EU sanctions against Russia

[Yalta1945]

I recently heard that NATO is interested in Russian military equipment and, thus, is going to buy weapons from Russia in big amounts. So it seems that not only gas and oil are Russia's main values.

::lol ::lol :tas :mdr :lol +1 +1 :lol: ::lol :haha

[Steven]

I think I heard something similar as well, but it was not about NATO, I forgot what organization was named...
nevertheless, Russia is a large army supplier in the world. Thus, such countries as Venezuela, Turkey, India indeed buy Russian weapons.

[Yalta1945]

Actually imposing sanctions against Russia is a very hard task.
So let’s imagine EU does it. But in the same easy way it is hard to imagine if this will have any effect, and more importantly for who?
I think for any country the energy resources count first than the economic relations, as you cannot build them in a market that lacks the basic power to keep it alive.

Does it mean that Russian can do anything? If gas and oil works perfect as a weapon why cannot Russia use it more often to demand anything it wants?
(To be continued)

[Yalta1945]

And you think Sarkozy is paranoic?

Why do you want somebody to think Sarkozy is paranoic? Not ethical at all.

Ethic is fine and good but political desigions are not based on it.

Really? If we call good political decisions those that are based on denial of ethics, then what is good after all?

Elections were fair.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe could not monitor the presidential elections because of severe restrictions on its observers by the Russian government.
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stated: for an election to be good it takes a good process, not just a good election day
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Press/StopPressView.asp?ID=2013">http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Press/StopP ... sp?ID=2013</a><!-- m --> (full text)

This election repeated most of the flaws revealed during the Duma elections of December 2007. They were highlighted as failings by the PACE pre-electoral mission that was in Russia on 7 and 8 February 2008. None of the concerns of the pre-electoral mission were dealt with ahead of the 2 March vote. Candidate registration concerns could not have been accommodated, putting into question the degree of how free the election was. Equal access of the candidates to the media and the public sphere in general has not improved, putting into question the fairness of the election.

As PACE referred to the Duma elections, its earlier statement must be mentioned:
Russian Duma elections ‘not held on a level playing field’, say parliamentary observers
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Press/StopPressView.asp?ID=1979">http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Press/StopP ... sp?ID=1979</a><!-- m --> (full text)

However, they [elections] took place in an atmosphere which seriously limited political competition and with frequent abuse of administrative resources, media coverage strongly in favour of the ruling party, and an election code whose cumulative effect hindered political pluralism.
Broadcast media, particularly television, is under almost total state control.

In several areas, including Chechnya and other parts of the North Caucasus, 99% of the population "voted" for Putin's United Russia party in 2007. The turnout in Chechnya was 99.6%. Putin said the result was "perfectly objective".
Sergei Kovalev wrote an open letter to Putin, describing Russia's elections as nothing more than a "tasteless farce being played out by untalented directors on the entire boundless Russian stage". "Not even Stalin could have dreamed of the Chechen record," he added.
For more, read here: Fraud, intimidation and bribery as Putin prepares for victory
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/nov/30/russia.politics">http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/no ... a.politics</a><!-- m -->
The Russian presidential election was a sad farce and another manipulative operation undertaken by the siloviki regime of secret police officers to hold on to power, said Andrei Illarionov, senior fellow at the a former economic adviser to President Putin.

