum was a joke, I don't even know why dictators like Putin do this, you'd think if you're going to rig a vote you at least make it semi-believable at like 60% or something, but really, 97%, are they actually trying to take the piss or what? 82% turnout and 97% vote for joining Russia does indeed imply that Ukrainians and Tatars that are almost universally opposed to joining Russia voted for exactly that. This alone shows what an absolute complete and utter farce it was.

          As if the hijacking of all Crimean comms in and out, radio, TV, and surrounding of military bases and refusal to allow international observers in whilst beating up journalists wasn't obvious evidence enough that a fraudulent vote was about to follow. I'm not sure who exactly they're trying to convince short of the few useful idiots that are dotted about here and there, but what do they matter? It's almost like they're just trying to convince themselves they're doing the right thing, as it sure as hell ain't convincing anyone else that matters.

          • by Erikderzweite (1146485) on Monday March 17, 2014 @12:09PM (#46507667)

            It's not as simple as that: most Ukrainian people, especially the elderly are very likely to have voted in Russia's favour. Not only because they were living side by side with Russians and are nostalgic for the good ol' times, but also because of the pensions which are about four times higher in Russia. The right-wing radicals that are very vocal among the Ukrainian government gave a strong trump to Russia as well.

            As for Tatars: Tatarstan's president (federal Republic in Russian Federation) was in Crimea promoting tolerance to Russians. He is well respected among the Tatar community and was busy explaining that Tatars and Russians can indeed live peacefully together. Plus the above-mentioned economic factor. Of all groups, the Tatars are, of course, most opposed to the Russians, but you won't feed your family with politics alone.

  • by zerosomething (1353609) on Monday March 17, 2014 @10:52AM (#46506563) Homepage

    In this corner Bill O'Reilly for the U.S of A and in the other corner Dmitry Kiselyov for the Russian Federation. In a match to see who can talk their own country into radioactive ash first!

    READY, FIGHT!!!

  • by Maimun (631984) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:00AM (#46506657)
    for many years. The writing has been on the wall all the time. Those idiotic threats are just the tip of the iceberg. It would be wrong to downplay them with the arguments like "some idiot lost his nerves". The bellicosity has been on the rise in Russia for many years and no, the reason is not that they were unjustly insulted by the West. The fascist-like regime wants to expand and dominate. It is that simple. The fascizoids can never be stopped by appeasement. The appeasement did not work before WWII and will not work now. The only argument they understand is raw power. For them, politeness and tolerance are signs of weakness and met with derision. Maybe, I hope, one day the Russian people will kick the fascists out of power but for the forseeable future this is wishful thinking.

    Well, international relations are heating up again, coffee-break is over and the West should better wake up and start doing something. If raw power is the only thing that can stop the bad guys, raw power we must accumulate.

    • by Kiuas (1084567) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:55AM (#46507473)

      The fascist-like regime wants to expand and dominate. It is that simple. The fascizoids can never be stopped by appeasement. The appeasement did not work before WWII and will not work now. The only argument they understand is raw power. For them, politeness and tolerance are signs of weakness and met with derision. Maybe, I hope, one day the Russian people will kick the fascists out of power but for the forseeable future this is wishful thinking.

      Agreed. Putin is basically doing "blitzkrieg" on the world political stage and currently has the ball. He's constantly been referring to "the situation in Ukraine" and "the situation in Crimea" as being something that justifies the actions of "pro-russian militias" (note: the Kremlin denies that they have any direct control over the troops occupying Crimea, officially they're supposed to be militias regradles of the fact that they're using equipment thus far only seen in service with the Russian special forces). Putin's playing the victim card to the west, and the nationalistic chest-beating "for the motherland" -card to his own citizens - all the while giving a strong signal to people like me living next to his country (in my case Finland) that any Russian promises regarding the respect for international law and sovereignty are better used as toilet paper.

      West should better wake up and start doing something.

      Yes.

      If raw power is the only thing that can stop the bad guys, raw power we must accumulate.

      The west does not need to accumulate power. The west (that is the US/NATO) already controls the largest military force in the history of mankind. We have power, we need the will to use it. If we let this slip Russia will keep chiseling ex-USSR nations piece by piece using the same lame "we're just protecting out citizens" -excuse as the west re-enacts the 30s and tries to appease a man who clearly doesn't give a shit about talk. The west can "condemn" the actions as many times and as "harshly" as we want, but until a line is drawn and it is made clear to Russia that the crossing of this line will lead to military action, Putin will keep controlling the ball.

  • ISS (Score:4, Interesting)

    by tekrat (242117) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:13AM (#46506817) Homepage Journal

    Next up: Russians "deport" American astronauts from ISS, as they are the only country with a manned space flight program. How ironic; we spend many billions to build it, and then scrap our only way of getting to it. Nice plan. No wonder USA is number 37.

    Someday USA might be a great country, but this decade and the next is not that day.

    USA is now filled with religious, science-denying blowhards that will turn this country into a backwater 3rd world with nuclear weapons and offshore billionaires that own the government. Just look at Greenspan's comments. We'll all be shooting each other for food in a few years, while CEOs sit on piles of cash that guarantee they are comfortable for 6 or 7 generations.

  • by Lucas123 (935744) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:14AM (#46506829) Homepage
    There were those of us who fought against this. But in the end, we could not keep up with the expense involved in the arms race, the space race, and the peace race. And at the same time, our people grumbled for more nylons and washing machines. Our Doomsday scheme cost us just a small fraction of what we'd been spending on defense in a single year. But the deciding factor was when we learned that your country was working along similar lines, and we were afraid of a Doomsday gap.
  • by rvw (755107) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:24AM (#46506975)

    The US invaded Iraq without UN approval and with false proof (remember the WMD) to "liberate" it. Now Russia does the same with Crimea, only the proof is much more valid, even if this poll was a complete farce. What's new?

    Disclaimer: I'm EU citizen and totally against all this idiotic behavior. But let's be honest - the US has no moral standing in cases like this anymore, even if Obama is not to blame for Iraq. And the EU, well, they simply have no backbone in foreign policy.

    • by MightyMartian (840721) on Monday March 17, 2014 @11:49AM (#46507379) Journal

      This obsession with "moral standing" is ludicrous. Do you think the British Empire had heap loads of moral standing on September 1, 1939? Do you think the US and the USSR had barrels of "moral standing" hanging around when they joined the fight against the Nazis?

      Nations do shit things, sometimes for perceived benefit, or simply out of greed. If we allowed every ill actions we had done in the past hold us back, no one would ever intervene when some other nation state violated the general rules of international conduct?

      Russia signed an agreement in the 1990s guaranteeing Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine's nuclear stockpiles. Thus, even excluding any notions of territorial integrity that have been a part of international law since the end of WWII, Russia is in violation of its own treaty with Ukraine.

      So yes, it sucks ass that the US invaded Iraq, but do you seriously want the US to sit in the corner and refuse to come out when Russia starts enlarging itself with trumped up referendums, because a decade ago it did a naughty thing?

    • 1. people who are not americans, and hated the invasion of iraq, are not happy with what kgb thug putin has done

      2. morality does not mean "that guy over there did something bad so it's ok that this guy does something bad"

      3. the world doesn't actually revolve around the usa. the usa is not the standard you use to determine right and wrong in this world

      that putin did something wrong is not automatically made ok because the usa did something wrong. different entities. if i murder your neighbor is it ok because

  • by PPH (736903) on Monday March 17, 2014 @12:12PM (#46507699)

    ... and raise you a Limbaugh.

    We won't go to war with Russia. We are kindred spirits. Both of us will let any moron get hold of a microphone.

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce

Working...