Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 30, 2015, 06:04:19 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  International General Discussion (Moderators: Peter, afleitch)
| | |-+  Ukraine Crisis
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 67 68 69 70 71 [72] Print
Author Topic: Ukraine Crisis  (Read 92343 times)
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19005
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -8.71, S: -5.22

View Profile
« Reply #1775 on: February 18, 2015, 10:24:27 am »
Ignore

There are a few other things that could be done. Sanction every airline that flies into Crimea (and every airport that receives flights from Crimea). Make the western-oriented states that have not joined in join the sanctions (South Korea, where are you? BTW, when Mr. Netaniyahu comes visiting, as I've heard he is planning, he should get an earfull as well - that would help Speaker Boehner get rid of the charges he cares more about a foreign government, than about his own). Run a few big exercises with the Japanese near the Kuril islands. Invite President Nazarbayev for a State Visit to the US (a speech to Congress would add an extra nice touch).  Have as many presidents and prime ministers as possible attend the V-E Day parade in Kiev - Ukraine is as much as successor to the USSR here as Russia is.

This would backfire immensely from a tactical standpoint. The Putin government collapsing (if that is the intended result of your sanction/ostracization proposals) would not result in a liberal Russia, but an ultranationalist and presumably more trigger-happy Russia--that is, the NSDAP to Putin's DNVP.

(If I haven't already, I do apologize for my Putin apologism last year)
« Last Edit: February 18, 2015, 10:30:08 am by Snowstalker »Logged

ag
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7224


View Profile
« Reply #1776 on: February 18, 2015, 11:42:11 am »
Ignore

There are a few other things that could be done. Sanction every airline that flies into Crimea (and every airport that receives flights from Crimea). Make the western-oriented states that have not joined in join the sanctions (South Korea, where are you? BTW, when Mr. Netaniyahu comes visiting, as I've heard he is planning, he should get an earfull as well - that would help Speaker Boehner get rid of the charges he cares more about a foreign government, than about his own). Run a few big exercises with the Japanese near the Kuril islands. Invite President Nazarbayev for a State Visit to the US (a speech to Congress would add an extra nice touch).  Have as many presidents and prime ministers as possible attend the V-E Day parade in Kiev - Ukraine is as much as successor to the USSR here as Russia is.

This would backfire immensely from a tactical standpoint. The Putin government collapsing (if that is the intended result of your sanction/ostracization proposals) would not result in a liberal Russia, but an ultranationalist and presumably more trigger-happy Russia--that is, the NSDAP to Putin's DNVP.

(If I haven't already, I do apologize for my Putin apologism last year)

Who is talking about making the government collapse? Now, I would love that - but I am. from Russia, I care anout that country. From outsider standpoint it is sufficient that Putin government has little money to engage in mischief.

Nobody knows what will emerge in Russia post-Putin. Public politics is dead there: and public propaganda is in an overdrive. Russian nastyness is emphasized for all to observe. This, of course, is by design: the regime likes pretending to be "Russia's greatest European". The confident predictions of disaster post-Putin are no more grounded in reality than optimistic forecast of immediate victory of liberal democracy.
Logged
ag
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7224


View Profile
« Reply #1777 on: February 18, 2015, 02:37:13 pm »
Ignore

Looks like the rebels captured Debaltseve, not sure how many troops of the Ukrainian Army managed to pull out and how many were captured.

But the Minsk agreements are "very much alive", of course.
Logged
jaichind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2501
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

View Profile
« Reply #1778 on: February 18, 2015, 03:47:12 pm »
Ignore

Looks like the rebels captured Debaltseve, not sure how many troops of the Ukrainian Army managed to pull out and how many were captured.

But the Minsk agreements are "very much alive", of course.

One thing is is interesting is that the Ukrainian army which was trapped in Debaltseve did break out (or at least most of them) and mostly unopposed by the rebels who seems to have managed to at least place the road out under artillery fire if not outright occupation.   This act is actually a signal from the rebels to the Kiev regime that it values the city more than the destruction of the Ukrainian armed forces its which in turn signals goals are limited to trying to create viable mini-state and not the destruction of the current regime in Kiev.  This actually creates some space for possible peace and compromise in the future when it comes to a political settlement of this conflict.  
Logged

Chinese from Taiwan Province.  Now in New York City suburb of Scarsdale.  Ex-GOP now Libertarian.
The important thing is not how they vote but how we count.             - Stalin
ag
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7224


View Profile
« Reply #1779 on: February 18, 2015, 07:59:18 pm »
Ignore

Looks like the rebels captured Debaltseve, not sure how many troops of the Ukrainian Army managed to pull out and how many were captured.