All the genuine opponents to the regime - Vladimir Bukovsky, Garry Kasparov, Vladimir Ryzhkov, Mikhail Kasyanov - were either not registered or forced not to participate in the election. No serious programs have been offered to the electorate by the candidates and there have been no debates.
In reality, the Kremlin has allowed no opposition and there has been no real competition. D.Medvedev was anointed by Vl.Putin and real opponents were kept out of the race, leaving just Communist G.Zuganov, V.Zhirinovsky and A.Bogdanov to stand. None of those three have undertaken any serious efforts to be elected - they were there just for form's sake.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/storie...517&EDATE=
Some declared, registered and dismissed candidates:
Boris Nemtsov, former Vice Prime Minister in Sergei Kiriyenko's Cabinet, was nominated by the Union of Right Forces and became a registered candidate. He later withdrew his bid and called on his supporters to vote for Kasyanov. Mikhail Kasyanov, a former Prime Minister and current leader of the People's Democratic Union, was registered as the candidate successfully, but later it was decided that too many of his signatures of support were forged and he was disqualified. Kasyanov appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, which rejected the appeal on February 6, 2008. Bogdanov also had a similar criminal investigation opened against him, but it was reported that even if the accusations are proven, his candidacy will not be dismissed. According to Kasyanov, NTV and other media intentionally lied to people about the Central Electoral Commission finding 60 thousand counterfeit signatures in his presidency bid. He says that despite very strong pressure by the local FSB and police in many Russian regions put on the people signing Kasyanovs bid to give false evidence of forgery, out of more than 2 million signatures only 170 were found to be made by different people.The rest of the contested signatures were related to minor technical problems with the gathered documents.
Grigory Yavlinsky, Leader of the Yabloko party, was widely expected to run for the presidency as a candidate of united liberal parties. However, at the Yabloko congress, on December 14, 2007, it was announced that Yavlinsky and his party would support the candidacy of Bukovsky. Vladimir Bukovsky - Soviet-era dissident - received a new Russian passport at the Russian Embassy in London on August 3, 2007. He arrived in Moscow in October to launch his campaign. His bid was refused on the grounds that he didn't live in Russia in the last 10.
Garry Kasparov, former World Chess Champion and United Civil Front leader, failed to nominate by the deadline, citing government obstructions in finding a suitable congress venue as the reason.
Under Russian election law, presidential contenders who were not affiliated to one of four major parties that won seats in parliament had to organise an "initiative group" meeting of at least 500 supporters before a deadline. "In all Moscow we have not been able to find a hall where our supporters could meet," Kasparov said. "We pay and the people agree. There are no problems. And then they call us to say they are refusing, can't give us the hall any more," he said. "They refuse to give us the hall for technical reasons."
Mr Kasparov accused Mr Putin of stifling the opposition through its dominance of the media and through new electoral laws that allegedly favour pro-Kremlin parties. <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7140946.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7140946.stm</a><!-- m -->
(To be continued)

[Yalta1945]

Elections were fair.

(In supplement to the reply posted above:)
Russian Novaya Gazeta claimed that there were forged election protocols and cases when independent observers were not allowed to monitor the election process. Journalist V.Shenderovich claimed that only 3.5% of voters came to the elections in certain North Caucasus regions according to independent observers, whereas the Central Election committee reportered more than 90% turnaround.
Writer and radio host Y.Latynina, known for her often sharp, polemic and radical statements, particularly for her claim that Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, French President Jacques Chirac, Chancellor of Germany Gerhard Schröder, and U.S. President George W. Bush have all been successfully "recruited" by Vladimir Putin to serve his political objectives, and her prediction that Mr.Putin would secure a third term, said at the Echo of Moscow that election fraud was inevitable. She said that according to Russian laws, local election committees are free to rewrite the election protocol after asking the independent observers to leave the voting place; and members of those committees are not punishable for the election fraud. Even more important are alleged manipulations with the Russian computerized election system followed pre-programmed instructions to automatically reject any favorable results for the opposition parties.
Russian programmer Shpilkin analyzed the results of Medvedev's election statistically and came to a conclusion that the results were falsified by the election committees. Shpilkin's analysis revealed typical statistics (for example Gaussian distribution of the percent of votes for the whole sample of voting stations) for all presidential candidates except for Medvedev. In case of Medvedev, statistical distributions were highly abnormal. Namely, there was a clear correlation between the reported voting attendance and the percent of votes for Medvedev, with spikes of votes for Medvedev at the round voting attendance numbers (85, 90, 95, 100%) and an enormous peak for the unrealistic, but numerous 100% attendance. Shpilking concluded that these extra votes for Medvedev were either added by the election officials or resulted from the voting of the state employees commanded to vote in a certain way.
Schoolteacher, Novosibirsk:
"They got us teachers together in the school a couple of weeks ago and told us to take absentee ballots and vote at work. They told us election day will be a working day. A few young teachers asked, 'What about freedom of expression?' They were told, 'If you want freedom, go and look for work in a different place.'
For more, read Kremlin accused of fixing presidential poll @ <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/01/russia">http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/01/russia</a><!-- m -->

[SiD]

Why do you want somebody to think Sarkozy is paranoic? Not ethical at all.

