Ban Russia, Ban USA, Blame Canada

[Cousin Strawberry]

I hear ya UW but...what if it's true?

The start of the evidence predates Putin, it predates Reagan, it really predates most players on the global stage.

I encourage you to read over Corn's link. I had a look and it really gets you thinking...ya but what if it's true.

If it is then the United States executive branch of government has been compromised by their enemies and these enemies are utilizing their asset to actively sabotage the NATO alliance, the relationships with historic allies..

What if it's true? Then what?

[UWSaint]

If it is then the United States executive branch of government has been compromised by their enemies and these enemies are utilizing their asset to actively sabotage the NATO alliance, the relationships with historic allies..

What if it's true? Then what?

(1) Russian interference with Trump was the subject of 3 years of intense investigation. And they all just missed it?

(2) NATO countries don't like Trump. NATO's secretary general loves him. Why? Because Trump's diplomacy w/r/t NATO has resulted in additional commitments to NATO that weren't there before. It happened in the first term, and it was reupped in this term. Why? Part of its Russia, but a lot of it is that the US demanded more contributions to the alliance. It was fear the US would walk that led to (a little more) putting money and guns behind words and empty promises. If Russia's been using Trump to sabotage the alliance, these are pretty odd results.

(3) The fissures between Europe and the US have nothing to do with Russophilia (though I totally believe that Russia does everything it can to foment discord in NATO) and everything to do with Europe providing less and less of an argument about why it is the United States' interests to maintain the alliance. Increased defense spending by NATO countries will help to maintain the alliance a lot -- and will help create a balance of power if it ever falls apart (win win). But one thing that always held the alliance together was a shared worldview, an overlapping culture, and a (largely) shared view of liberty and democracy. The American perspective, especially on the MAGA right, is that Europe is more anti-liberty and anti-democracy than ever, and that its a continent that is oikiphobic of its traditions, bankrupt, and resigned to managing its decline. And while that case might be overstated, its not without a factual support. (Much in the same way as European antipathies towards the US and Trump may be overstated, but are not without factual support). That doesn't make China or Russia more like the US in terms of shared values than the US is with Europe, but the traditional, soft ties that bind aren't nearly as strong, and we seem to be moving in opposite directions. If its just about maintaining peace or trade, and it is no longer about a common purpose, then it doesn't matter who the allies are, not to the same degree. Especially when there are nations on the rise where the future could be peace and cooperation or antagonism and zones of nonoverlapping interest.

[Meds]

A well written article by the hockey profile and sports writer Szymon Szemberg.

Szymon Szemberg is the CEO of the European Hockey Club Alliance E.H.C. He was head of information of the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF) 2001-2014 and COO of the Champions Hockey League (CHL) 2013-2015.

IT'S TIME TO GIVE THE REAL REASON WHY RUSSIA IS OUT

I'm glad that the international sporting authorities' banning of different bad nations ended war. I am sure that's how apartheid ended, too.

I love it when UW simply points out when the actions, or proposed actions, of some sort of official body or organization amount to nothing more than pissing in the wind.

[Meds]

(3) The fissures between Europe and the US have nothing to do with Russophilia (though I totally believe that Russia does everything it can to foment discord in NATO) and everything to do with Europe providing less and less of an argument about why it is the United States' interests to maintain the alliance. Increased defense spending by NATO countries will help to maintain the alliance a lot -- and will help create a balance of power if it ever falls apart (win win). But one thing that always held the alliance together was a shared worldview, an overlapping culture, and a (largely) shared view of liberty and democracy. The American perspective, especially on the MAGA right, is that Europe is more anti-liberty and anti-democracy than ever, and that its a continent that is oikiphobic of its traditions, bankrupt, and resigned to managing its decline. And while that case might be overstated, its not without a factual support. (Much in the same way as European antipathies towards the US and Trump may be overstated, but are not without factual support). That doesn't make China or Russia more like the US in terms of shared values than the US is with Europe, but the traditional, soft ties that bind aren't nearly as strong, and we seem to be moving in opposite directions. If its just about maintaining peace or trade, and it is no longer about a common purpose, then it doesn't matter who the allies are, not to the same degree. Especially when there are nations on the rise where the future could be peace and cooperation or antagonism and zones of nonoverlapping interest.