But the Minsk agreements are "very much alive", of course.

One thing is is interesting is that the Ukrainian army which was trapped in Debaltseve did break out (or at least most of them) and mostly unopposed by the rebels who seems to have managed to at least place the road out under artillery fire if not outright occupation.   This act is actually a signal from the rebels to the Kiev regime that it values the city more than the destruction of the Ukrainian armed forces its which in turn signals goals are limited to trying to create viable mini-state and not the destruction of the current regime in Kiev.  This actually creates some space for possible peace and compromise in the future when it comes to a political settlement of this conflict.  

Destruction of military forces was a difficult strategy for the rebels to implement in this case. Ukraine only had a few thousand troops in the salient - only a small part of its force. An attempt to "destroy" them would result in major losses on the rebel side: these were still well-armed and would fight for their lives. It is far from clear that the rebel casualties would be much - if at all - smaller in that case. And the rebel draft base - unless you count the Russian volunteers and "volunteers" is much smaller than that of Ukraine (the occupied area even in the best of times had, may be, 4 mln. people, of which almost half - including most of the young men - has left; Ukraine is a country of over 40 mln people). So, human casualties are much harder for the rebels to replace (except, by getting people from Russia itself, of course: which is, in fact, what has sustained the war).
Logged
ingemann
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1602


View Profile
« Reply #1780 on: February 19, 2015, 09:00:18 am »
Ignore

Russia is a great power with enough nuclear weapons to leave USA as smoldering glass covered wasteland. Yes it would be nice if we could treat it as a defeated enemy or some Middle Eastern or third world sh**thole. We can't and we should accept that and look into how we need to deal with Russia (like remobilise).

I never said we should initiate a shooting war with Russia. Containment followed by RollBack should be the policy. But my main point was hat we should treat this as the threat it actually is.

The Soviet Union had a powerful nuclear arsenal too, but that didn't stop us from doing what it took to win.
'

USA and the rest of NATO did nothing to win, we just contained USSR until it collapsed under it own wrong economical policies, public opposition and demographic change. That's the logical policy to follow with Russia, to contain it and we have succesful done so, even if wasn't completely aware of it, with the expansion of NATO and EU to the east. Now Russia have lost one of its most important client states and instead they have gotten Crimea and a pathetic puppet in eastern Ukraine.

Well, containment should be firmer. The last time I checked Russian trains still could get to Kaliningrad.

Yes they can, just as West German trains could get to Berlin under the Cold War and the Baltic and Black Sea wasn't closed from our side. Closing down the land connection between Kaliningrad and core Russia would serve no purpose, it would not make Russia weaker, it would not make them back down,it would just cost them marginal to set up a ferry between it and Petrograd. The only thing it would do would be to give a excuse to Putin and Russia apoligists around the world. So we're very sorry we don't do counterproductive dickwaving.
Logged
I want my friggin hoverboard!
Old Europe
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6154


View Profile
« Reply #1781 on: February 19, 2015, 09:33:52 am »
Ignore

ingemann has made some legitimate points IMO.

Russia is on the defensive... or at least that's how Putin tends to see it. Since February 2014, Ukraine has a pro-Western government and it may never have a pro-Russian government again in the future. Invading Crimea and Donbass was a mere attempt at cutting the losses. From a Russian point of view, it's damage control.

Not that I agree with Russia's actions. I do think that they act like a bunch of paranoid jackasses. Tongue
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36054
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #1782 on: February 19, 2015, 10:05:00 am »
Ignore

Putin is suffering from the same kind of trauma that Hitler suffered from, just a bit different. Hitler had a WW1 trauma (personally as a soldier, and more universally with Germany getting destroyed and blamed and footed with the bills).

Putin still suffers a Cold War trauma (also personally => he was a spy, and more universally: Russia got its ass kicked and thrown backwards economically).

Both Hitler and Putin then and now want to compensate it by "making their country strong" and by occupying further land "for the needs of our people".

Both the people of Russia and Nazi Austro-Germany also have/had unwavering and blind trust in their Führer (Hitler/Putin).

Both peoples are also similarly xenophobic and fascist.