The world saw enough of paranoics assuming responsibility for THEIR nation.

yor words. i just said that sarkozy must think about interests of his nation.

Really? If we call good political decisions those that are based on denial of ethics, then what is good after all?

history will tell what desigion was bad what good. Sometimes rulers iron will and fist are bringing more good to nation that if they were great moralists or complietly boun by ethic. You see i do not say that politic must denie ethic, he just cant base his desigions on it. There are nessesities, opportunities sometimes choice between lesser evil.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe could not monitor the presidential elections because of severe restrictions on its observers by the Russian government.
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stated: for an election to be good it takes a good process, not just a good election day
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Press/StopP">http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Press/StopP</a><!-- m --> ... sp?ID=2013 (full text)

in text there is said that they have "doubts". I do not care about thier doubts and opinion actualy. if someone asked me i wont even bother to invite those observers, they are always unhappy and have many "doubts" if someone who thier country dont like is chosen.
You have listed some RIGHT condidates. You should know that RIGHT parties are UNPOPULAR in Russia this today it is just fact. They are blamed by many for 90s. So it is better for them to occuse present government than to admit they couldnt have any significant support anyway.

OOh i should believe novaya gazeta and Echo of Moscow without question? or they are the ONLY ones objective becouse they tell what you like?
And of course russian programmer Shpilkin (parhaps if he was Pravdin that would be better) is far more trustworthy than any official.

If you think that Putin or Medvedev won elections unfairly point me please condidate who would win " if they were fair".

[Yalta1945]

If we call good political decisions those that are based on denial of ethics, then what is good after all?

history will tell what desigion was bad what good. Sometimes rulers iron will and fist are bringing more good to nation that if they were great moralists or complietly boun by ethic.

History itself is not a science about what is good and what is bad.
Secondly, you don't seem to learn from your history. The reason for that might also be the version of history you wrote. Since good and bad for you has only relatively utilitarian meaning, a completely rewritten history is nothing bad to tou. The new rewritten version of history will tell us whether falsifying the history/reality was good or bad. 8-) The end will justify meanness. :nonnon

You see i do not say that politic must denie ethic, he just cant base his desigions on it. There are nessesities, opportunities sometimes choice between lesser evil.

Let's ask people if they are going to buy this tale when "necessities, opportunities, and lesser evil" will be applied to them. It's not justice, and courts in your country do not officially follow this line. Without justice states are no more than big gangs. But gangsterims is a crime, and you must see this absurdity seeded in your argument.
As for your reaction to the arguments that provide enough basis for not accepting the claim that elections in Russia were fair, I think it is miserable. You're picking up tiny details from the whole picture and just looking what scornful label you could attach to this name, to that surname, to certain media sources, and so on. While doing it, you look like carrying water in a sieve.
As you have similarly tried to distract attention from the essence of any problem by turning to some subjects that are not in any way related to the problem (very often it is the USA round every corner of your problems 8-) ), so you do now again. You don't trust any criticism, all the critics are just biased 8-) Peculiar.

Why should one dismiss one’s doubts based on the provided information in view of your smilies?
What are your doubts on other’s doubts based on?

Actually imposing sanctions against Russia is a very hard task.
So let’s imagine EU does it. But in the same easy way it is hard to imagine if this will have any effect, and more importantly for who?
I think for any country the energy resources count first than the economic relations, as you cannot build them in a market that lacks the basic power to keep it alive.

The stronger will not necessarily be the winner in the street fight, for it’s the will to fight that is crucial for the street fight. It happens similarly on the international stage. The brave has an advantage over the coward. The one who is more ready to suffer, sacrifice, and who is capable of sustaining losses, pain, and humiliation has an obvious advantage in the potential conflict. The society composed mostly by dudes and barbies has an obvious disadvantage.
I’ve often heard that Russia is so dependent on the cooperation with the West that it cannot engage in the conflict with the West. I’ve heard that sanctions against Russia would be too painful for her to bear, therefore Russia would not confront the West. Now I see it’s not true. Russia just hinted that there might be less disco parties and shows for us, and we are quick to bend on our knees. To save one’s face this capitulation is masked under respectability of “pragmatism” and “realism”. Does anybody still care if Russia has been observing its own commitments to international community?
Is there any use in pacifying countries which have certain reason to worry about Russia’s foreign policy if calculations based on the Russia’s dependence on cooperation with the West contain the fundamental flaw? After all, is there any use in collective security arrangements if partners aren’t pretty serious about the implementation of some actions plan when the time strikes?
Is there any use then in so big military spending of states if their soldiers exist just for parades?
Well, we are fortunately not talking about the hot war. I’d like to pose more theoretical question: is Europe capable to apply sanctions against Russia at all? (Even if there would be little doubt of her inhuman, violent and lawless actions.)

