Dealing With Putin

[overthere]

Sure but your claim that GWB would have gone to "DEFCON +" is laughable. A complete joke.

Was he the president that won the Nobel Peace Prize?

Anybody have any doubt about Putins actual intentions when he agreed to a ceasefire last week in Minsk?

[bush_cheney2004]

....Anybody have any doubt about Putins actual intentions when he agreed to a ceasefire last week in Minsk?

Mitt Romney sure didn't have any doubt. But he lost the election.

[Hudson Jones]

Zomg! You mean the U.S. prefers lower oil prices! What a scoop!

Sometimes I wonder what is the percentage of the information you actually grasp. Because, from the responses you make, it looks like you comprehend very little of it.

[Shady]

Sometimes I wonder what is the percentage of the information you actually grasp. Because, from the responses you make, it looks like you comprehend very little of it.

Oh I know. Because the Saudis always listen when America wants them not to decrease production right?

Edited February 19, 2015 by Shady

[Shady]

Btw, if they are agreeing to not decrease production to sqeeze Russia, it's the right thing to do. Except of course if you're a big Putin fan. Which some of you are.

[GostHacked]

Btw, if they are agreeing to not decrease production to sqeeze Russia, it's the right thing to do. Except of course if you're a big Putin fan. Which some of you are.

Who are the Putin fans? Can you name them? The drop in oil is also putting a squeeze on the USA and Canada and Europe. Not just Russia. But you knew that.

[Argus]

Russia supporting rebels in Ukraine, bad.

USA supporting rebels n Syria, good.

The USA isn't supporting rebels in Syria. But why would you not say it was better to support rebels against a murderous, autocratic dictatorship as opposed to supporting rebels against an elected, democratic government?

Further, there ARE no organized rebels doing much fighting. Virtually all the fighting has been conducted by the Russian military after Russian special forces started the 'rebellion' by seizing various government buildings in eastern Ukraine.

[ASIP]

Further, there ARE no organized rebels doing much fighting. Virtually all the fighting has been conducted by the Russian military after Russian special forces started the 'rebellion' by seizing various government buildings in eastern Ukraine.

No. That was true in August of the last year.

The situation has changed drastically for the last five-six months. Now, according to Ukrainian reports from the front line, ratio of locals to Russian military among captured separatists is 7-8 to 3-2.

"True" rebels who joined anti-Ukrainian military units in the beginning of the conflict are dead by now. The Russian army established relatively strict order among rebels group. Those who didn't want to subdue to the direct Russian command were dispersed or killed. There is practically no any economy on most of the rebel controlled territory. There is no income to dozens of thousands of men. Russia pays money for them to join "rebel's army". And they do join it. Plus, there is an influx of Russian volunteers. They become a disposable human material that continuously attack Ukrainian Army positions, wearing out the defence and finding weak spots.

Russian army personnel constitute artillery, tank, anti-aircraft, reconnaissance and electronic countermeasure units. They normally do not have immediate contact with the Ukrainian Army. They act when a weak spot is found and a decisive blow is required, or when separatist infantry retreats under attack of the Ukrainian Army. Though, the latter situation is very rear as Ukraine obeys Minsk agreement of September 2014 and do not advance.

[August1991]

Finland’s leader Sauli Niinisto says his country, which has traditionally steered a course between Russia and the West, should not join NATO, despite the Ukraine crisis and calls from other Finnish politicians.

“It is very obvious that if Finland joins NATO, that would undoubtedly harm our relations with Russia. You have to keep in mind that 1,300 kilometers is a long, long border, and you just don’t keep it closed. On the contrary, it’s a living border,” the politician, who has led his country since 2012, told the Washington Post in Helsinki.

RussiaToday

Tell us more about the invasion of Finland....

Invasion? No, it is sending a message.

As Truman did at Potsdam when he negotiated face-to-face with Stalin and at the same time (without telling Stalin), Truman made the decision to approve dropping not one but two atom bombs on Japanese cities.

Imagine Stalin's reaction when he got back to Moscow, in August 1945 and learned of the atom bombs and the fact that Truman had said nothing about these new bombs while in Potsdam.

=====

IMV, we in the civilized West must send such messages. Whether we are dealing with psychopaths or obscurantist medievalism, we must oppose them with modern wiles.

Let us be Truman in Voltaire clothing.