As you can see, there are some troubling similarities between them.
Logged
Charlotte Hebdo
politicus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8177
Denmark


View Profile
« Reply #1783 on: February 19, 2015, 10:08:26 am »
Ignore

Putin is suffering from the same kind of trauma that Hitler suffered from, just a bit different. Hitler had a WW1 trauma (personally as a soldier, and more universally with Germany getting destroyed and blamed and footed with the bills).

Putin still suffers a Cold War trauma (also personally => he was a spy, and more universally: Russia got its ass kicked and thrown backwards economically).

Both Hitler and Putin then and now want to compensate it by "making their country strong" and by occupying further land "for the needs of our people".

Both the people of Russia and Nazi Austro-Germany also have/had unwavering and blind trust in their Führer (Hitler/Putin).

Both peoples are also similarly xenophobic and fascist.

As you can see, there are some troubling similarities between them.

LOL

Otherwise: One more similarity is that the war/"war" ended with significant German/Russian minorities left in neighbouring countries. In the Soviet case that was an unnecessary error.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2015, 10:12:47 am by Charlotte Hebdo »Logged

ingemann
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1602


View Profile
« Reply #1784 on: February 19, 2015, 10:15:48 am »
Ignore

ingemann has made some legitimate points IMO.

Russia is on the defensive... or at least that's how Putin tends to see it. Since February 2014, Ukraine has a pro-Western government and it may never have a pro-Russian government again in the future. Invading Crimea and Donbass was a mere attempt at cutting the losses. From a Russian point of view, it's damage control.

Exactly if took a realpolitik perspective, USA and EU have gotten 80% of Ukraine with almost no cost. While Russia are destroying their economy and their careful net of alliance to keep the last 20% in their orbit.

Quote
Not that I agree with Russia's actions. I do think that they act like a bunch of paranoid jackasses. Tongue

I think ag have some interesting points, but they're less interesting than him, he more or less show us how the Russian think just the opposite way, if they don't stop us at Donbass, next we will push into Russia, until we take Moscow.
Russia have also shown the cost of thinking that way:
If Putin had just ignored the revolution in Ukraine, a few year down the road a new pro-Russian government would have arisen as the anti-Russian alliance collapsed. But now he has removed millions of pro-Russian voters from the Ukrainian electorate. Now Russia damage control have lost 80% of Ukraine permanent.
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16869


View Profile
« Reply #1785 on: February 19, 2015, 10:26:37 am »
Ignore

Putin has been on the offensive since the Second Chechen War (1999-2002). If the West was really as anti-Russian as the paranoid Putin fanatics claim, the human rights abuses committed there would have been a much bigger problem for Putin. The next stage was Georgia (2008), a small state outside of Europe with existing de facto independent puppet states within it. Ukraine (2014-15) is the latest stage, a large state within Europe, with no previous conflict before this. It is a pattern of steady escalation in his 15 year career, with marked acceleration recently. But I don't think the pattern has ever changed.
Logged

Charlotte Hebdo
politicus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8177
Denmark


View Profile
« Reply #1786 on: February 19, 2015, 10:38:17 am »
Ignore

The next stage was Georgia (2008), a small state outside of Europe

No.
Logged

ingemann
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1602


View Profile
« Reply #1787 on: February 19, 2015, 10:48:05 am »
Ignore

Putin has been on the offensive since the Second Chechen War (1999-2002). If the West was really as anti-Russian as the paranoid Putin fanatics claim, the human rights abuses committed there would have been a much bigger problem for Putin. The next stage was Georgia (2008), a small state outside of Europe with existing de facto independent puppet states within it. Ukraine (2014-15) is the latest stage, a large state within Europe, with no previous conflict before this. It is a pattern of steady escalation in his 15 year career, with marked acceleration recently. But I don't think the pattern has ever changed.

Yes that's sounds impressive, if you completely ignore the history behind the two earlier war. Let's remember that Chechnya beside being a earlier version of IS was negotiate for independence from Russia and was close to get it, before the geniuses decided to invade Dagestan and of course at the same there was a terror campaign in Russia which the Chechen was blamed for (it's believed it wasn't a false flag operation, but honestly we don't know for sure).

As for South Ossetian it was a Russian puppet set up under Jeltsin, whose autonomy Georgia decided to end. Which was a major reason we decided to ignore that war.