Oikophobia. I had to google that one.

But it's apt.

I'm curious, UW, if you have a theory as to why it seems that so many people (average Joe-public citizens) on the left side of the political aisle are so dead set on Socialistic Liberalism over Free Market Libertarianism. In general most Liberals that I talk with want individual rights and freedoms, but when you point out that what they are asking for is actually Libertarianism, while Liberalism is "Big Brother" exerting more and more control that in its longer game actually removes opportunity and freedom of the individual, well, frankly, they get their nut sack in a twist and don't want to engage in a conversation.

[Per]

I hear ya UW but...what if it's true?

The start of the evidence predates Putin, it predates Reagan, it really predates most players on the global stage.

I encourage you to read over Corn's link. I had a look and it really gets you thinking...ya but what if it's true.

If it is then the United States executive branch of government has been compromised by their enemies and these enemies are utilizing their asset to actively sabotage the NATO alliance, the relationships with historic allies..

What if it's true? Then what?

”I’m not saying Trump is a russian asset, I just can’t think of what a russian asset in the White House would do differently.”

[5thhorseman]

I hear ya UW but...what if it's true?

The start of the evidence predates Putin, it predates Reagan, it really predates most players on the global stage.

I encourage you to read over Corn's link. I had a look and it really gets you thinking...ya but what if it's true.

If it is then the United States executive branch of government has been compromised by their enemies and these enemies are utilizing their asset to actively sabotage the NATO alliance, the relationships with historic allies..

What if it's true? Then what?

”I’m not saying Trump is a russian asset, I just can’t think of what a russian asset in the White House would do differently.”

A real Russian asset would not be as obvious.

[UWSaint]

I'm curious, UW, if you have a theory as to why it seems that so many people (average Joe-public citizens) on the left side of the political aisle are so dead set on Socialistic Liberalism over Free Market Libertarianism. In general most Liberals that I talk with want individual rights and freedoms, but when you point out that what they are asking for is actually Libertarianism, while Liberalism is "Big Brother" exerting more and more control that in its longer game actually removes opportunity and freedom of the individual, well, frankly, they get their nut sack in a twist and don't want to engage in a conversation.

In the US, most Joe Public citizens are not liberal. Liberals are dominated by highly educated coastal sorts on the one hand and minority interest identity groups on the other.

Broadly speaking, the former are attracted to social liberalism because they see themselves as the ones who get to tell others what to do, how to love, what to believe. When they state libertarian positions of the government staying out of stuff (or libertine preferences -- what's wrong with thruples?; government should stay out of the bedroom but kink fest parades on the street if your not a homophobe!), they are stating a brand, expressing a luxury belief they will never practice. They tend to individually small c conservative -- the product of married parents, functional homes, practice monogamy, etc. -- and then they model their parents in their lives. Those in this group who get married and have multiple kids usually will become more conservative over time (or just drop politics); those who get married and don't have kids will stay liberal and run for office, run the NGOs, run government departments. Kids or not, these folks also will comprise the civil service, be the professors and other "educators", and work in corporations or otherwise in the private sector as the transaction costs ancillary to the prime business but necessary a regulated state -- compliance, HR, lawyers, etc. All people who get to tell other people what to do without producing shit or exposing themselves to economic risks.

There is still some Joe Public citizen on the left side in the US who lean socialist, but they aren't libertarians because they choose security over freedom. These are many of the blue collar union members, and also younger people in the service or gig economy who don't see a future as good as their parents had and think the odds are stacked against them. They lean socialist (or at least robust ventral government) because they want the safety net. They are mostly indifferent to the culture wars (and might lean a little to the right). I think this group has a very weak voice in today's democratic party, and many supported Trump. But they are not economic liberals. And if the democrats ever find someone who can speak to this group well, they will win swing states and win the Presidency.

[Per]

CAS has ruled that russia must be allowed back into the world championships, the World Juniors and all other IIHF tournaments.