Edited February 21, 2015 by August1991

[GostHacked]

The USA isn't supporting rebels in Syria. But why would you not say it was better to support rebels against a murderous, autocratic dictatorship as opposed to supporting rebels against an elected, democratic government?

Further, there ARE no organized rebels doing much fighting. Virtually all the fighting has been conducted by the Russian military after Russian special forces started the 'rebellion' by seizing various government buildings in eastern Ukraine.

Oh come on, I posted in this forum and created a thread 6 months before I knew that western powers would be putting their troops into the mix again. The US support of the FSA has been somewhat documented in other threads.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/08/18/the-terrorists-fighting-us-now-we-just-finished-training-them/

In recent years, President Obama, his European friends, and even some Middle Eastern allies, have supported “rebel groups” in Libya and Syria. Some received training, financial and military support to overthrow Muammar Gadhafi and battle Bashar al Assad. It’s a strategy that follows the old saying, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend,” and it has been the American and allied approach for decades in deciding whether to support opposition groups and movements.

The problem is that it is completely unreliable — and often far worse than other strategies. Every year there are more cases in which this approach backfires. The most glaring and famous failure was in Afghanistan, where some of the groups taught (and supplied) to fight the Soviet Army later became stridently anti-Western. In that environment, Al Qaeda flourished and established the camps where perpetrators of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were trained. Yet instead of learning from its mistakes, the United States keeps making them.

Now the claim is that the FSA and other rebel groups have joined the ISIS fold.

[Derek 2.0]

RussiaToday

Invasion? No, it is sending a message.

As Truman did at Potsdam when he negotiated face-to-face with Stalin and at the same time (without telling Stalin), Truman made the decision to approve dropping not one but two atom bombs on Japanese cities.

Imagine Stalin's reaction when he got back to Moscow, in August 1945 and learned of the atom bombs and the fact that Truman had said nothing about these new bombs while in Potsdam.

=====

One slight historic correction, at Potsdam, Truman did notify Stalin of the intention to drop Atomic Bombs on Japan (The first successful test in Nevada occurred during the Potsdam conference)…..Stalin reportedly didn’t respond in shock to Truman’s revelation, and endorsed the idea to some degree, surprising Truman, who’d only learned of the program itself weeks earlier after his sudden promotion...

……..of course, unbeknownst to the Americans (and British), the Soviets already had their own atomic weapons program, of which received technical intelligence from the Manhattan project, via several American physicists with Communist leanings.

[WWWTT]

Looks like the people of Russia are dealing with Barak Obama in their own way!

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=779782132042757

WWWTT

[GostHacked]

The USA isn't supporting rebels in Syria. But why would you not say it was better to support rebels against a murderous, autocratic dictatorship as opposed to supporting rebels against an elected, democratic government?

Kind of like supporting Bin Laden's Muhajedeen to fight off the Soviets. And how did that turn out?

Further, there ARE no organized rebels doing much fighting.

Virtually all the fighting has been conducted by the Russian military after Russian special forces started the 'rebellion' by seizing various government buildings in eastern Ukraine.

While that might be true for Ukraine, that does not seem to be the case in Syria or Iraq.

I

[GostHacked]

We also have Turkey starting to put their tanks and troops into Syria.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/turkey-sends-troops-into-syria-to-bring-ottoman-tomb-guards-home-1.2966484

The operation was successful, with the 38 soldiers safely back in Turkey, Davutoglu told a news conference in Ankara. He said that Turkey had not sought permission or assistance for the mission but had informed allies in the international coalition against Islamic State (ISIS) after the operation began.

Davutoglu earlier said the remains of Suleyman Shah, grandfather of the founder of the Ottoman Empire, would be moved to a different area of Syria that has been brought under Turkish military control.

TRT television broadcaster said ground troops backed by warplanes crossed into Syrian territory to reach the tomb, just over the border near the town of Sarrin and not far from Kobani, the town once surrounded by ISIS jihadists.

That is an act of war/aggression. I have a feeling 2015 is when everything in the M.E. really starts to blow up and make the past few years seem like Christmas.

[August1991]

One slight historic correction, at Potsdam, Truman did notify Stalin of the intention to drop Atomic Bombs on Japan (The first successful test in Nevada occurred during the Potsdam conference)…..Stalin reportedly didn’t respond in shock to Truman’s revelation, and endorsed the idea to some degree, surprising Truman, who’d only learned of the program itself weeks earlier after his sudden promotion...