The Russian conflicts while not acceptable have been purely reactive to outside pressure, not expansionistic.
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16869


View Profile
« Reply #1788 on: February 19, 2015, 11:00:21 am »
Ignore

Putin has been on the offensive since the Second Chechen War (1999-2002). If the West was really as anti-Russian as the paranoid Putin fanatics claim, the human rights abuses committed there would have been a much bigger problem for Putin. The next stage was Georgia (2008), a small state outside of Europe with existing de facto independent puppet states within it. Ukraine (2014-15) is the latest stage, a large state within Europe, with no previous conflict before this. It is a pattern of steady escalation in his 15 year career, with marked acceleration recently. But I don't think the pattern has ever changed.

Yes that's sounds impressive, if you completely ignore the history behind the two earlier war. Let's remember that Chechnya beside being a earlier version of IS was negotiate for independence from Russia and was close to get it, before the geniuses decided to invade Dagestan and of course at the same there was a terror campaign in Russia which the Chechen was blamed for (it's believed it wasn't a false flag operation, but honestly we don't know for sure).

As for South Ossetian it was a Russian puppet set up under Jeltsin, whose autonomy Georgia decided to end. Which was a major reason we decided to ignore that war.

The Russian conflicts while not acceptable have been purely reactive to outside pressure, not expansionistic.


Chechen independence movement was hardly IS. It started as a rebel movement of an ethnic minority seeking political independence... precisely what Putin claims the Ukrainian rebels currently are. It didn't become radicalized until later. South Ossetia has never been recognized as an independent state, and Russia ended the war with military bases where it previously did not have them, so the result was expansionist, not purely defensive.
Logged

ingemann
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1602


View Profile
« Reply #1789 on: February 19, 2015, 11:42:43 am »
Ignore

Putin has been on the offensive since the Second Chechen War (1999-2002). If the West was really as anti-Russian as the paranoid Putin fanatics claim, the human rights abuses committed there would have been a much bigger problem for Putin. The next stage was Georgia (2008), a small state outside of Europe with existing de facto independent puppet states within it. Ukraine (2014-15) is the latest stage, a large state within Europe, with no previous conflict before this. It is a pattern of steady escalation in his 15 year career, with marked acceleration recently. But I don't think the pattern has ever changed.

Yes that's sounds impressive, if you completely ignore the history behind the two earlier war. Let's remember that Chechnya beside being a earlier version of IS was negotiate for independence from Russia and was close to get it, before the geniuses decided to invade Dagestan and of course at the same there was a terror campaign in Russia which the Chechen was blamed for (it's believed it wasn't a false flag operation, but honestly we don't know for sure).

As for South Ossetian it was a Russian puppet set up under Jeltsin, whose autonomy Georgia decided to end. Which was a major reason we decided to ignore that war.

The Russian conflicts while not acceptable have been purely reactive to outside pressure, not expansionistic.


Chechen independence movement was hardly IS. It started as a rebel movement of an ethnic minority seeking political independence...precisely what Putin claims the Ukrainian rebels currently are.

I would have been a lot more impressed with these claims, if we had seen how their state work between the 1st and 2nd war. Me I have a hard time having sympathy for people practicing and a state legalising slavery and bride stealing, and of course the fact that while the terror attacks can be claimed to have been false flag, their invasions of the neighbouring republics was something which we have clear historical evidence for. For some reason I fail to see how it was attempt

So you may celebrate the brave Chechen Muhadjins fight against the Russians, I on the other hand prefer a world without slavers.

Quote
  It didn't become radicalized until later. South Ossetia has never been recognized as an independent state, and Russia ended the war with military bases where it previously did not have them, so the result was expansionist, not purely defensive.

I said reactive not defensive wars.

Plus this is why I hate you people sometimes, you move the argument so far out that you think other people defend something because they ask you to deal with reality.

Man1: "Saddam is a cannibal"
Man2: "No he's not"
Man1: "So you defend Saddam"
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16869


View Profile
« Reply #1790 on: February 19, 2015, 12:05:03 pm »
Ignore

That's fair enough, I'll admit that all of these wars have had some reactive element to them from Russia's part. You were not defending the wars, you just pointed out that they didn't come out of nowhere. You're right in that.

The Chechen nationalists were undoubtedly horrible, but they were not IS. The government & most people who supported it were secular, but the government was too weak to control the Islamists. It was the latter that attacked Dagestan. The Chechen "government" offered Russia to crack down on the Islamists, but it was refused and a full scale invasion launched instead. In any case, I never said I supported the "brave Chechen Muhadjins". It is well known that both sides committed the worst atrocities in that war.