[SiD]

History itself is not a science about what is good and what is bad.
Secondly, you don't seem to learn from your history. The reason for that might also be the version of history you wrote. Since good and bad for you has only relatively utilitarian meaning, a completely rewritten history is nothing bad to tou. The new rewritten version of history will tell us whether falsifying the history/reality was good or bad. The end will justify meanness.

Youp history is not science about and bad. As life itself is not white and black. for example defeat of nazi is good, but to defeat them german cities were bombed, many civilians died, it is bad. So choice is to defeat nazi once and for all or to wait untill they rebuild and attack again. What would your highly ettical leader suggest? To hide behind some magino line?

Let's ask people if they are going to buy this tale when "necessities, opportunities, and lesser evil" will be applied to them. It's not justice, and courts in your country do not officially follow this line. Without justice states are no more than big gangs. But gangsterims is a crime, and you must see this absurdity seeded in your argument.
As for your reaction to the arguments that provide enough basis for not accepting the claim that elections in Russia were fair, I think it is miserable. You're picking up tiny details from the whole picture and just looking what scornful label you could attach to this name, to that surname, to certain media sources, and so on. While doing it, you look like carrying water in a sieve.
As you have similarly tried to distract attention from the essence of any problem by turning to some subjects that are not in any way related to the problem (very often it is the USA round every corner of your problems ), so you do now again. You don't trust any criticism, all the critics are just biased Peculiar.

Why should one dismiss one’s doubts based on the provided information in view of your smilies?
What are your doubts on other’s doubts based on?

Well and how many famalies of soldiers who died in Iraq are buyng story about democracy that is brought to Iraq? But story is bought and not by just one country.
Second Justice is wery WIDE word. EYE for EYE for example, it is justice doesnt it? But i do not think that courts in EU countries are sentecsing murderers to death. Becouse they are acting according to LAW. And of course if big gang is making people life better for most of citizens, brings order and security to citizens it isnt bad to have such gang.
It isnt my reaction it are your arguments misarable. 2 media sources and few forbidden condidates who couldnt even have 5% of people support anyway? And of course some "doubts" , "regrets", "wishes" and "hopes" of observers? do not make me lough. As i said i speak according expirience not according articles. There is just no political force today in Russia that can rival Putin and his party. that is why elections are so predictable. Right partyes and communists had LARGE support in early 90s but lost it themselves. Look at Ukraine. thier elections were called fair and democratic what is happening now? How many reelections they will have?
And were you have seen me mentioning USA related to elections? 8-)

I’d like to pose more theoretical question: is Europe capable to apply sanctions against Russia at all? (Even if there would be little doubt of her inhuman, violent and lawless actions.)

Some sanctions Europe is certainly capable to apply, but what is doubted is effect of those sanctions and results of such policy.

[Yalta1945]

History itself is not a science about what is good and what is bad.
Secondly, you don't seem to learn from your history. The reason for that might also be the version of history you wrote. Since good and bad for you has only relatively utilitarian meaning, a completely rewritten history is nothing bad to tou. The new rewritten version of history will tell us whether falsifying the history/reality was good or bad. The end will justify meanness.

Youp history is not science about and bad. As life itself is not white and black. for example defeat of nazi is good, but to defeat them german cities were bombed, many civilians died, it is bad. So choice is to defeat nazi once and for all or to wait untill they rebuild and attack again. What would your highly ettical leader suggest? To hide behind some magino line?

Many people were also deliberately and unjustifiably killed. There were also such shameful episodes as the Red Army waiting for Nazis to crush Warsaw uprising. Nazis were defeated but their former allies Communists were not. It would have been much better for the whole world if Russians had met Americans and other anti-Nazi allies not in Germany but somewhere along the Urals.

