• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Cookson is worse for cycling than McQuaid

Page 80 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Power, corruption and lies.

It exists on two levels. Do as the Russian do; bribe, cheat, pay to hold all major events in your home country as symbol of strength and power for the motherland – OR - do as the British do; infiltrate political hierarchy placing “meek” leaders into power that can be manipulated from afar, claim the corruption is democratic because due process has been followed as symbol of might and strength for the motherland.
 
May 14, 2010
5,303
4
0
Visit site
thehog said:
Power, corruption and lies.

It exists on two levels. Do as the Russian do; bribe, cheat, pay to hold all major events in your home country as symbol of strength and power for the motherland – OR - do as the British do; infiltrate political hierarchy placing “meek” leaders into power that can be manipulated from afar, claim the corruption is democratic because due process has been followed as symbol of might and strength for the motherland.

As usual with such things, the British have it right. If you can call that right.
 
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Power, corruption and lies.

It exists on two levels. Do as the Russian do; bribe, cheat, pay to hold all major events in your home country as symbol of strength and power for the motherland – OR - do as the British do; infiltrate political hierarchy placing “meek” leaders into power that can be manipulated from afar, claim the corruption is democratic because due process has been followed as symbol of might and strength for the motherland.

As usual with such things, the British have it right. If you can call that right.


Actually not really. The average Russian expects a strong leader and one to tell them how they should live their lives. It’s a large country, too many divisions exist over a vast landscape, leadership and strength is necessary. Putin despite his ways has an extremely high approval rating even among the female and young population.

The British tend to fall for spin, saving face and providing a politically correct message whilst doing the exact opposite. It’s very hard to get a British person to be honest and direct. Russian prefer to be direct, concise and truthful. Even if the truth is to admit they are corrupt.

Alistair Campbell and Tony Blair were the antithesis of being direct and open (ref: Iraq War).

Now we see it with Seb Coe, always smiling, providing very nice answers to all questions all whilst doing not very much. Cookson's manifesto on "transparency" compared to what reality has show us is another example.
 
May 14, 2010
5,303
4
0
Visit site
thehog said:
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Power, corruption and lies.

It exists on two levels. Do as the Russian do; bribe, cheat, pay to hold all major events in your home country as symbol of strength and power for the motherland – OR - do as the British do; infiltrate political hierarchy placing “meek” leaders into power that can be manipulated from afar, claim the corruption is democratic because due process has been followed as symbol of might and strength for the motherland.

As usual with such things, the British have it right. If you can call that right.


Actually not really. The average Russian expects a strong leader and one to tell them how they should live their lives. It’s a large country, too many divisions exist over a vast landscape, leadership and strength is necessary. Putin despite his ways has an extremely high approval rating even among the female and young population.

The British tend to fall for spin, saving face and providing a politically correct message whilst doing the exact opposite. It’s very hard to get a British person to be honest and direct. Russian prefer to be direct, concise and truthful. Even if the truth is to admit they are corrupt.

Alistair Campbell and Tony Blair were the antithesis of being direct and open (ref: Iraq War).

Now we see it with Seb Coe, always smiling, providing very nice answers to all questions all whilst doing not very much. Cookson's manifesto on "transparency" compared to what reality has show us is another example.

By "right" I mean it works for them the way they want it to. The Japanese are sort of the same as the British: civil, polished, very difficult to get them to be direct and up front. They don't see "direct" and "up front" as honesty, they see it as barbarism. Anyway, the point is the British have a long history of having things go the way they want while being genteel; and, while also maintaining a participatory democracy and rule of law. I'll take that any day over frank thuggery and strongman rule.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
Visit site
thehog said:
The British tend to fall for spin, saving face and providing a politically correct message whilst doing the exact opposite.
George Orwell, writer of what is perhaps the greatest novel of the 20th century, Nineteen Eighty-Four, did say that one of the most defining qualities of the English was their hypocrisy. ;)
 
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Power, corruption and lies.

It exists on two levels. Do as the Russian do; bribe, cheat, pay to hold all major events in your home country as symbol of strength and power for the motherland – OR - do as the British do; infiltrate political hierarchy placing “meek” leaders into power that can be manipulated from afar, claim the corruption is democratic because due process has been followed as symbol of might and strength for the motherland.

As usual with such things, the British have it right. If you can call that right.


Actually not really. The average Russian expects a strong leader and one to tell them how they should live their lives. It’s a large country, too many divisions exist over a vast landscape, leadership and strength is necessary. Putin despite his ways has an extremely high approval rating even among the female and young population.

The British tend to fall for spin, saving face and providing a politically correct message whilst doing the exact opposite. It’s very hard to get a British person to be honest and direct. Russian prefer to be direct, concise and truthful. Even if the truth is to admit they are corrupt.

Alistair Campbell and Tony Blair were the antithesis of being direct and open (ref: Iraq War).

Now we see it with Seb Coe, always smiling, providing very nice answers to all questions all whilst doing not very much. Cookson's manifesto on "transparency" compared to what reality has show us is another example.

By "right" I mean it works for them the way they want it to. The Japanese are sort of the same as the British: civil, polished, very difficult to get them to be direct and up front. They don't see "direct" and "up front" as honesty, they see it as barbarism. Anyway, the point is the British have a long history of having things go the way they want while being genteel; and, while also maintaining a participatory democracy and rule of law. I'll take that any day over frank thuggery and strongman rule.

Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Visit site
thehog said:
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Power, corruption and lies.

It exists on two levels. Do as the Russian do; bribe, cheat, pay to hold all major events in your home country as symbol of strength and power for the motherland – OR - do as the British do; infiltrate political hierarchy placing “meek” leaders into power that can be manipulated from afar, claim the corruption is democratic because due process has been followed as symbol of might and strength for the motherland.

As usual with such things, the British have it right. If you can call that right.


Actually not really. The average Russian expects a strong leader and one to tell them how they should live their lives. It’s a large country, too many divisions exist over a vast landscape, leadership and strength is necessary. Putin despite his ways has an extremely high approval rating even among the female and young population.

The British tend to fall for spin, saving face and providing a politically correct message whilst doing the exact opposite. It’s very hard to get a British person to be honest and direct. Russian prefer to be direct, concise and truthful. Even if the truth is to admit they are corrupt.

Alistair Campbell and Tony Blair were the antithesis of being direct and open (ref: Iraq War).

Now we see it with Seb Coe, always smiling, providing very nice answers to all questions all whilst doing not very much. Cookson's manifesto on "transparency" compared to what reality has show us is another example.

By "right" I mean it works for them the way they want it to. The Japanese are sort of the same as the British: civil, polished, very difficult to get them to be direct and up front. They don't see "direct" and "up front" as honesty, they see it as barbarism. Anyway, the point is the British have a long history of having things go the way they want while being genteel; and, while also maintaining a participatory democracy and rule of law. I'll take that any day over frank thuggery and strongman rule.

Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.

The Germans didn't have a hope in hell's chance of pulling off a successful invasion of Britain in 1940, but knew they had to somehow put Britain out of the war, or lose. So in 1941 Germany went to plan B, invade the USSR in a crazy attempt to get Britain to come to terms.
 
May 14, 2010
5,303
4
0
Visit site
thehog said:
Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.

I beg to differ. The British, the Americans, and even people in his own government tried to warn Stalin that Hitler was planning a surprise attack. Stalin thought they were all trying to provoke trouble and ignored the warnings. When Hitler in fact did attack, what did Stalin do? Unbelievably, he retreated to his country dacha for two weeks, utterly at a loss. When members of his Politburo finally summoned the courage to go to the dacha to solicit his guidance, Stalin was convinced they were coming to arrest him. It's all in Krushchev's book.

The truth is, the Soviets triumphed in the war, amazingly, despite "frank thuggery and strongman rule". In part this was because Germany's frank thuggery and strongman rule was even more idiotic and inept than the Soviets' own.
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Visit site
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.

I beg to differ. The British, the Americans, and even people in his own government tried to warn Stalin that Hitler was planning a surprise attack. Stalin thought they were all trying to provoke trouble and ignored the warnings. When Hitler in fact did attack, what did Stalin do? Unbelievably, he retreated to his country dacha for two weeks, utterly at a loss. When members of his Politburo finally summoned the courage to go to the dacha to solicit his guidance, Stalin was convinced they were coming to arrest him. It's all in Krushchev's book.

The truth is, the Soviets triumphed in the war, amazingly, despite "frank thuggery and strongman rule". In part this was because Germany's own frank thuggery and strongman rule was even more idiotic and inept than their own.

And the Soviets relied on Arctic convoys from Britain and its allies for supplies of important war material, something that they acknowledge today was `essential to our war effort'.
 
May 14, 2010
5,303
4
0
Visit site
Hawkwood said:
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.

I beg to differ. The British, the Americans, and even people in his own government tried to warn Stalin that Hitler was planning a surprise attack. Stalin thought they were all trying to provoke trouble and ignored the warnings. When Hitler in fact did attack, what did Stalin do? Unbelievably, he retreated to his country dacha for two weeks, utterly at a loss. When members of his Politburo finally summoned the courage to go to the dacha to solicit his guidance, Stalin was convinced they were coming to arrest him. It's all in Krushchev's book.

The truth is, the Soviets triumphed in the war, amazingly, despite "frank thuggery and strongman rule". In part this was because Germany's own frank thuggery and strongman rule was even more idiotic and inept than their own.

And the Soviets relied on Arctic convoys from Britain and its allies for supplies of important war material, something that they acknowledge today was `essential to our war effort'.

Yep. They'd have been lost without "lend-lease".
 
Maxiton said:
Hawkwood said:
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.

I beg to differ. The British, the Americans, and even people in his own government tried to warn Stalin that Hitler was planning a surprise attack. Stalin thought they were all trying to provoke trouble and ignored the warnings. When Hitler in fact did attack, what did Stalin do? Unbelievably, he retreated to his country dacha for two weeks, utterly at a loss. When members of his Politburo finally summoned the courage to go to the dacha to solicit his guidance, Stalin was convinced they were coming to arrest him. It's all in Krushchev's book.

The truth is, the Soviets triumphed in the war, amazingly, despite "frank thuggery and strongman rule". In part this was because Germany's own frank thuggery and strongman rule was even more idiotic and inept than their own.

And the Soviets relied on Arctic convoys from Britain and its allies for supplies of important war material, something that they acknowledge today was `essential to our war effort'.

Yep. They'd have been lost without "lend-lease".
Some sensible comments here from you and Hawkwood, dealing with the over-simplification of WWII history. Coming back to the issue, it is clear that a "strong man" or thug has no place in either the UCI or the IAAF and whatever lack of suitability the presidential incumbents may demonstrate they would be no better if they tried to be dictatorial. I doubt whether the constitution of either body would permit it. We should not be surprised if progress is slow and whoever has the job is some sort of disappointment.
 
Hawkwood said:
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.

I beg to differ. The British, the Americans, and even people in his own government tried to warn Stalin that Hitler was planning a surprise attack. Stalin thought they were all trying to provoke trouble and ignored the warnings. When Hitler in fact did attack, what did Stalin do? Unbelievably, he retreated to his country dacha for two weeks, utterly at a loss. When members of his Politburo finally summoned the courage to go to the dacha to solicit his guidance, Stalin was convinced they were coming to arrest him. It's all in Krushchev's book.

The truth is, the Soviets triumphed in the war, amazingly, despite "frank thuggery and strongman rule". In part this was because Germany's own frank thuggery and strongman rule was even more idiotic and inept than their own.

And the Soviets relied on Arctic convoys from Britain and its allies for supplies of important war material, something that they acknowledge today was `essential to our war effort'.


Are you suggesting the Soviets had a tailwind? :rolleyes:
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Re:

Benotti69 said:
It would appear Soviet swimmers had a favourable current.....
:D

to be fair though, it seems rather unfavorable to be a Russian pro-athlete at this point in time.
high chances of getting targeted and exposed.

if at all they get to participate in Rio it'll be interesting to watch them on the medal table.
 
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.

I beg to differ. The British, the Americans, and even people in his own government tried to warn Stalin that Hitler was planning a surprise attack. Stalin thought they were all trying to provoke trouble and ignored the warnings. When Hitler in fact did attack, what did Stalin do? Unbelievably, he retreated to his country dacha for two weeks, utterly at a loss. When members of his Politburo finally summoned the courage to go to the dacha to solicit his guidance, Stalin was convinced they were coming to arrest him. It's all in Krushchev's book.

The truth is, the Soviets triumphed in the war, amazingly, despite "frank thuggery and strongman rule". In part this was because Germany's frank thuggery and strongman rule was even more idiotic and inept than the Soviets' own.
WW2. Huh i wonder how much i remember from the history books. If i remember one plausible theory (i'm not sure about evidences) was that Soviets planned to attack Nazi Germany while they're on war with Great Britain. Hitler wasn't that tactically inept in the first days of WW2 and he knew that an eventual attack from Soviet Russia was possible. Besides, Soviets had a suspiciously big army in Ukraine before Barbarossa begun. Germany could be like a week ahead or so with their attack. That could be why Soviet army wasn't ready in defence.

Weren't there some documents leaked out not so long ago describing that Soviets actually had planned to attack Germany and had like a couple of simulation of attacking scenarios and if Germany would be ahead then there were only vague defensive reactions? This post is actually useless and offtopic but at least i can test my lacking memory a lil bit.

Cookson is worse for cycling than McQuaid? I actually wouldn't care but isn't one of them trying to cut Vuelta to give some oil rich dictatorship a criterium race a la F1 in the middle of nowhere? I guess Beijing was a finantial success after all. Those crowds... Giro is nowhere near those lads.
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Visit site
thehog said:
Hawkwood said:
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.

I beg to differ. The British, the Americans, and even people in his own government tried to warn Stalin that Hitler was planning a surprise attack. Stalin thought they were all trying to provoke trouble and ignored the warnings. When Hitler in fact did attack, what did Stalin do? Unbelievably, he retreated to his country dacha for two weeks, utterly at a loss. When members of his Politburo finally summoned the courage to go to the dacha to solicit his guidance, Stalin was convinced they were coming to arrest him. It's all in Krushchev's book.

The truth is, the Soviets triumphed in the war, amazingly, despite "frank thuggery and strongman rule". In part this was because Germany's own frank thuggery and strongman rule was even more idiotic and inept than their own.

And the Soviets relied on Arctic convoys from Britain and its allies for supplies of important war material, something that they acknowledge today was `essential to our war effort'.


Are you suggesting the Soviets had a tailwind? :rolleyes:

Lol, a case of mechanical doping perhaps?
 
Hawkwood said:
thehog said:
Hawkwood said:
Maxiton said:
thehog said:
Frank thuggery and strongman rule by the Russians is what saved the British from the Germans in WW2.

I beg to differ. The British, the Americans, and even people in his own government tried to warn Stalin that Hitler was planning a surprise attack. Stalin thought they were all trying to provoke trouble and ignored the warnings. When Hitler in fact did attack, what did Stalin do? Unbelievably, he retreated to his country dacha for two weeks, utterly at a loss. When members of his Politburo finally summoned the courage to go to the dacha to solicit his guidance, Stalin was convinced they were coming to arrest him. It's all in Krushchev's book.

The truth is, the Soviets triumphed in the war, amazingly, despite "frank thuggery and strongman rule". In part this was because Germany's own frank thuggery and strongman rule was even more idiotic and inept than their own.

And the Soviets relied on Arctic convoys from Britain and its allies for supplies of important war material, something that they acknowledge today was `essential to our war effort'.


Are you suggesting the Soviets had a tailwind? :rolleyes:

Lol, a case of mechanical doping perhaps?


Speaking of which.

In the book Stalingrad by Antony Beevor, he tells a story that the Russians would equip their dogs with explosives. The detonation device was attached to their tails. Hitler rolled his tanks all the way to the Russian border, to not only find mud but little dogs running under the tanks with the tail setting off the bomb which rendered the tank useless.

Marginal gains WW2 style :)
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

sniper said:
Benotti69 said:
It would appear Soviet swimmers had a favourable current.....
:D

to be fair though, it seems rather unfavorable to be a Russian pro-athlete at this point in time.
high chances of getting targeted and exposed.

if at all they get to participate in Rio it'll be interesting to watch them on the medal table.

Diack made himself a multimillionaire out of the Russians. Not sure Coe will want to close that flow of finance.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
sniper said:
Benotti69 said:
It would appear Soviet swimmers had a favourable current.....
:D

to be fair though, it seems rather unfavorable to be a Russian pro-athlete at this point in time.
high chances of getting targeted and exposed.

if at all they get to participate in Rio it'll be interesting to watch them on the medal table.

Diack made himself a multimillionaire out of the Russians. Not sure Coe will want to close that flow of finance.
true story.
i think Coe is already a millionaire, but if the Russians have dirt on him and IAAF, he will have no choice but to sing along.
 

TRENDING THREADS