October 6, 2015 at 1:04 am #44280
With the front in the Middle East developing into a new level of conflict I found this article pertinent. After seeing the weakness of the US response to every global issue I was certain Putin would start expanding Russia territorial control. So far he has moved on his western borders and now in the south. I’m guessing that Russia will be controlling both Syria and Iraq before long with a strong arm around Iran.
Quotes from the article:
“By the way, Putin has made it clear that in the event of a conflict with NATO he is prepared to use nuclear weapons to end the war.”
“subjects discussed was the possibilities for additional, even more dangerous crises between our two countries. There were lots of potential flash points identified, beyond the current crisis in Ukraine, ranging from the Baltics to Kaliningrad, Moldova, Kazakhstan and the Arctic”
“his dangerous initiatives – invading Crimea, starting an insurgency in the Ukraine, going to the rescue of the Syrian regime, violating the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, planting the Russian flag in international waters in the Arctic and harassing U.S. and NATO military forces – are only stupid if he wasn’t getting away with them”October 6, 2015 at 2:19 am #44284
After almost 6.75 years of O in the Whitehouse, Putin knows he can do whatever he wants for the remainder of O’s term. Russia has very real economic and demographic problems but they are not going to go quietly into the night. Putin also knows that neither Europe or the US are serious about stopping radical Islam, and that leaves him as the only adult in the room on that topic.
I don’t think he is looking for WWIII, but I doubt he will shy away from it if Europe & the US get in his way. The question then is whether Europe and the US will go to war to stop him.October 6, 2015 at 2:25 am #44285
The problem is , IF you actually listen to what he says , he makes too much sense a lot of the time , whereas our explanations seem reactionary and paranoia based . Trump seems to be the only candidate that knows the cold war is over , and doesnt want a resurrection of it . He ( Putin ) definitely sees things in his own way , some are spot on , some not , but thats to be expected , even our allies dont see the same situation the way we do sometimes . He is right about it being better when the Soviet Union was still around . With the bi-polar world system , things were much more simple , we were the good guys and the commies were the bad guys , it made things more black and white , less complicated for everybody . At the time they were indeed the aggressor , such as communisms survival depends on . We were indeed liberators and defenders at the time , now nobody can be trusted , not them , not us . In the 2nd vid , you can hear some old style rhetoric , kind of amusing .October 6, 2015 at 3:29 am #44290
When combined with the item I posted the other day on another thread, which linked to his extensive remarks at a conference in Russia, one begins to see a very different picture of Vladimir Putin than one sees if only obtained from ANY of the US media. He is certainly consistent when it comes to claiming that “national interests” are his primary concern. Do I trust him?!? Sorry, but I remember three little initials: KGB. And I remember how long (and how) he’s been President. Still, I do have to wonder if he’d be entirely that interested in world domination if he had the chance. I don’t know if his stated “facts” are all accurate, but he certainly did make the point about which country is projecting its nuclear capability nearer to the other one. He hasn’t (to our knowledge at least) put any nukes in Venezuela, or attempted that trick again in Cuba. Yet we’re all over the board, circling him with nuclear capability.
Two reasonable possibilities emerge off the top of my head. Either it’s a very classic communist fake out (a distinct possibility that should not be discounted), whereby he uses this logical “poor picked on Russia” approach so as to be able to take back a good bit of Europe when there is insufficient weaponry there to stop him; or it’s a fairly honest assessment of how HE sees it, presented back to us, and he really is primarily interested in Russia’s own national interest. I’m not willing to bet our security on either one, but certainly there needs to be dialog. And frankly, after more than ½ century, I personally think it’s well past time for Europe to either decide to stand up for their own collective interests, or get taken over. I’m tired of spilling American blood for what?
I do have to take back what I said elsewhere in support of Fiorina’s statement that she wouldn’t talk to him at all – very short sighted knee-jerk reaction on my part. Frankly, at least for now, Putin’s approach to Syria MAY make more sense than ours by far! As bad as Assad is, we’d have an even greater nightmare than we had with Libya and Egypt if Assad fell right now with no one to replace him. The real estate surrounding Syria is far more important than that surrounding Libya. Russia seems to be the only one that understands that.