Let's ask people if they are going to buy this tale when "necessities, opportunities, and lesser evil" will be applied to them. It's not justice, and courts in your country do not officially follow this line. Without justice states are no more than big gangs. But gangsterims is a crime, and you must see this absurdity seeded in your argument.

<...> And of course if big gang is making people life better for most of citizens, brings order and security to citizens it isnt bad to have such gang.

Such reality is simply a fantasie.

Well and how many famalies of soldiers who died in Iraq are buyng story about democracy that is brought to Iraq? But story is bought and not by just one country.
<...>
And were you have seen me mentioning USA related to elections? 8-)

So what is then mentioning Iraq? 8-) And look at many of the previous posts of yours and of other Russians - Americans were everywhere, you invited them even when they were not needed at all.
But it makes fun. We start talking of the war against Georgia but finish discussing the USA 8-) And we repeat it twenty times. ;-) (Smart!)
I express my regret of seeing you keep carrying water in a sieve.

[SiD]

Many people were also deliberately and unjustifiably killed. There were also such shameful episodes as the Red Army waiting for Nazis to crush Warsaw uprising. Nazis were defeated but their former allies Communists were not. It would have been much better for the whole world if Russians had met Americans and other anti-Nazi allies not in Germany but somewhere along the Urals.

I wont comment such nonsense.

Such reality is simply a fantasie.

Youp great answer if you have nothing to answer.

SiD wrote:
Well and how many famalies of soldiers who died in Iraq are buyng story about democracy that is brought to Iraq? But story is bought and not by just one country.
<...>
And were you have seen me mentioning USA related to elections?

So what is then mentioning Iraq? And look at many of the previous posts of yours and of other Russians - Americans were everywhere, you invited them even when they were not needed at all.
But it makes fun. We start talking of the war against Georgia but finish discussing the USA And we repeat it twenty times. (Smart!)
I express my regret of seeing you keep carrying water in a sieve.

You should READ first. Iraq was mentionet in my reply about politics in general. You havent noticed? i am not surprised. I made letters bigger and used red color so you can see.

[Yalta1945]

Well and how many famalies of soldiers who died in Iraq are buyng story about democracy that is brought to Iraq? But story is bought and not by just one country.
<...>
And were you have seen me mentioning USA related to elections?

So what is then mentioning Iraq? And look at many of the previous posts of yours and of other Russians - Americans were everywhere, you invited them even when they were not needed at all.
But it makes fun. We start talking of the war against Georgia but finish discussing the USA And we repeat it twenty times. (Smart!)
I express my regret of seeing you keep carrying water in a sieve.

You should READ first. Iraq was mentionet in my reply about politics in general. You havent noticed? i am not surprised. I made letters bigger and used red color so you can see.

Ok, I will also make letters bigger:
"As you have similarly tried to distract attention from the essence of any problem by turning to some subjects that are not in any way related to the problem (very often it is the USA round every corner of your problems ), so you do now again."
Was it needed to mention Iraq again..? :?
Related to elections or to something else - it does not change the essence.
You just dismissed everyone, including PACE and OCSE, all observers that did not share your view, and all the critics.

[SiD]

Ok, I will also make letters bigger:
"As you have similarly tried to distract attention from the essence of any problem by turning to some subjects that are not in any way related to the problem (very often it is the USA round every corner of your problems ), so you do now again."
Was it needed to mention Iraq again..?
Related to elections or to something else - it does not change the essence.
You just dismissed everyone, including PACE and OCSE, all observers that did not share your view, and all the critics.

Well have i mentioned USA related to elections? NO. Have you admitted it? Nop. you just accuse me in changing subject and bringing USA everywere. It is becouse they ARE everythere with thier nose in others business.
You can focus on Ukrain than. Why in this DEMOCRATIC coutry FREE and FAIR elections are taking place so OFTEN?

[Yalta1945]

Ok, I will also make letters bigger:
"As you have similarly tried to distract attention from the essence of any problem by turning to some subjects that are not in any way related to the problem (very often it is the USA round every corner of your problems ), so you do now again."
Was it needed to mention Iraq again..?
Related to elections or to something else - it does not change the essence.
You just dismissed everyone, including PACE and OCSE, all observers that did not share your view, and all the critics.

