Sell me on Vladamir Putin

[Truth Detector]

But, he is a KGB murderous thug.

...and yet, last election you guys were fine with Obama buddying up to Medvedev. Not only are you liberal lying morons, but you're massive hypocrites.

An open microphone captured US President Barack Obama assuring Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he will have "more flexibility" to deal with missile defense after this year's US presidential election.

 

[Truth Detector]

A relationship has to have a foundation. What would be the foundation of a Putin/America relationship? Sell me.

Since you give Putin a complete and total pass on his foreign policy, what about his domestic policy? The oligarchs have pick-pocketed the Russian people, such that Putin himself is estimated to be worth 200 billion. Civil rights are basically non-existent. Being gay is a crime. Political dissent is punishable by death. How is that anyone's fault but Putin's? How does America or NATO push him to be a dictatorial oligarch?

I dismiss all wisdom when the source of that wisdom is curdled. Do you know what wisdom and why it is valuable?

Alternative question: Lets say the opposite of Putin is elected in Russia. Someone who embraces liberal democracies, embraces NATO, embraces civil rights, and pushes for free and fair elections. Someone who basically reverses everything Putin did under his reign.

How would you treat such a Russia and their relationship with the West?

In order to honestly answer these questions, we would have to pretend that your version of the world is real; but it isn't, therefore, your questions are strawmen.

This notion that SUDDENLY, Russia has become enemy number one with ISIS running around Europe blowing people up and running them down with trucks, and the mess Obama left us, is specious and moronic.

But alas, when Obama cuddled up to Medvedev, that was okay. Morons.

 

[Buckly J. Ewer]

TD LOVES PUTIN...

VLAD IS GLAD

 

[Amadeus]

In order to honestly answer these questions, we would have to pretend that your version of the world is real; but it isn't, therefore, your questions are strawmen.

Do you even know what a strawman argument is? FYI, if you use a term without knowing what it is, it makes you look stupid.

But alas, when Obama cuddled up to Medvedev, that was okay. Morons.

Your characterization aside, that was before Putin did a LOT of what he did. Putin's threat and actions have escalated over time, not diminished. Medvedev was before Crimea and before Syria.

 

[Amadeus]

that would make them more amendable to a friendlier relationship -but it wouldn't guide the relationship per se'.
With the exception of NATO where we have an alliance, and Great Britain's "special relationship"
we operate internationally with whatever our perceived bests interests are.

In Great Britain's case we assume we operate in the same best interest.
In NATO's case we assume a military coordination.

So what is in Russia's best interests? Not Putin's, but Russia's.

 

[Truth Detector]

TD LOVES PUTIN...

BucklyTard loves looking like a moron! Yay BucklyTard!

 

[Truth Detector]

Do you even know what a strawman argument is? FYI, if you use a term without knowing what it is, it makes you look stupid.

Apparently you're the one who is clueless about strawmen; and we know you're an idiot.

Your characterization aside, that was before Putin did a LOT of what he did.

That is a massive pile of crap; but assuming you have even the slightest clue of what you are emotionally erupting about, if they occurred AFTER Obama snuggled up to Medvedev, it merely illustrates what a massive failure Obama was.

If you had even half a brain, you would realize that a LOT of what Putin did was on Obama's watch.

Putin's threat and actions have escalated over time, not diminished. Medvedev was before Crimea and before Syria.

....during Obama's Presidency you clueless leftist twit. Now what threats has Putin made towards the US? List them out with the dates.

Right now, Putin is laughing at morons like you trying to destroy a Presidency because your pissed off the lying sociopath you supported lost. Hell, Democrats are trying to succeed at what Communists could have only dreamed of....the destruction of the American political process and elections.

Dunce.

 

[Buckly J. Ewer]

BucklyTard loves looking like a moron! Yay BucklyTard!

You make Vlad so glad...

 

[Truth Detector]

Another massive straw man illustrating why you support the Party of the Jackass.

I have a better question; how is turning on Russia and calling their leader a criminal ensure peace or cooperation?

Dunce.

In what capacity and in what area of cooperation? If could certainly be argued -- if not be verified as the gospel truth -- that Putin has vastly increased the problem of ISIS and terrorism in general.

Wrong again dumnbfuck; Obama's unilateral withdrawal from the region after numerous warnings about how stupid and dangerous it would be is what has vastly increased the problem of ISIS. Then Obama doubled down on his stupidity and called ISIS JV.

Putting this on Putin is about as moronic as claiming the Russians put Trump into power. But then, when it comes to painfully stupid, vapid and divisive remarks, you liberal liars have few peers.

Now answer my question you dishonest leftist twit on steroids.

Fucking CHUD.

Dumbfuck.

 

[Buckly J. Ewer]

Wrong again dumnbfuck; Obama's unilateral withdrawal from the region after numerous warnings about how stupid and dangerous it would be is what has vastly increased the problem of ISIS. Then Obama doubled down on his stupidity and called ISIS JV.

Putting this on Putin is about as moronic as claiming the Russians put Trump into power. But then, when it comes to painfully stupid, vapid and divisive remarks, you liberal liars have few peers.

Now answer my question you dishonest leftist twit on steroids.



Dumbfuck.

TD DEFENDS PUTIN...

VLAD IS GLAD...

 

[Amadeus]

Cold War 2.0 is the big relationship.

Do you think a relationship based on appeasing Putin is productive?

all other considerations aside -would it not be better for the US to be spending that money for domestic needs?
well the way you accomplish that is to begin to revese the tensions built up since NATO expansion

I think Russia would like nothing more than for America to adopt an America First stance on foreign policy.