Putin's real problem is that he's too old. He still sees things from the Cold War KGB mentality which he never left behind. Otherwise, why would he even care that Ukraine is pro-Western? In his mind, pro-Western = anti-Russian (to be fair many others have this mentality too, but Putin only reinforces it).
Logged

ingemann
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1602


View Profile
« Reply #1791 on: February 19, 2015, 12:32:36 pm »
Ignore

That's fair enough, I'll admit that all of these wars have had some reactive element to them from Russia's part. You were not defending the wars, you just pointed out that they didn't come out of nowhere. You're right in that.

The Chechen nationalists were undoubtedly horrible, but they were not IS. The government & most people who supported it were secular, but the government was too weak to control the Islamists. It was the latter that attacked Dagestan. The Chechen "government" offered Russia to crack down on the Islamists, but it was refused and a full scale invasion launched instead. In any case, I never said I supported the "brave Chechen Muhadjins". It is well known that both sides committed the worst atrocities in that war.

Putin's real problem is that he's too old. He still sees things from the Cold War KGB mentality which he never left behind. Otherwise, why would he even care that Ukraine is pro-Western? In his mind, pro-Western = anti-Russian (to be fair many others have this mentality too, but Putin only reinforces it).

I agree you're right, Putin should have retired last election. It would have been better for Russia and it would have a whole lot better for his legacy.

Through I do get why he care that Ukraine is pro-western. Putin goal have been to semi-recreate USSR/the Russian Empire as the Eurasian Union, and without Ukraine that doesn't make a lot of sense.
 
Logged
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29702
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1792 on: February 19, 2015, 01:12:23 pm »
Ignore

To extend the Nazi analogy, if Putin is Hitler and Russia is Germany then Putin sees the Ukraine as his Austria despite not having been born there.  I do wonder why he didn't go after the Rhineland (Belarus) first tho.  It would have made this analogy stronger.  (Or was Crimea the Rhineland?)  Will Kazakhstan end up being Czechoslovakia or Poland?
Logged

did the Speaker spend his entire winter in a tanning salon, hibernating?
The one thing everyone can agree on is that the media is biased against them.
ag
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7224


View Profile
« Reply #1793 on: February 19, 2015, 02:01:59 pm »
Ignore

Putin is suffering from the same kind of trauma that Hitler suffered from, just a bit different. Hitler had a WW1 trauma (personally as a soldier, and more universally with Germany getting destroyed and blamed and footed with the bills).

Putin still suffers a Cold War trauma (also personally => he was a spy, and more universally: Russia got its ass kicked and thrown backwards economically).

Both Hitler and Putin then and now want to compensate it by "making their country strong" and by occupying further land "for the needs of our people".

Both the people of Russia and Nazi Austro-Germany also have/had unwavering and blind trust in their Führer (Hitler/Putin).

Both peoples are also similarly xenophobic and fascist.

As you can see, there are some troubling similarities between them.

LOL

Otherwise: One more similarity is that the war/"war" ended with significant German/Russian minorities left in neighbouring countries. In the Soviet case that was an unnecessary error.

Are you telling me you would prefer a massive deportation of Russians in 1991? So kind of you.

It would still not work, at least for Ukraine: you would have to separate millions of families. There is a continuum of self-identifications there. And, while there is no doubt in Lviv or Vologda (or even in Moscow or Kiev), there is a reason the war in Donbass is so violent now. Perhaps you are unaware, but the Ukrainian draft is failing in the West - Halicians do not care about dying for Donetsk. The bulk of the crack Ukrainian units (including the most nationalistic ones) are easterners, many from Donetsk itself - they are fighting for their homes. And, while it is true that Russia has registered hundreds of thousands of refugees from Donetsk - Ukraine by now has got over a million who fled West.

Either not following the 1991 administrative borders or engaging in deportations (India partition style) would have resulted in, conservatively, millions dead - there and then. Keep that in mind, please.
Logged
ag
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7224


View Profile
« Reply #1794 on: February 19, 2015, 02:02:45 pm »
Ignore

That's fair enough, I'll admit that all of these wars have had some reactive element to them from Russia's part. You were not defending the wars, you just pointed out that they didn't come out of nowhere. You're right in that.