Well have i mentioned USA related to elections? NO. Have you admitted it? Nop. you just accuse me in changing subject and bringing USA everywere. It is becouse they ARE everythere with thier nose in others business.
You can focus on Ukrain than. Why in this DEMOCRATIC coutry FREE and FAIR elections are taking place so OFTEN?

Ukraine is a young democracy with it's own specific features. The latest crisis occured thanks to the "helpful hand" of Russia. Congratulations! 8-)
There are countries where democracy was given longer time to develop but where change of government is also frequent.
The USA is an old democracy. Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville published his "Democracy in America" (De la démocratie en Amérique) in 1835. What was Russia like then? Russia (helped by its friends from the West)was still too busy with fighting Poles and Lithuanians . And many years afterwards even some quite bright people in Russia justified these actions. Meanwhile, Russia remained the country where serfdom was not abolished. Compare the rest part of the history, and you will feel the great diffrence. Don't underestimate America's democratic potential, if you can guess what I mean.

[SiD]

Ukraine is a young democracy with it's own specific features. The latest crisis occured thanks to the "helpful hand" of Russia. Congratulations!
There are countries where democracy was given longer time to develop but where change of government is also frequent.
The USA is an old democracy. Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville published his "Democracy in America" (De la démocratie en Amérique) in 1835. What was Russia like then? Russia (helped by its friends from the West)was still too busy with fighting Poles and Lithuanians . And many years afterwards even some quite bright people in Russia justified these actions. Meanwhile, Russia remained the country where serfdom was not abolished. Compare the rest part of the history, and you will feel the great diffrence. Don't underestimate America's democratic potential, if you can guess what I mean.

Wow that is cool . No bad thing ever happened without Russian helpfull hand . Just point me please how this helpfull hand has helped to make current crisis?
USA are old democracy there is no doubts. But as nation USA could be seen as young. Of course there are huge differencess in Russian and US historys, it is natural. Japan for example was empire untill the end of second world war, GB has monarchs still. Everyone has thier own history. I dont underestimate any potential of US, but it doesnt mean i like thier foreign policy.

[Yalta1945]

Wow that is cool . No bad thing ever happened without Russian helpfull hand . Just point me please how this helpfull hand has helped to make current crisis?

Briefly, events in Ukraine were catalyzed by Russia‘s war against Georgia, and everything that was related to it.

[SiD]

Wow that is cool . No bad thing ever happened without Russian helpfull hand . Just point me please how this helpfull hand has helped to make current crisis?

Briefly, events in Ukraine were catalyzed by Russia‘s war against Georgia, and everything that was related to it.

I find it hard to believe. After all it is democratic if parlament is questioning presidents actions. And you know that prime minister is Timoshenko, not pro-russian politic to say the least.

[Terry]

Things happening now in Ukraine could be an early-planned Russian script. Of course, I'm not talking about everything, but, since the Ukraine supported Georgia in the conflict, Russia was interested in making a recession appear in this country.

[SiD]

Things happening now in Ukraine could be an early-planned Russian script. Of course, I'm not talking about everything, but, since the Ukraine supported Georgia in the conflict, Russia was interested in making a recession appear in this country.

Yeah and if some asteroid would fall on USA it will also will be Russian foult becouse we dont like Bush. Those "democraticly elected democratic leaders" are just strugling for power thats all.

[sektor_Gaza]

Let's put Yushi on a rocket and send him to aliens! Or may be he's one of then already? uper

[Canpee Further]

Let's put Yushi on a rocket and send him to aliens! Or may be he's one of then already? uper

Can we just send him to Moscow, Pleeeazzze? You guys are sooo much better at shooting trouble makers!!

[Canthink further]

PLEEEEaZZZe, don't send him to Russia ---we need him in no way :roll:

[Lenus]

Let's put Yushi on a rocket and send him to aliens! Or may be he's one of then already? uper

Well, you tried that once already didn't you? But apparently there was only one vacancy and they accepted only Litvinenko.

[Guest]

But apparently there was only one vacancy and they accepted only Litvinenko.

So pity for Ushenko! Nobody seems to need him :lol: