Elon Musk leads 116 experts calling for outright ban on killer robots

[Fweethawt]

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/20/elon-musk-killer-robots-experts-outright-ban-lethal-autonomous-weapons-war

 

Open letter signed by Tesla chief and Google’s Mustafa Suleyman urges UN to block use of lethal autonomous weapons to prevent third age of war.

[pantheory]

The problem may be how precisely they define the meaning of the words "lethal autonomous weapons." If not defined at all, or if too precisely defined, then such an entity could be designed around the definition or its interpretation. If too broadly defined then some of the key members of the U.N., including the US, might not sign such a proposal. 

[Vigile]

Agree. Let's start with drones. 

[Geezer]

Yeah, much better to kill pilots & soldiers than drones. I keep thinking the PC bandwagon is full, but apparently it isn't. How about we declare all nuclear weapons should be banned. Oh wait, we did that already. 

 

I'm thinking soldiers & police officers would rather have robots search room by room for armed combatants/ suspects than do it themselves. I thinks it's that old let's not get killed doing our job today if we don't have to thing. 

 

Robots are inevitable & whether that ultimately proves to be a good or bad thing will be determined at some future date, but I think it's probably a good thing. 

[Vigile]

Do you realize how drones are being used? The president has a kill list and drones are sent into countries all over the world taking out people who have never had a trial and who are on sovereign soil where no war has been declared. This happens in over 100 sovereign nations (who the fuck do we think we are?) around the globe without permission from those nations to operate, much less commit acts of war. Even US citizens have been taken out -- again, with no due process. 

So, no, we shouldn't be sending in soldiers or planes either. The drones just make it easier for us to break international law. 

[Geezer]

2 hours ago, Vigile said:

Do you realize how drones are being used? The president has a kill list and drones are sent into countries all over the world taking out people who have never had a trial and who are on sovereign soil where no war has been declared. This happens in over 100 sovereign nations (who the fuck do we think we are?) around the globe without permission from those nations to operate, much less commit acts of war. Even US citizens have been taken out -- again, with no due process. 

So, no, we shouldn't be sending in soldiers or planes either. The drones just make it easier for us to break international law. 

 

It's called war & terrorism. The object is to kill the enemy before they kill you. And do you honestly believe Russia, China, Iran, & North Korea aren't developing these weapons? MAD may sound insane but it has probably prevented WWIII from occurring long before now. And terrorists are enemy combatants not criminals. They don't get trials they get exterminated whenever & wherever possible.

 

How many countries has Russia invaded & how many militant groups have they armed & supported? Make sure you hands are clean before you point fingers. 

[Vigile]

On 8/21/2017 at 9:59 PM, Geezer said:

 

It's called war & terrorism. The object is to kill the enemy before they kill you. And do you honestly believe Russia, China, Iran, & North Korea aren't developing these weapons? MAD may sound insane but it has probably prevented WWIII from occurring long before now. And terrorists are enemy combatants not criminals. They don't get trials they get exterminated whenever & wherever possible.

 

How many countries has Russia invaded & how many militant groups have they armed & supported? Make sure you hands are clean before you point fingers. 

 

And Napoleon was just bringing French Glory to the world. The US isn't fighting terrorists, it's creating them, both literally and figuratively. This isn't a war on terrorism, it's imperialism straight up. 

Russia hasn't invaded a single country. They may or may not be arming those in Donetsk. Hard to say. They wouldn't have had to if the US hadn't incited a coup and supported Nazi killing squads in UK. 

 

But why do I have to defend Russia? I'm still an American citizen. 

[Geezer]

"Russia hasn't invaded a single country"

Military occupations by the Soviet Union

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Jump to: navigation, search

 

Soviet sphere of influence in East-Central Europe with border changes resulting from military operations of World War II

During World War II, the Soviet Union occupied and annexed several countries effectively handed over by Nazi Germany in the secret protocol Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact of 1939. These included Eastern Poland (incorporated into two different SSRs),^[1] as well as Latvia (became Latvian SSR),^[2][3]Estonia (became Estonian SSR),^[2][3]Lithuania (became Lithuanian SSR),^[2][3] part of eastern Finland (became Karelo-Finnish SSR)^[4] and eastern Romania (became the Moldavian SSR and part of Ukrainian SSR).^[5][6] Apart from Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact and post-war division of Germany, USSR also occupied and annexed Carpathian Ruthenia from Czechoslovakia in 1945 (became part of Ukrainian SSR).

Below is a lists of various forms of military occupations by the Soviet Union resulting from both, the Soviet pact with Nazi Germany (ahead of World War II), and ensuing Cold War in the aftermath of Allied victory over Germany.^[7][8][9]

 

Contents

 [hide] 

• 1 Poland (1939–1956)
• 2 Baltic states (1940–1991)
• 3 Finnish territories (1940)
• 4 Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina (1940)
• 5 After the USSR entered the war on the Allied side
  • 5.1 Northern Iran 1941–1946
  • 5.2 Hungary (1944)
  • 5.3 Romania (1944)
  • 5.4 Bulgaria (1944)
  • 5.5 Czechoslovakia (1944)
  • 5.6 Northern Norway 1944–1946 / Bornholm 1945–1946
  • 5.7 Germany (1945)
  • 5.8 Austria 1945–1955
  • 5.9 Manchuria 1945–1946
  • 5.10 Korea 1945–1948
  • 5.11 Kuril Islands 1945
• 6 Cold War
  • 6.1 The Hungarian Revolution of 1956
  • 6.2 Czechoslovakia (1968–1989)
  • 6.3 Afghanistan 1979–1989

[Geezer]

 

 

 

Russian involvement in the Syrian Civil War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

For the intervention since 2015, see Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War.

 

Russia (green) and Syria (orange)

[show] v t e Foreign involvement in the Syrian Civil War

Russia has supported the internationally recognised government of Syria since the beginning of the Syrian conflict in 2011: politically, with military aid, and since 30 September 2015 also through direct military involvement. The latter marked the first time since the end of the Cold War that Russia entered an armed conflict outside the borders of the former Soviet Union.^[1]

Since October 2011, Russia, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, repeatedly vetoed Western-sponsored draft resolutions in the UN Security Council that demanded the resignation of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad and opened the possibility of U.N. sanctions against his government.^[2][3]

The Russian leadership rejects the demands of Western powers and their Arab allies that Bashar Assad should not be allowed to be a participant in the Syria settlement.^[4][5][6] In January and February 2012, Russian peace initiatives were dismissed by the opposition Syrian National Council^[7] and by the Western powers.^[8]

In September 2015, the Federation Council, Russia's upper house of parliament authorised the Russian president to use armed forces in Syria.^[9][10] Russia acknowledged that Russian strikes targeted not only ISIL, but also rebel groups in the Army of Conquest coalition like al-Nusra Front, al-Qaeda's Syrian branch.^[6][11]

Russia has also separately provided armament and air support to Turkey and the Syrian Democratic Forces in their operations against ISIL in Syria.^[12][13]

 

Contents

  [hide] 

• 1Background
  • 1.1History of ties between Syria and Russia
  • 1.2Syrian Civil War
• 2Presumed motives
  • 2.1Military facilities
  • 2.2Russian jihadists in Syria
  • 2.3Economic importance and history of arms sales
• 3Political efforts and statements
  • 3.12011
  • 3.22012
  • 3.32013
  • 3.42015
    • 3.4.1September
    • 3.4.2October
• 4Russian peace initiatives and efforts
• 5Military support for the Assad government
  • 5.1Military assistance prior to the intervention
  • 5.22015-2016 intervention and airstrikes
  • 5.3Role of private contractors
• 6Russian nationals fighting for rebel/jihadist groups
• 7Cooperation attempts with U.S. and UK
• 8Discussing a long-term political settlement
• 9Reactions
  • 9.1Domestic
  • 9.2Foreign
• 10See also
• 11References
• 12Further reading

 

Background[edit]

History of ties between Syria and Russia[edit]

Main article: Russia–Syria relations

 

Dmitry Medvedev in a joint press conference with the Syrian President following Russo-Syrian talks in May 2010

During the Cold War (1947–1991), Syria was an ally to the Soviet Union in opposition to the Western powers, and a stronger political bond grew.^[14] Between 1955 and 1958, Syria received about $294 million from the Soviet Union for military and economic assistance.^[15] The Suez War in 1956 accelerated a multiplication of ties between Syria and the Soviet Union, simultaneously with the increase in power and influence of the Syrian Ba'ath Party.^[16]

The Syrian Revolution of February 1966 gave the Soviet Union the opportunity to further support Syria. In 1971, under an agreement with the Syrian Ba'athist government's President Hafez al-Assad, the Soviet Union was allowed to open its naval military base in Tartus, giving the Soviet Union a stable presence in the Middle East.^[17][18] Thousands of Syrian military officers and educated professionals studied in Russia during President Hafez al-Assad's three-decade rule (1971–2000).^[19]

In April 1977, Hafez al-Assad visited Moscow, and met with Soviet leaders Leonid Brezhnev and Alexei Kosygin among others, as a sign of improved Syrian relations with the USSR. Three years later, in October 1980, Syria and the Soviet Union signed a twenty-year Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation.^[20]

At the beginning of the Syrian Civil War (2011), Syria was one of Russia's closest Middle Eastern allies.

[Vigile]

Geezer, Russia became a nation in 1989. The Soviet Union no longer exists and Russia has not invaded anyone in its 25+ years of existence. The US, meanwhile, over the past 25 years, has invaded, droned, bombed, overthrown democratically elected governments and otherwise molested 134 countries. 

 

You do realize that Syria is a Russian ally and that Russia was invited there to defend it? Seems like you don't. 

 

The US, OTH, is there as an invader. You don't invade your friend's home when he invites you in, you invade when you break in uninvited. 

 

Can't believe I have to point this out. The level of misinformation that exists today is unreal. 

[Geezer]

And then there are the Ukraine issues for Russia too. Having noted all of that, I will agree that the United States sticks its noise in too many other countries business. Isis has declared war on the U.S. so that's a different problem. Isis must be destroyed. They aren't even human. And the idea that the U.S. drone strikes produced collateral damage is simply a reality of war. There is no such thing as a clean war where only enemy combatants suffer casualties.Considering what Isis does to civilians I think those civilians would hate and fear Isis a lot more than the U.S. 

[Vigile]

I'm never going to concede that all countries do it. Russia did nothing wrong in the Ukraine. The US fomented a coup in order to turn Ukraine into another NATO base and grab Russia's important naval base Sevestapol. The people of Crimea, who are 95% Russian held a referendum and voted to join the Russian Federation with almost a 90% result in favor. No shots were fired. And who could blame them, after seeing the Nazis in charge in Kiev who had kill lists and were on a hunt for Russians and Russian sympathizers? Below is a detailed explanation of what happened there. 

 

The US is doing a whole lot more than sticking its nose in other's business. It's a completely out of control rogue state that is running around the globe completely destroying countries, such as Libya, which was no threat, not a rogue state, and which was successful and thriving until the US turned it into an ISIS infested wasteland. It's sick. Nations like Russia are a tiny handful that are actually standing up to the US and pushing back -- hence, the enemy state label. The US essentially sent ISIS to Syria and was aiding and supporting it for years until Russia went in and bombed them into a shell of their former selves in a matter of weeks. 

 

IOW, it's Russia and Syria that are actually fighting the war on terror and the US which is fanning it for its own military and political purposes. The American people seem happy to be willfully ignorant about what their country is up to. 

 

Quote

Do you remember when Ukraine included Crimea and there was no fighting and killing among its people?

I do; it was a time that I was a frequent visitor to that country and I drove the length of it in a hired car, all the way down to Crimea.

So what happened to turn a peaceful country into the mess it is today?

I know some of you, influenced by Western political rhetoric and corporate media brainwashing will immediately think: "Russia"...
but, let's examine the events as they unfolded:

People in Kiev hit the streets to demonstrate against their democratically elected but corrupt government. What country does not witness demonstrations in its territory and what government, East or west, is not corrupt? Although I will admit that corruption in Ukraine was a national sport in all walks of life and I will not exclude government officials.

These demonstrations suddenly attracted western politicians, from both the EU and the US, who paraded through Kiev directly addressing the demonstrators and promising them a new western society for their impoverished country, if only they would overthrow their legitimate government that was friendly toward Russia.

Who can forget John McCain, the same guy posing for photos with the leaders of ISIS in Syria, preaching "America is with you, I am with you". Imagine that happening in Canada, right on America's doorstep with a Russian politician in the role of McCain.

Naturally, with such western support, and some Ukrainian friends claim 50 euros per day to each "demonstrator" who turned up, peaceful demonstrations quickly turned into riots with snipers taking shots at both demonstrators and the unarmed police that tried desperately to disperse them. The military was not called in for the task.

How many of you have listened to the leaked phone conversation between the Estonian Foreign Minister and the then Foreign Policy Chief of the EU, where he is heard saying "the snipers (killing people in Maidan Square) were from our people"? "OUR PEOPLE", let that sink in for a minute! (By the way, the phone conversation was admitted to by both these diplomats).

After the democratically (emphasised) elected government was overthrown, with no little help from the west, there was speculation as to who would now "govern" Ukraine, and that is when that other leaked phone conversation, between Victoria Nuland of the US State Department, (the lady that was handing out cookies to the rioters in Kiev), became public. In it she is heard giving the US Ambassador to Kiev instructions on who to appoint to lead the new Ukrainian "government". When the Ambassador said "the EU will not go along with that", the response from the "lady" was "F@ck the EU, we'll appoint whoever we want and get the UN to glue it together."

So far, no Russian involvement even though this western instigated coup is taking place right on its border in a country that's been their traditional ally. Again, imagine what the US reaction would have been if these events had been taking place in Canada!

Now we come to Crimea, a peninsula that has been Russian territory for centuries but was "gifted" to the Ukraine in the early 50s, by the then leader of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev (a Ukrainian). The population of Crimea is, in its vast majority, of Russian origin and have been for centuries. (Russian speakers).

Witnessing what was deliberately happening in Kiev, the Crimeans, and at this point I would not rule out understandable Russian guidance, decided to close the access to their peninsula and call for a referendum, the ultimate expression of democracy and something that did not happen in Kosovo that the US and minions quickly recognised as a "state", to decide their future as an independent state. Soldiers in non Ukrainian uniforms (speculated to have been Russian since there was already a large legitimate Russian military presence on Crimea) appeared on the streets. The people embraced them and took thousands of selfies with them.

The referendum was held in Crimea, witnessed by international observers who reported it was held to western standards, and an overwhelming majority of the population voted in favour of independence from the now Nazi led Ukraine. No Russian tanks in the streets, no duress reported by any of the western observers, not a shot fired and NO Russian "invasion".

Ukraine got rid of their democratically elected government but lost Crimea, widely considered to have been the cherry on the cake for the US and more than likely the main reason for this "spontaneous, genuine colour revolution".

So what did the Ukrainians win?

Certainly not the "visa-free travel" to the west they were promised. Not much money to speak of, nowhere near the 5 billion that Ms Nuland admitted to have "invested" in the regime change in that country. No EU market for their produce and products. (They don't conform to EU standards). Definitely no membership to the EU.

What have they lost? Russia, the "benevolent cousin" who bought everything they had to sell, that gave them heavily discounted natural gas only afforded to friends, low-interest rate loans without conditions. Crimea, now firmly back in the Russian fold as part of the Federation and more than likely the region of Donbass with which they are now in an open war supported by western weapons, the Ukrainians have to pay for, and western mercenaries that they also pay for.

So, what reasonable thinking person, with a measurable intelligence, can blame Russia for Ukraine's woes?

The fault lies squarely with the Ukrainians who believed the Western lies and sold their country out for a "bag of cookies".

 

[Geezer]

44 minutes ago, Vigile said:

Geezer, Russia became a nation in 1989. The Soviet Union no longer exists and Russia has not invaded anyone in its 25+ years of existence. The US, meanwhile, over the past 25 years, has invaded, droned, bombed, overthrown democratically elected governments and otherwise molested 134 countries. 

 

You do realize that Syria is a Russian ally and that Russia was invited there to defend it? Seems like you don't. 

 

The US, OTH, is there as an invader. You don't invade your friend's home when he invites you in, you invade when you break in uninvited. 

 

Can't believe I have to point this out. The level of misinformation that exists today is unreal. 

 

 

I knew you were going to say that, but no that dog won't hunt. Russia is Russian nothing of political significance has changed. Political dissidents are still jailed or murdered. Political opponents of Putin disappear or suddenly die for inexplicable reasons. As long as Putin is alive he will run Russia. Anyone who challenges him will mysteriously disappear never to be heard from again. Yeah, the “New” Russia seems to be indistinguishable from the old Russia and why wouldn't it?

 

We can at least impeach our mistakes or limited their terms in office. And yes I realize Syria is a Russian Ally, but they are still committing genocide on their own people and Russia is helping them do it. And I noted in another post I agree the U.S. has their nose in too many other countries business and I think most of our citizens want to get out of these conflicts that don't involve us and stay out. I'm suspect higher ups in Washington would give reasons for why that's a bad idea though. 

 

The overall point being Vigile both countries have their own unique problems. Violence and murder is out of control in the U.S. precisely because we are a free society. Individuals have government guaranteed rights that must be honored and that sometimes produces undesirable results because political activists have learned how to manipulate the system. The U.S. is no where near perfect and there are probably many other countries that are more desirable to live in, but I wouldn't put Russia on my list. Canada, New Zealand, Australia  and several Scandinavian Countries probably have a better quality of life than many parts of the United States does now. And I wouldn't mind living in any of those countries. 

 

And I would add only in a free and independent society would Barrack Obama  & Donald Trump ever be elected President. There is an old saying in American that anyone can become President of the United States and I believe Obama and Trump have proved that is true. 

 

 

[Geezer]

I get it. You have made it clear in your posts for a long time now that you don't like the United States,  and that is your right. But that makes me wonder why you keep your U.S. Citizenship active, since you apparently dislike this country. Why would you want to be a citizen of a country you apparently hate? 

[midniterider]

http://www.newsweek.com/drones-swarm-autonomous-russia-robots-609399

 

http://www.newsweek.com/russia-produce-heavy-military-drone-within-five-years-says-contractor-653267

 

 

[pantheory]

23 minutes ago, midniterider said:

http://www.newsweek.com/drones-swarm-autonomous-russia-robots-609399

 

In the link directly above they said that the next generation of drones may be able to pick their own targets. This is where the problem will be. If such a U.N. resolution is passed it will probably have to curtail complete autonomy which means that there should always be a human interface between the robotic entity, and the mission target or kill. The entity should not be able to choose its own target if such a resolution were drafted.

[MOHO]

So anyway...back to the original post...

 

My understanding is that every weapon ever devised by man has been used for it's intended purpose and so will AI drones/robots etc.

 

Can't put the Genie back in the box.

[Fweethawt]

1 hour ago, Geezer said:

Why would you want to be a citizen of a country you apparently hate? 

Just in case the free medical ever stops.

[Geezer]

As MOHO noted. The Genie is out. These exec's are just playing the corporate game of CYA. They want their public image to be PC, but they know there is no way to stop this now. Putting the military issues aside there is potentially a lot of good things that will benefit society that can and probably will come out of this technology. If there is a way to make a buck someone will figure out how to do it.

[Vigile]

Quote

I knew you were going to say that, but no that dog won't hunt. Russia is Russian nothing of political significance has changed. Political dissidents are still jailed or murdered. Political opponents of Putin disappear or suddenly die for inexplicable reasons. As long as Putin is alive he will run Russia. Anyone who challenges him will mysteriously disappear never to be heard from again. Yeah, the “New” Russia seems to be indistinguishable from the old Russia and why wouldn't it?

 

Sigh. 

 

This is just not true. Claims unsupported by actual facts don't make things true. Russia today is far more free than the US is today. This is a great example of why I started my thread about bullshit in the media. People don't know which way is up anymore as the media can't be trusted to share facts, but are more than happy to spread propaganda. I encourage you to come visit. It will do wonders for your world view. 

Syria is not committing genocide against its own people. There is so much wrong with your post, I just don't have energy to address it all. Let me ask you, why did 600k people return to Syria after Assad and Russia liberated Aleppo if Assad, with the help of the Russians, were committing genocide against them? Seriously, turn off the television and stop reading the newspaper. It will make you less ignorant of reality just for that effort. 

[Vigile]

16 hours ago, Geezer said:

I get it. You have made it clear in your posts for a long time now that you don't like the United States,  and that is your right. But that makes me wonder why you keep your U.S. Citizenship active, since you apparently dislike this country. Why would you want to be a citizen of a country you apparently hate? 

 

I don't like the US government (not unlike any thinking and informed person with a sense of morality in this day and age), but I'm an American citizen and I want the best for the American people whom I love even if I sometimes criticize them. Right now they are just as abused (if not more so in many ways) by their government than other countries that are also victims of this evil organization. My citizenship is my birthright, it's not something the government granted me. Why should I give it up? My family came to the US 200 years ago and worked hard to build the country, long before the corrupt government that exists today came into power

 

You can't know about a country unless you visit it and visit it thoroughly btw. Reading about countries can only get you so far and in many, if not most cases, it will end up leading you down paths of misconceptions. Russians today, especially in St. Petersburg and Moscow, have a higher quality of life than the Average American by quite a long mile. They have more vacation time (a lot more -- everyone I know goes to places like Turkey, Tunis, India, Thailand, Philippines, Italy, Greece 2x year), they have less debt (a lot less), far more of them own their homes outright (around 70% IIRC). They have more spendable income after taxes and bills. They have more education. They have less stress. They don't have to pay for expensive medical insurance and they don't have to worry about an illness wiping them out. They have an efficient rail system that is cheap and that takes them anywhere around the country or Europe. They have amazing metro systems that are fast and cheap with stations that look like rooms in palaces) make cars unnecessary. They have no crime to speak of. I can go to any neighborhood in Moscow or SPB day or night and be perfectly secure. There are literally no slums. I could do without St. Petersburg's cold, dark winters, but I have hundreds of world class museums, hundreds of live performance theater shows, ballet, opera, the symphony to help bide the time until spring. All of these things are affordable for even lower middle class people (definitely not true of NYC). Live, professional theater, for instance, costs $2-$3. I can visit the Hermitage, a museum that puts the NYC Met to shame, for around $4 IIRC. 

The US still has a lot of great things about it, but the police, the economy, the government, pressures at work are all putting a damper on people's lives and from what I see from the outside looking in, things are getting a whole lot more stressful over there and people seem to be being pushed to their limits by a lot of different factors. I don't find any glee in this. Quite the opposite. 

[Vigile]

9 hours ago, Fweethawt said:

Just in case the free medical ever stops.

 

'cause I'm shallow like that.

[Geezer]

You are correct Vigile I have no personal knowledge of Russia. I can only say  Russian citizens & American businessmen who have business interst in Russia tell a very different story about Russia on American TV.  They seem to have had a different experience than what you have had. I assume you are going to tell me Putin's political foes have not been put in prison, where they often die under mysterious circumstances, or are assassinated. That doesn't really happen right, they are all lying about those things, correct?

 

 

[Vigile]

On American TV. As I've been pointing out, the media has an agenda. The same conglomerates that have interests in seeing NATO expansion own the media. But, it's not easy for foreigners to do business here. That's another topic. I'm not really too worried about this. I'd like to see Russian businesses given a chance without having to compete with Western corps. IMO, it's better for the Russian people. 

 

Putin put Khardikovsky in prison for a while. The guy was evading taxes and when he did it, he was in the political fight of his life, having to deal with western-backed oligarchs who were in control of the country and selling the Russian people down the river. Standing up to these guys was one of the highlights of his career. Literally hundreds of high profile Putin critics operate in the open on Russian television. there are even stations dedicated to the opposition parties. They aren't dying. Under mysterious circumstances is easy to jump to conclusions with. How many dead people do conspiracy theorists attribute to the Clintons now? Well over a 100 by my count, and those are all people who Americans can readily read about and follow up on. Americans have no real way of doing research here in Russia where everything is done in Russian language, and where the culture and the stories are unfamiliar to them. How easy is it then to attribute every single death to Putin and just have people believe it? 

 

Bottom line here is he has over an 80% approval rating and has no need to kill off his critics. Weak dictators do that. Strong leaders don't have to. So, no, I don't believe he is killing off his critics or imprisoning them. 

[Vigile]

Sorry for derailing this thread. I'll stop if you wish Fwee. On the subject of business experience in Russia, there was an interesting event which took place Putin's first year in office. The city of Vladivostok was left without heat right in the dead of winter. 400K people were at risk of freezing. Meanwhile, ships in Siberia were loaded with coal, already sold to western companies. Corrupt oligarchs had diverted the entire supply of coal in the region to Western buyers. Putin seized the coal in the harbors, diverted it back to the city of Vladivostok and arrested 24 industry insiders for criminal conspiracy. 

 

So, yeah, I'm sure business leaders don't like him, but name me a single western populist who has put the people of his/her country first over business interests like this. If you can, I'll bet he/she also has an 80% approval rating.