The Chechen nationalists were undoubtedly horrible, but they were not IS. The government & most people who supported it were secular, but the government was too weak to control the Islamists. It was the latter that attacked Dagestan. The Chechen "government" offered Russia to crack down on the Islamists, but it was refused and a full scale invasion launched instead. In any case, I never said I supported the "brave Chechen Muhadjins". It is well known that both sides committed the worst atrocities in that war.

Putin's real problem is that he's too old. He still sees things from the Cold War KGB mentality which he never left behind. Otherwise, why would he even care that Ukraine is pro-Western? In his mind, pro-Western = anti-Russian (to be fair many others have this mentality too, but Putin only reinforces it).

I agree you're right, Putin should have retired last election. It would have been better for Russia and it would have a whole lot better for his legacy.


Russia has not had a proper presidential election since 2000. Are you suggesting he should not have run the first time?
Logged
Yeahsayyeah
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 265


Political Matrix
E: -9.25, S: -8.15

P
View Profile
« Reply #1795 on: February 19, 2015, 02:35:06 pm »
Ignore

I always wondered what a Sjuganow government would have looked like.
Logged
ag
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7224


View Profile
« Reply #1796 on: February 19, 2015, 03:47:24 pm »
Ignore

I always wondered what a Sjuganow government would have looked like.

Think Maduro, but with less charisma.
Logged
ingemann
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1602


View Profile
« Reply #1797 on: February 19, 2015, 04:16:44 pm »
Ignore

That's fair enough, I'll admit that all of these wars have had some reactive element to them from Russia's part. You were not defending the wars, you just pointed out that they didn't come out of nowhere. You're right in that.

The Chechen nationalists were undoubtedly horrible, but they were not IS. The government & most people who supported it were secular, but the government was too weak to control the Islamists. It was the latter that attacked Dagestan. The Chechen "government" offered Russia to crack down on the Islamists, but it was refused and a full scale invasion launched instead. In any case, I never said I supported the "brave Chechen Muhadjins". It is well known that both sides committed the worst atrocities in that war.

Putin's real problem is that he's too old. He still sees things from the Cold War KGB mentality which he never left behind. Otherwise, why would he even care that Ukraine is pro-Western? In his mind, pro-Western = anti-Russian (to be fair many others have this mentality too, but Putin only reinforces it).

I agree you're right, Putin should have retired last election. It would have been better for Russia and it would have a whole lot better for his legacy.


Russia has not had a proper presidential election since 2000. Are you suggesting he should not have run the first time?

I suggested that he should have let his crony (Dmitry Medvedev) stay president in 2012 and he should have retired to a mansion on the Black Sea coast, more or less like Yeltsin did.
Logged
ag
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7224


View Profile
« Reply #1798 on: February 19, 2015, 07:30:16 pm »
Ignore

That's fair enough, I'll admit that all of these wars have had some reactive element to them from Russia's part. You were not defending the wars, you just pointed out that they didn't come out of nowhere. You're right in that.

The Chechen nationalists were undoubtedly horrible, but they were not IS. The government & most people who supported it were secular, but the government was too weak to control the Islamists. It was the latter that attacked Dagestan. The Chechen "government" offered Russia to crack down on the Islamists, but it was refused and a full scale invasion launched instead. In any case, I never said I supported the "brave Chechen Muhadjins". It is well known that both sides committed the worst atrocities in that war.

Putin's real problem is that he's too old. He still sees things from the Cold War KGB mentality which he never left behind. Otherwise, why would he even care that Ukraine is pro-Western? In his mind, pro-Western = anti-Russian (to be fair many others have this mentality too, but Putin only reinforces it).

I agree you're right, Putin should have retired last election. It would have been better for Russia and it would have a whole lot better for his legacy.


Russia has not had a proper presidential election since 2000. Are you suggesting he should not have run the first time?

I suggested that he should have let his crony (Dmitry Medvedev) stay president in 2012 and he should have retired to a mansion on the Black Sea coast, more or less like Yeltsin did.

I know what you WANTED to suggest. But you suggested something quite different.

He cannot retire. He will be eaten alive if he does. Medvedev was in office only because Putin was in power. In order for Medvedev to be in power, he would have to kill Putin. Doubt he is capable of that, so, most likely, he would himself be killed and replaced by somebody who would have to kill Putin to stay alive. This is the logic of the house that Putin built.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 67 68 69 70 71 [72] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines