Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
It isn't going to stop just because you made some silly law. Laws that can not be enforced are just a waste of perfectly good paper.
Russia wasn't even the only country to meddle in the US elections. The only reason this is so focused on is because the whole "Russia is evil" tangent that Americans seem to love so much.

Well, see, there's this thing where they do it in the US. There is this thing where if you go to soemone's country, and, say, kill soemone, they can get you deported. Just because Russia is unlikely to deport these people, particularly those associated with Vladimir Putin, does not mean that no one does.

Or, if Russia really feels that way, then by all means, I should be able to go to Russia and do things that are illegal there but not in the US, and get away with it.

If you were to go to Russia and do something illegal there you would be arrested by Russian police and face charges before a Russian court. Same way if a Russia goes to the US and does something illegal there, he will be arrested by US police and face charges before a US court.
The difficulty is that sometimes, people can do something illegal in your country without actually being physically present there (or if they are but leave before you can get to them). That means you can't arrest them. You can ask the country where they reside to arrest them for you, of course. But that is usually a difficult diplomatic process. And since Russia doesn't extradite its citizens (only in extraordinary circumstances like murder) that means that if a Russian does something in the US, he is perfectly safe from persecution as long as he is in Russia (or in any country that does not extradite to the US, which is most places in the world). It works both ways, so the same goes for an American who does something in Russia (or another country). The US generally does not extradite its citizens, so as long as you avoid being physically present in the target country or leave before getting arrested you can get away with almost everything. UN organisations like Interpol try to combat this, but like most UN organisations they are not terribly effective. The list of fugitive criminals who reside in other countries is pretty long (at least I know it is for the Netherlands and Russia).

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I'm still baffled how these attempts to influence elections are ok when we do it, but it's somehow wrong when someone else does it.

Because when you (assuming you're an American citizen) do it, it' politics. When someone does it to you, it's considered an act of war by some countries. The US has extensive laws prohibiting foreign persons from attempting to manipulate the US elections. By a wide variety of means.

You know, maybe someone should tell the US government that making laws for foreign persons isn't going to be very effective... You can prohibit those pesky foreigners from meddling in your elections all you want, but those prohibitions are pretty much powerless since they are well... foreigners.

To be fair, the US has extradition treaties with a large number of nations that would allow US law to reach such people, and if they don't have diplomatic immunity can be charged if found within the borders of the US.

Nobody expects Russia to actually extradite anyone, that's never going to happen, but not every foreign nation is Russia. The recent FIFA scandals were prosecuted in US courts against foreign nationals who committed banking crimes in the US.

That said, does Russia not have nearly identical laws? They probably don't expect to get extraditions often, but I'm sure if some were found within the borders of the Russian Federation engaging in such activity it would not go well.

Besides, it is not like the US or other countries do not meddle in foreign elections (the US is in fact more active in this than Russia is, according to academic studies).

I don't think anyone would debate that the US routinely meddles in foreign elections, the hypocrisy is obvious and rank, but just as the nations the US meddles with naturally take steps to minimize and counter that activity, so will the US.

Of course, if someone wanted in the US was found in the US he would be arrested. The US also has extradition treaties with a number of countries (though this does not automatically mean that they will actually extradite people) So the simple trick is not to visit the US or countries that are likely to extradite you to the US if you are wanted by the US. And yeah, Russia does have same kind of laws as the US in this. I think all countries do.

Edit: the US has more extradition treaties than I thought I remembered it did. So apart from the EU, the US also has extradition treaties with all of South America, most of Southeast Asia and about 1/3rd of Africa. And of course with Canada, Australia and NZ. That said, the US also has an extradition treaty with Turkey, yet it refuses to extradite people in the US wanted by Turkey (and Turkey would be highly unlikely to extradite anyone to the US as well given the current political climate), so extradition treaties can be quite meaningless. It usually still comes down to a game of complicated diplomatic negotiations and (geo)political considerations. In the arena of international politics, 'justice' and 'law' aren't very important considerations.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

If you were to go to Russia and do something illegal there you would be arrested by Russian police and face charges before a Russian court. Same way if a Russia goes to the US and does something illegal there, he will be arrested by US police and face charges before a US court.
The difficulty is that sometimes, people can do something illegal in your country without actually being physically present there (or if they are but leave before you can get to them). That means you can't arrest them. You can ask the country where they reside to arrest them for you, of course. But that is usually a difficult diplomatic process. And since Russia doesn't extradite its citizens (only in extraordinary circumstances like murder) that means that if a Russian does something in the US, he is perfectly safe from persecution as long as he is in Russia (or in any country that does not extradite to the US, which is most places in the world). It works both ways, so the same goes for an American who does something in Russia (or another country). The US generally does not extradite its citizens, so as long as you avoid being physically present in the target country or leave before getting arrested you can get away with almost everything. UN organisations like Interpol try to combat this, but like most UN organisations they are not terribly effective. The list of fugitive criminals who reside in other countries is pretty long (at least I know it is for the Netherlands and Russia).

