It's so cheap and so effective, I'm sure everyone does it.
Of course totalitarian regimes exist to keep the totalitarian regime in power, at the expense if necessary of everything else. But the Russian state is comprised of the core ethnic Russian territory, which we think of as Russia, but then also have a VERY large population and land exposure of the -Stans as vassal states to be exploited.
None of those stans want to be with Russia. Of course for Russia, losing control of those provinces will mean exposure on all sides from continental invasion, a massive loss of resources and wealth, and worst of all would motivate the regime to be toppled as weak.
It would be foolish to think the Russians aren't doing it. There was demonstrable evidence of them interfering in the Clinton-Trump election.
There is hints of substantial dark money sloshing around Washington from China and Russia. Why would there not, when Saudi (notice how almost every President goes to Saudi Arabia to kiss ass at the end of their terms?) and Israeli already is, although those are more clear geopolitical interests.
Because the quiet agreement on both sides of the aisle is "don't stop any money trains", there isn't the proper attention on this influence, but the Ukraine funding holdup, which was really funny money accounting of valuing old stockpiles being pulled from warehouses that was going to just be scrapped in the near future anyway, was a bizarre political event.
To me that really felt like Russian dark money, because the Ukrainians were basically kept without ammo for months and months and the Russians made substantial gains. Why would they not?
Regardless, the current administration is still showing weakness and taking it. The Russians are constantly escalating the war, and are now shipping in foreign North Korean troops, and NATO should respond in kind with its own direct troop assistance.
The Russians have for decades bragged about fomenting discontent in foreign powers, ironically as their country has economically and demographically faded.
We supposedly have invested in state of the art information warfare, but the weakness is that we SUPPOSEDLY can't turn those weapons on our population, while our main opponents can use their capabilities at will domestically or internationally.
How are these Stans exploited, exactly?
>None of those stans want to be with Russia.
Up to third of their GDP is coming from the remittances and it's mostly from Russia. The worst thing Russia can do to them is to close the border.
>but the weakness is that we SUPPOSEDLY can't turn those weapons on our population
Your conviction that -stans are exploited by Russia and don't want to deal with Russia is the proof that American information warfare is working quite well against its own population.
Message of support from a guy who has a Polish background; lots of us know this Western bullshit, hypocrisy and downright psychopathy and are sickened by it. Slavs fighting Slavs for the benefit of American interests. Sigh.
Looking forward to Russia solving this stupid Banderite problem once and for all.
Pity Polish government is also crazy.
Best of luck friend
and sticking that into google gives a link to it: https://www.isdglobal.org/digital_dispatches/russian-propaga...
The word interference doesn't make it into the abc article and the "russia amplified hurricane disinformation" seems pretty provenn from links in the ISD articles to posts from RT, Sputnik and Dmitry Medvedev doing just that.
Not to say there weren't legit criticisms, just that the Russians were trying to stir things.
Both articles are quoting prominent US politicians and goes on to detail Fema's response.
> and Dmitry Medvedev doing just that.
How does a vague statement from Russian politician "amplify disinformation"?
Is the bar for "amplifying disinformation" as low as quoting US politicians/presidential candidate?
This looks like damage control trying to shift blame and make legit criticism looks like Russian interference