And it MAY be (since I don’t automatically buy anybody’s “news” reports) that he really doesn’t care whether it’s the anti-Assad forces, OR the anti-ISIS forces that we support, that he attacks in Syria. He may genuinely want stability in Syria because he knows the alternative could be far worse, so he stabilizes Assad by stabilizing the nation. He’s got his own Islamic terrorist problem in the form of Chechens, particularly, so he’s clearly got an interest there, going back at least into the 1990s. And it’s not like we don’t have our own history of backing brutal dictators – as long as they were OUR brutal dictators (giving chemicals to Saddam when he was “our” brutal dictator fighting our enemy Iranian brutal dictator, for example).
Regardless of his motives or how anyone looks at him politically, he’s certainly a massive contrast to our own CinC. I find myself wondering these days exactly what was going on when Obama whispered to Medvedev to tell Vladimir he’d have more flexibility once the 2012 election was over and he’d been re-elected. Is this all really just an orchestrated show jointly put on for the world by Obama and Putin? Or did Putin laugh his guts out at Obama trying to make like a big boy as if he had something to offer Putin in the big leagues?
My bottom line is: I don’t know. But of the two national leaders, there’s no doubt in my mind who the stronger one is. And he doesn’t reside on this side of the pond. Great video, Tolik.October 6, 2015 at 4:19 am #44291
No , you cant trust him , but you can bargain with him . You cant trust any leader who is looking out for the best interests of their country . I do believe that he would indeed honor any agreements that were made about combined military operations against Islam , but we would have to be smart enough to make things very clear and spell everything out in detail . I will try to post this if I can find it again , but there was a poll taken in Europe , asking the populations of the NATO countries if they would be willing to come to the aid of their neighbor if they were to get into a conflict . The results were different for each country , but over all …………..they were not very keen on it . One thing about Putin , that is a reoccurring theme , is that he feels that the US does not give his country the respect its entitled to as a nation …………which we dont . I have seen a lot of his interviews , and what is disturbing to me as an American ( because it may be true ) is that what he claims about international affairs , in not so many words is this : As a nation and government , the US no longer has an identity , internally and externally , or really knows what it wants to do . Then goes around making a mess of things . While his country isnt going to sit in the back of the bus any longer , it cant afford to , because certain things are starting to get out of hand ( Islam for one ), and they need to assert themselves again . I hope that isnt true , but it makes me think . Every one of our regimes is completely different from the previous , while they are fairly consistent . Forget the government for a moment , we dont even know who we are as a people anymore . We ourselves are unstable , so we run to the tried and true , which is paint them as a bogey man , in order to try to hang onto what little unity we have left . Unwise long term . World domination is a fools errand , he is no fool . Bottom line on a lot of things , is that when our two countries make a decision to act and cooperate on an issue , Things get done , and get done quickly , because we have the ability to do so .October 7, 2015 at 4:18 pm #44314
Putin is on the move. He knows he has a little over a year to do what he needs to do.October 8, 2015 at 4:15 pm #44343
Its a simple proposition to me , the US has been spilling its blood over there for a long time now , why not let them spill some blood of their own over there , so we dont have to , quit ***** footing around and get the job done . Any perceived ” loss ” of Syria , is no real loss . Other than a port , Syria doesn’t have much to offer . I actually do think that he is in there to do just what he said , which is to support a legit government in order to prevent more spreading of ISIS and other groups . Does he have other motives ? he probably does , but right now , what he is doing is actually useful . So far , they are only using their air force to support syrian ground troops , and spetsnaz to hit cells . Like was mentioned in another post , looking back , its too bad that Saddam Hussein got greedy , and went into Kuwait , absolutely forcing us to intervene . Had he not done that , as brutal as he was , it would have been at least some more stability over there .
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.