As I've mentioned many times before "Putin is a rational state actor"-meaning he's not operating from some fanatical base-but from what he perceives as concrete measures to further Russia's interests.

You are conflating Russia's interests with Putin's interests. At the moment, Putin is Russia, but that has proven terrible for Russians, as most are living below what Americans would consider the poverty line. Russia could be more than a glorified gas tank.

Which brings us back to realpolitik again the chances for both the US/NATO/and Russia to all operate from our own best interests.
And the new Cold War 2.0 serves none of our purposes except our military industrial complexes.

Even now, you say that Crimea is done and over with, and everyone should just accept the annexation. You are the best spokesman for Russia on these forums. Do you watch RT a lot?

I snipped most of your post, the stuff that references the imaginary Deep State -- which is so much gobbledekgook that you cannot even define it what it is or where its located.

This is not to dismiss his war crimes -but it is to see his valued idea in international relations

It's not wisdom, is the point. Kissinger says something you agree with and you are passing it off as wisdom. Wisdom is not wisdom when the source is curdled.

 

[Buckly J. Ewer]

Do you think a relationship based on appeasing Putin is productive?



I think Russia would like nothing more than for America to adopt an America First stance on foreign policy.



You are conflating Russia's interests with Putin's interests. At the moment, Putin is Russia, but that has proven terrible for Russians, as most are living below what Americans would consider the poverty line. Russia could be more than a glorified gas tank.



Even now, you say that Crimea is done and over with, and everyone should just accept the annexation. You are the best spokesman for Russia on these forums. Do you watch RT a lot?

I snipped most of your post, the stuff that references the imaginary Deep State -- which is so much gobbledekgook that you cannot even define it what it is or where its located.



It's not wisdom, is the point. Kissinger says something you agree with and you are passing it off as wisdom. Wisdom is not wisdom when the source is curdled.

They make Vlad Glad...

 

[canceled.2021.1]

Pretend that I'm a blank slate. Sell me on why Putin is good for Russia, why America should 'team-up' with Russia in general, and/or why Russia under Putin should be embraced in the international community of liberal democracies as an ally.

Ready. Set. Go.

It isn't up to us whether or not Putin rules Russia or is good for Russia. However we have to deal with him.

Change your premise

 

[Minister of Truth]

I wonder if anatta was appalled by Reagan's use of incendiary rhetoric against the Soviets, like "evil empire" and "tear down this wall?"

 

[Minister of Truth]

...and yet, last election you guys were fine with Obama buddying up to Medvedev. Not only are you liberal lying morons, but you're massive hypocrites.

An open microphone captured US President Barack Obama assuring Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he will have "more flexibility" to deal with missile defense after this year's US presidential election.

Do you think I give a fuck what Obama said or did while he was in office?

 

[Buckly J. Ewer]

I wonder if anatta was appalled by Reagan's use of incendiary rhetoric against the Soviets, like "evil empire" and "tear down this wall?"

Anatta-boy must have hated Bonzo...

 

[Amadeus]

It isn't up to us whether or not Putin rules Russia or is good for Russia. However we have to deal with him.

Again I ask: Where, why, and how? Convince me that Putin has been a net positive in the war on terrorism.

Seems to me that Putin has only been useful in securing the Iran nuclear deal, which you hate.

 

[anatta]

So what is in Russia's best interests? Not Putin's, but Russia's.

diversify it's economy, lift sanctions so it can get back to international banking.
Putin ( and the 2 are inseparable for now)is also making inroads into the Arctic.

It's a geopolitical friend of Iran -although Iran has it's own interests

 

[anatta]

I wonder if anatta was appalled by Reagan's use of incendiary rhetoric against the Soviets, like "evil empire" and "tear down this wall?"

meh. rhetoric is only important if it effect behavior.
It's assumed Reagan's rhetoric did so - and it might have been convincing -but only when taken with US behaviors

 

[anatta]

Originally Posted by anatta
Cold War 2.0 is the big relationship.

Do you think a relationship based on appeasing Putin is productive?

how is the Cold War2.0 an appeasement?

I think Russia would like nothing more than for America to adopt an America First stance on foreign policy.

Everyone would benefit.
But it's not going to happen unless both Putin and Trump try to ratchet down the tensions.
And that's not going to happen given the climate of Russiaphobia sweeping DC

You are conflating Russia's interests with Putin's interests. At the moment, Putin is Russia, but that has proven terrible for Russians, as most are living below what Americans would consider the poverty line. Russia could be more than a glorified gas tank.

Trying to un-twine Putin from Russia today is impossible.
It's like saying what if there was no NATO expansion. Events exist. Putin exists.
That's the "real" part of realpolitik. dealing with states as they are, not how we want them to be

Even now, you say that Crimea is done and over with, and everyone should just accept the annexation. You are the best spokesman for Russia on these forums. Do you watch RT a lot?

argumentative with out purpose

I snipped most of your post, the stuff that references the imaginary Deep State -- which is so much gobbledekgook that you cannot even define it what it is or where its located.

It operates as a power base within existing government. It's not like you can put it on a flow-chart.
It's the IC leadership in conjunction with it's powers to set policy ( like the Russiaphobia)
in tandem with other players that shift in an out.

It's not wisdom, is the point. Kissinger says something you agree with and you are passing it off as wisdom. Wisdom is not wisdom when the source is curdled.

OK. it's smart power..lol