Yes, but these people went to the US, and committed crimes while physically present there. (Unlike, say, Kim Dotcom or Dmitry Sklyarov)

Oh, and in an entirely unrelated matter, the number of places that extradite to the US is much, much larger than the one's that extradite to Russia. I looked into it once, you know, for a friend who had a surprisingly large number of machine guns and pot plants for a paroled felon.

If that's all it takes, then ALL of us that posted in the US Politics threads before the election face indictment for meddling.

 Just Tony wrote:
If that's all it takes, then ALL of us that posted in the US Politics threads before the election face indictment for meddling.

My prison gang will be the most FABULOUS prison gang ever. With that I will be content

So if a Russian does X it's considered an act of war against America.
Surely if an American does exactly the same thing it should be considered treason?

Perhaps it's not that meddling in an election should be illegal. [Which is stupid] but that spreading lies should be. [Isn't that supposed to be slander?]

Well, never let it be said that Washington doesn't have a sense of humour.

Foreign meddling?

Anyway, back OT. This has been a theme in UK politics with Brexit, and the accusations that Russia may have meddled in the Brexit vote, but I'll repeat what I said over there:

The NSA, the CIA, the FBI, spend billions a year, employ thousands of people, and are at the forefront of global surveillance.

And yet somehow, we're being asked to believe that they missed Russia 'rigging' the Brexit vote, and then only a few months later, they 'rigged' the US election,

and nobody at these agencies picked up on it?

I'm not buying it.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


And yet somehow, we're being asked to believe that they missed Russia 'rigging' the Brexit vote, and then only a few months later, they 'rigged' the US election,

and nobody at these agencies picked up on it?

I'm not buying it.

To be fair, I think there have been accusations of attempted meddling in both events since the start, including accusations from the agencies you mention.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


And yet somehow, we're being asked to believe that they missed Russia 'rigging' the Brexit vote, and then only a few months later, they 'rigged' the US election,

and nobody at these agencies picked up on it?

I'm not buying it.

To be fair, I think there have been accusations of attempted meddling in both events since the start, including accusations from the agencies you mention.

The Christopher Steele dossier, which should have been laughed out of town, often gets brought up in these conversations, and that seems to have set the hare running.

Without getting too political, the dossier falls apart at the first application of logic being applied to it.

Again, I'm walking a fine line here, but I'll say this.

There is a certain person, who ran for a certain election, and there are certain media outlets who have been out to get that person since the 1990s.

For more than 20 years, people have been drip fed negative news against that person. Therefore, these people would NEVER vote for that person, even if you gave them a billion dollars each.

Any Russian 'meddling' would not have made a blind bit of difference to how these people voted.

In the UK, we have people who have supported Brexit since the 1970s, which obviously pre-dates Putin.

No force on heaven or earth would have changed the views of these millions. Some people's political views are set in stone.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


And yet somehow, we're being asked to believe that they missed Russia 'rigging' the Brexit vote, and then only a few months later, they 'rigged' the US election,

and nobody at these agencies picked up on it?

I'm not buying it.

To be fair, I think there have been accusations of attempted meddling in both events since the start, including accusations from the agencies you mention.

If they have been there since the start, how come only now its being done? Just a wildcard, but I'm guessing if Hillary won, the "Russian bogeyman" would have quietly vanished...

 Dr. Mills wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


And yet somehow, we're being asked to believe that they missed Russia 'rigging' the Brexit vote, and then only a few months later, they 'rigged' the US election,

and nobody at these agencies picked up on it?

I'm not buying it.

To be fair, I think there have been accusations of attempted meddling in both events since the start, including accusations from the agencies you mention.

If they have been there since the start, how come only now its being done? Just a wildcard, but I'm guessing if Hillary won, the "Russian bogeyman" would have quietly vanished...

Or, you know, investigations take time to do properly? But no, it's all a conspiracy I tell you!

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
There is a certain person, who ran for a certain election, and there are certain media outlets who have been out to get that person since the 1990s.

Since the 90s? No. No one was that against him until he entered center stage cause while famous he wasn't exactly a household name everyone could identify at the drop of a hat, nor were his political views widely reported. He was famous for a hit reality TV show, and being rich and not much else which is a farcry from what he's currently famous for.

Any Russian 'meddling' would not have made a blind bit of difference to how these people voted.

A little banal. If political advertising didn't work, no one would spend money on it let alone tens of millions of dollars or the absurd hundreds of millions spent in American politics. And there is no assertion that the meddling effected the outcome and the indictment itself states that it makes no determination that it did.

In the UK, we have people who have supported Brexit since the 1970s, which obviously pre-dates Putin.

That's beside the point. I remember reading articles making such accusations before the Brexit vote, especially from places that are big on tracking social media trends like Slate and HuffPo. I'm not arguing their right, but you're absolutely wrong in acting like this is something that's only just now come up. These assertions have been floating around for years and only since the 2016 Presidential Election (and yes the Steele dossier) made them more widely know among the public.

If they have been there since the start, how come only now its being done?

Because people are fickle and never do anything about anything until well after they maybe should have done something?

Just a wildcard, but I'm guessing if Hillary won, the "Russian bogeyman" would have quietly vanished...

On the one hand this makes total sense and I agree. On the other hand, Hillary lost the election and Fox news still runs reports about her conspiring to sell Uranium to Russia so no. I think even if she won this bogeyman would still be there and I think creating the bogeyman was ultimately the point of the entire campaign, not actually effecting the outcome. Why bother trying to control political outcomes when you can induce chaos by throwing outcomes into question (which is exactly what the indictment is accusing the indicted of). The later is a hell of a lot more realistic as goal, while the former is something you'll likely only find in a Hollywood thriller. It would probably look different though and you'd totally have a whole different set of people dedicating their every waking moment to being angry about it/denying it at every turn. We'd certainly probably still be living with angry Sanders reporters demanding the DNC do... whatever it is they want the DNC to do no one really talks about that much anymore probably because Hillary lost (and I'm sure we all know who is accused of leaking the information that brought all that out).

I think the person DINLT referred to was the other one, and that the political opposition to her has been going on for so long that the Russian campaign didn't matter.

Which, of course, ignores the fact that it's easier to play on already existing prejudices than to create new ones from nothing. It's the same thing with Russian campaigns surrounding Brexit; it's not that the sentiments wouldn't exist without Russian involvment, it's that they wouldn't have anywhere near the same strength without an orchestrated desinformation campaign behind them.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


And yet somehow, we're being asked to believe that they missed Russia 'rigging' the Brexit vote, and then only a few months later, they 'rigged' the US election,

and nobody at these agencies picked up on it?

I'm not buying it.

To be fair, I think there have been accusations of attempted meddling in both events since the start, including accusations from the agencies you mention.

The Christopher Steele dossier, which should have been laughed out of town, often gets brought up in these conversations, and that seems to have set the hare running.

Without getting too political, the dossier falls apart at the first application of logic being applied to it.

Again, I'm walking a fine line here, but I'll say this.

There is a certain person, who ran for a certain election, and there are certain media outlets who have been out to get that person since the 1990s.

For more than 20 years, people have been drip fed negative news against that person. Therefore, these people would NEVER vote for that person, even if you gave them a billion dollars each.

Any Russian 'meddling' would not have made a blind bit of difference to how these people voted.

In the UK, we have people who have supported Brexit since the 1970s, which obviously pre-dates Putin.

No force on heaven or earth would have changed the views of these millions. Some people's political views are set in stone.

It’s not about changing the view of the millions who would vote one way or the other. It’s about the undecided to swing the election. On top of that Russia would like one outcome, but their main aim is to cause disagreement and the kind of partisan behaviour we have seen. For them a divided nation is weaker, politically, economically and militarily.

There are two issues here, lazy media polling and false flagged opinion. Neither are real problems.

The former occurs when media perform online polling to assess trends, and dont bother to check where the numbers are coming from. Any online poll is asking a global audience to contribute. It wont just be Russians either, China is big on poll meddling, they just tend to use issue polls and other targets.

As for false flagging,opinion pieces could be from anywhere, and for any purpose.

The solution is simple, less hype on polls and internet media to be taken by mainstream media. If an internet poll reveals x, then the poll is worthless, ask 1000 people on the street instead.

No Russians turned up at voting booths with snow of their boots and told people 'Nyet' when trying to vote for their prefered candidate.

The meddling charge is bs outside of actual cases of vote theft. It voters do not factcheck who they are getting their opinions from that is their problem.

 feeder wrote:
Actually, at least one American citizen has pled guilty to identify theft and fraud in connection to this.

It's obvious to anyone who has been paying attention that Russia has been meddling in US and other countries elections for some time now.

Turns out being connected to everyone all the time is a double edged sword

Its what the inteligence services do - we do it, they do it. Why is everyone pretending otherwise.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Its what the inteligence services do - we do it, they do it. Why is everyone pretending otherwise.

Because that's a bs excuse.

No one should do it.

That the US has only gotten it's panties in a tizzy because now we're the victim of what developed nations have been doing for ages is a sign of hypocrisy and childish short sightedness (things I love to accuse America of because hot damn are we hypocritical and childishly short sighted).

It's not an argument for how we should all just get over it.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Its what the inteligence services do - we do it, they do it. Why is everyone pretending otherwise.

Because that's a bs excuse.

No one should do it.

That the US has only gotten it's panties in a tizzy because now we're the victim of what developed nations have been doing for ages is a sign of hypocrisy and childish short sightedness (things I love to accuse America of because hot damn are we hypocritical and childishly short sighted).

It's not an argument for how we should all just get over it.

I didn't say it should be ignored - I said we all do it and why are we prerending that its just the Russians?

 Mr Morden wrote:
I said we all do it and why are we prerending that its just the Russians?

I don't see anyone pretending it's just them, but then the thread title is "First Russian indictments are in" and as I understand it, discussing the topic is usually what's expected to happen on discussion boards

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The NSA, the CIA, the FBI, spend billions a year, employ thousands of people, and are at the forefront of global surveillance.

And yet somehow, we're being asked to believe that they missed Russia 'rigging' the Brexit vote, and then only a few months later, they 'rigged' the US election,

Global surveillance still requires that the people doing it know what they're looking for and connect all the pieces. War on Terror probably also gets priority over faked social media accounts, technically legal bank transfers and the like.

You haven't happened to see the reports that certain political parties in Europe have received bank loans from Russian banks? A party would seem to be a very bad sort of customer, unlikely to ever be able to pay back, but if someone higher up (Putin?) says they get a loan they get a loan. The loans are technically legal - the banks operate offices in some EU countries - and the loonies that get funding spread confusion. Kreml is staunchly against "facists" at home, but if some far right anti-EU party can cause division in the EU (and maybe are against the sanctions for Crimea) they're perfectly useful fellows. Why send a Russian to tell the comrades his opinion when it's far less suspicious to fund a local entity who has the right opinions?

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Ok, I know that the mods will freak because US politics, but hear me out, this may effect the whole damn world.

I'm still waiting to hear why a common political practice (i.e. trying to influence an election abroad) undertaken by virtually every nation of stature over the last century, is suddenly groundbreakingly global enough to justify breaching the US politics ban. Because y'know, it isn't just in place until BaronIveagh feels passionately enough about a specific US political subject to override it.

Because Americans have spent over a year next-leveling their lid-flipping (and we're not done yet!) and this is a nice causal off-topic thread that leaves convenient breadcrumbs toward what'll be known as the beginning of the end.

The FBI was specifically afraid to discuss it during the election because they did not want to undermine faith in the democratic system; Trump was talking about rigged elections from the onset. But they were aware of meddling, just not the extent. Like someone else said, investigations take time.

This does affect the world because it is evidence of a Russian effort to affect foreign elections much larger and more sophisticated than previously known. Obviously they aren't going to restrict meddling to just US elections, so the global connection is pretty clear.

Statements to the effect of 'but the US does it too!' is just whataboutism. To say that the indictments won't lead to criminal charges for the individuals involved IMO is pretty accurate, but to say that the indictments are pointless is willfully naive.

Statements to the effect of 'but the US does it too!' is just whataboutism.

No these are historical facts, with real historical consequences in places as varied from Central America to South Vietnam to Russia itself post Cold War...

It is perfectly valid and legitimate to criticise the USA on this, as well as recognising Russian attempts at inteference in foreign elections.

And yes, I am aware that when my own nation ruled the world at one time, they were equaly as ruthless in their pursuit of power.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

This does affect the world

It really doesn't. The thread is solely about American elections. Your average citizen in Paraguay/South Africa/Iran/Pakistan/the Cook Islands/Greece/Brazil/virtually every other nation on the planet doesn't give two feths about Russians paying a few Americans to try and influence their election. This subject is of no more 'global' importance than several thousand other aspects of US politics; and just like them, not of sufficient importance to justify breaking a clearly delineated forum rule.

If this was a specifically targeted discussion thread about Russian foreign policy and included their inteference in French elections, British referendums and so on, you might have a point. But right now this is just a thinly veiled American politics thread.

Spetulhu wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The NSA, the CIA, the FBI, spend billions a year, employ thousands of people, and are at the forefront of global surveillance.

And yet somehow, we're being asked to believe that they missed Russia 'rigging' the Brexit vote, and then only a few months later, they 'rigged' the US election,

Global surveillance still requires that the people doing it know what they're looking for and connect all the pieces. War on Terror probably also gets priority over faked social media accounts, technically legal bank transfers and the like.

You haven't happened to see the reports that certain political parties in Europe have received bank loans from Russian banks? A party would seem to be a very bad sort of customer, unlikely to ever be able to pay back, but if someone higher up (Putin?) says they get a loan they get a loan. The loans are technically legal - the banks operate offices in some EU countries - and the loonies that get funding spread confusion. Kreml is staunchly against "facists" at home, but if some far right anti-EU party can cause division in the EU (and maybe are against the sanctions for Crimea) they're perfectly useful fellows. Why send a Russian to tell the comrades his opinion when it's far less suspicious to fund a local entity who has the right opinions?

I agree with you and I don't deny that Russia has been funding fringe parties all over Europe.

But I'll say what I always say in these circumstances: only Americans can defeat America.

A nation that is confident and secure in its values, with an educated populace that is actively engaged in politics and civil society, (as the USA was at one time in its history) will never be defeated by outside interference.

Russian meddling is only a symptom of a system that is suffering apathy from voter disengagement, the corrupting effects of money on politics, and two political parties that hollowed out shells of their former glories.

A fish rots from the head down as the saying goes...

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The FBI was specifically afraid to discuss it during the election because they did not want to undermine faith in the democratic system; Trump was talking about rigged elections from the onset. But they were aware of meddling, just not the extent. Like someone else said, investigations take time.

This does affect the world because it is evidence of a Russian effort to affect foreign elections much larger and more sophisticated than previously known. Obviously they aren't going to restrict meddling to just US elections, so the global connection is pretty clear.

Statements to the effect of 'but the US does it too!' is just whataboutism. To say that the indictments won't lead to criminal charges for the individuals involved IMO is pretty accurate, but to say that the indictments are pointless is willfully naive.

"Sigh"

Not what i said - we are discussiing the Russian interfereance which is being investigated - what is interesting to me is the outrage of media outlets etc that one country is doing it when its actually normal practice for intelligence agencies.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Statements to the effect of 'but the US does it too!' is just whataboutism.

No these are historical facts, with real historical consequences in places as varied from Central America to South Vietnam to Russia itself post Cold War...

It is perfectly valid and legitimate to criticise the USA on this, as well as recognising Russian attempts at inteference in foreign elections.

And yes, I am aware that when my own nation ruled the world at one time, they were equaly as ruthless in their pursuit of power.

No, it's a textbook case of whataboutism, especially since it is being used to deflect criticism away from Russia. The fact that it's true is entirely irrelevant and frankly your reply shows that you don't understand what "Whataboutism" means in the first place. It's not about the validity of the criticism, it's about the relevance. How is the US's meddling in other countries relevant to the Russians meddling in the US? Make a separate thread on the US's meddling if that's what you're interested in discussing (well, don't, as it'd be a banned subject, but hypothetically) but stop dragging it in when it's not what is being discussed.

Wow, they spent as much as up to one point two million dollars per month on facebook memes. No wonder they could topple someone who spent one point four billion dollars on their campaign.

Rosebuddy wrote:
Wow, they spent as much as up to one point two million dollars per month on facebook memes. No wonder they could topple someone who spent one point four billion dollars on their campaign.

Yup, that's pretty much exactly what happened. /eyeroll

 Ouze wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:
Wow, they spent as much as up to one point two million dollars per month on facebook memes. No wonder they could topple someone who spent one point four billion dollars on their campaign.

Yup, that's pretty much exactly what happened. /eyeroll

Facebook must have been raking it in as part of sugested content