The IIHF and all of Europe is in shock. Nobody wants this.
We banned Germany from participating in international sports till the -50's.
They were locked out of the 1948 Olympics and the 1950 FIFA World Cup.
Why should we be more lenient to the modern day Hitler?

We will see what happens. For an individual country to boycott eg the world juniors could mean having to start over at the bottom division, and it might take up to eight years to reach the top level again. But if all major hockey nations of Europe join forces and all boycott the tournaments?
I mean, the Finns, Czechs, Latvians, Swedes... none of us want to have russia on the ice.

If we all refuse to play they may have to listen.

I mean, Ukraine has qualified for the 2027 World Championships.
Do you expect them to go out on the ice and play against the terrorists that are murdering their families?

https://www.tsn.ca/hockey-canada/video/ ... hf-events/
https://media-cdn.roundtable.io/media-s ... fcd02b/mp4
https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comment ... as_ruling/

[Per]

So, things are looking up!

Canada has announced they will not grant visas to a russian team for the World Juniors held this xmas.
Finland has announced that they will not play against russia, nor host a tournament with a russian team.
Latvia is already set, because they passed a law in 2024 that says Latvian citizens are not allowed to play against russian teams.

With a few countries already taking a stand, I expect the others to line up behind them.
Most European hockey associations have already stated that they are shocked and appalled by the CAS decision.
So when a few bold leaders step up it should be easy to follow suit.

If they want, they can perhaps hold a tournament with russia, the US, North Korea, China, Iran and Israel.
I’m sure it will be great hockey.

[Per]

So far Finland, Latvia, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Czechia have vowed not to play russia.
I’m sure more will follow.

So russia may be allowed to participate but virtually no other team will take the ice with them.
They may medal but without playing. Well, perhaps the USA will play them. I mean, Trump and Putin are best buddies after all.

It is also questionable if the russians will get visas. Both Finland (hosting the next World Juniors) and Germany (hosting the 2027 World Championships are extremely restrictive about allowing russians into the country. From what I heard Canada may refuse entry to a russian team for the upcoming World Juniors as well.


Edit: Germany has joined!

[Madcombinepilot]

So, things are looking up!

Canada has announced they will not grant visas to a russian team for the World Juniors held this xmas.
Finland has announced that they will not play against russia, nor host a tournament with a russian team.
Latvia is already set, because they passed a law in 2024 that says Latvian citizens are not allowed to play against russian teams.

With a few countries already taking a stand, I expect the others to line up behind them.
Most European hockey associations have already stated that they are shocked and appalled by the CAS decision.
So when a few bold leaders step up it should be easy to follow suit.

If they want, they can perhaps hold a tournament with russia, the US, North Korea, China, Iran and Israel.
I’m sure it will be great hockey.

I simply disagree with politics getting in the way of hockey (sports in general).

Sports are supposed to bring peoples and countries together, not be used as a wedge to drive groups of people apart. Sports help prevent wars and bring peoples together. ANY other thought is socially naive and divisive. For the record, I don't agree with the war, but this is the wrong way, wrong method and wrong message. It's 100% politics, and that is bullshit to the core. It solves nothing, will not force peace and continues to divide people.

[Per]

I simply disagree with politics getting in the way of hockey (sports in general).

Sports are supposed to bring peoples and countries together, not be used as a wedge to drive groups of people apart. Sports help prevent wars and bring peoples together. ANY other thought is socially naive and divisive. For the record, I don't agree with the war, but this is the wrong way, wrong method and wrong message. It's 100% politics, and that is bullshit to the core. It solves nothing, will not force peace and continues to divide people.

Well, hockey and politics are closely intertvined in russia and has always been. We just refuse to let Putin bask in the glory of his athletes.
We know that it hurts. CSKA Moskva is an army team and Dynamo Moskva has ties to the FSB. Almost all KHL teams are owned by oligarchs loyal to Putin.

KHL players are often forming a Z on the ice ahead of games to express support for the war crimes in Ukraine.
This is the russian equivalent to a swastika.




And just look at Putin and Ovi hugging and posing together whenever they get a chance. Ovi has even founded an organizaation for athletes who support Putin and has Putin in his profile pic on instagram. How tha Capitals have accepted this behaviour is beyond belief. If they think politics and hockey should be kept apart they should have reined him in years ago.

[Madcombinepilot]

Per, I understand your angst, and realize where it originates from, but just imagine.. what if a couple world leaders were actually gathered to watch a sporting event (like the Olympics or something), they started actually talking and peace broke out??

Now, I understand that idea is liberal as fuck, but the premise behind it stands. It's pretty simple... If neither side talks, then both sides keep shooting. War is the natural order for humans.. But, When one side picks a political platform stance that ensures no talking, and uses sports to back that platform, I think that using sports (which, historically sporting events between two peoples were originated to prevent fighting) is bullshit.

Anyways, I am not starting a political opinion debate, just sharing my thoughts.


...That, I and I like "best on best' hockey..

[Per]

You have to understand that even if we’re not at war with russia, they are at war with us, and Western Civilization at large.

The hacking of freezers and fridges in stores and restaurants throughout Europe, setting the temperature to 50 C and destroying food for billions of dollars has now been confirmed to be the work of russian hackers. As everyone suspected.
They even attempted to do this to freezers in French hospitals, storing blood as well as biological samples.
Luckily the hospital freezers immediately set off alarms and the hospital staff managed to reset them manually.

They block GPS and other navigation tools on and off in the Baltic countries, forcing ships and airplanes arriving i Latvia and Estonia to rely on visual cues instead of electronics.
They fly drones near airports throughout the EU, forcing them to shut down traffic.
They send mail bombs to executives in the weapons industry.
They have performed assassinations in eg Berlin, London, Paris, Geneva… there was even an assassination attempt on a Chechen dissident here in Gävle where I live.
They sabotage rail lines, set fire to factories and warehouses.
They drag anchors across the Baltic sea floor to damage energy and communication cables
They murder civilians in Ukraine on a daily basis and have kidnapped more than 20,000 Ukrainian children who are now being raised as russians and told that their families have abandoned them and hate them.

And you expect us to smile at them and pretend that everything is fine?

Forget it.

This is a terrorist regime we are talking about, and their athletes are seen as their pride and joy.
By depriving them of participation in international sports we are sending a message to the russian people that we do not accept that they continue to support this criminal regime. They need to undertake a regime change. A return to democracy.

Germany was not allowed back into international sports until the 1950’s eventhough the war ended in 1945.
Why should we be more lenient to the present day Hitler, as he attempts to annex and enslave all of russia’s neighbours?

Ask anyone from Finland, Latvia or Poland how they feel about russia.
Or a Ukrainian, I hear there are lots of them in Canada.
Ask them how they feel about russia returning to sports while the war crimes still go on.

Seven European nations have already vowed not to play russia. More will follow.
The sponsors AJ (Sweden), Nokia Tyres (Finland), Tipsports (Czechia) and even the main sponsor Skoda (Czechia) have also announced that they withdraw their sponsorship if russia plays.More will follow.

In a poll online 97% of Swedes thought we should boycott the IIHF tournaments if russia is allowed back before the war ends, and that was before the Swedish Hockey Association finally did the right thing and followed Finland’s lead.

Finland was attacked three times by russia in the 20th century. They lost 20% of their territory, including their best farmland (Karelia), their second biggest city (Viborg) and the largest nickel ore in the world. Every Finn has relatives that died in the war, fighting for their freedom. They feel strongly for Ukraine, as they have walked more than a mile in their shoes, and they were the first to step up to the plate this time and say no. Or, I guess in a way Latvia beat them as they made it illegal in 2024 already for Latvian citizens to play against russian teams in any sport.

Anyway. I hope Canada will stand with us.

Russia will be welcome back after their soldiers have left all Ukrainian territory, they have paid reparations and handed over the war criminals that have arrest orders issued by the International Criminal Court.

[5thhorseman]

Russia is certainly as much a terrorist organization as Isis or Al-Qaeda, but the players aren't. Maybe we could let Russians play as a team but they aren't allowed to wear their uniforms, play their anthem, or use their flag.