No, Truman didn't notify Stalin as you suggest.

Here's what Truman wrote in his memoirs:

"On July 24 I casually mentioned to Stalin that we had a new weapon of unusual destructive force. The Russian Premier showed no special interest. All he said was he was glad to hear it and hoped we would make 'good use of it against the Japanese.'"

===

Truman, ever the American card player, knew exactly what he was doing. And as I noted above, Truman - while sitting beside Stalin at Potsdam - gave the approval to drop it twice.

Derek, it is this point that is key: Stalin returned to Moscow and then in August learned what Truman knew already.

Edited March 3, 2015 by August1991

[August1991]

……..of course, unbeknownst to the Americans (and British), the Soviets already had their own atomic weapons program, of which received technical intelligence from the Manhattan project, via several American physicists with Communist leanings.

This came later, after the war.

[Bonam]

Looks like the people of Russia are dealing with Barak Obama in their own way!

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=779782132042757

WWWTT

Lol, not a single bit of the English subtitle translation is even slightly close to what he's actually saying.

[Derek 2.0]

No, Truman didn't notify Stalin as you suggest.

Here's what Truman wrote in his memoirs:

"On July 24 I casually mentioned to Stalin that we had a new weapon of unusual destructive force. The Russian Premier showed no special interest. All he said was he was glad to hear it and hoped we would make 'good use of it against the Japanese.'"

===

Truman, ever the American card player, knew exactly what he was doing. And as I noted above, Truman - while sitting beside Stalin at Potsdam - gave the approval to drop it twice.

Derek, it is this point that is key: Stalin returned to Moscow and then in August learned what Truman knew already.

August, you're citing the very conversation that I did........

[Derek 2.0]

This came later, after the war.

No, the Soviet nuclear weapons program began during the War.

[Rue]

The worst thing you can do is issue threats or ultimatums to Putin. He will accept the challenge every time. If you want to negotiate with him, it really does have to be an open discussion with no lines in the sand. Building up military presence around him? That is a challenge he'll gladly accept. How many lives are the NATO countries willing to sacrifice in order to fail in attempting to send this message?

Yes people said the same thing about Hitler and Stalin. Its called appeasement.

Some of us thing you repeat a policy that is the last thing one does with a dictator who interprets appeasement as weakness.

Next we should sit down with terrorists over tea and talk peace.

[GostHacked]

Yes people said the same thing about Hitler and Stalin. Its called appeasement.

Some of us thing you repeat a policy that is the last thing one does with a dictator who interprets appeasement as weakness.

Next we should sit down with terrorists over tea and talk peace.

Ronald Regan meets with the Taliban.

[Rue]

Good one Ghost. Excellent counter point. The Taliban in those days was called Mujahadeen. They were not considered terrorists but freedom fighters against the Soviets.

You have an excellent point on the double standards used by governements.

The Mujahadeen at that time were not the Taliban as we now know it.. When Osama came in, the Mujahadeen were infiltrated by non Afghani Muslims who changed the ideology and direction of the Mujahadeen. But your point is taken.

A good zap.

Ironically you still proved my point. Look how it came back to bite the US in its ass whether its ISIS, Taliban, etc.

Point remains, no one should have tea with terrorists. No good comes of it.

There is Russia supporting Assad amd Iran but battling Chechnyan Muslims.

There is China battling Sunni Muslims extremists in its country.

The US flip flop with ISIS and Iran also speaks volumes.

It is precisely why Israel and Egypt warned all three nations AND Saudi Arabia not to get into bed with either Sunni or Shiite Mulsim extremists.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Rue

[GostHacked]

Fair is far Ghost. Excellent counter point. The Taliban in those days was called Mujahadeen. They were not considered terrorists but freedom fighters against the Soviets.

You have a point on the double standards used with who people deal with at any given time. Fair.

The Mujahadeen at that time are not the Taliban. When Osama came in, the Mujahadeen were infiltrated by non Afghani Muslims who changed the

ideology and direction of the Mujahadeen. But your point is taken.

A good zap.

Ironically you still proved my point. Look how it came back to bite the US in its ass whether its ISIS, Taliban, etc.

It's only something me and others have warned about for a few years here. But we were told we were crazy and did not know what we were talking about. Now it's catching those by surprise with the notions of 'how did this happen?'.

You obviously pay attention to these developments with your support/stance on Israel. One could argue that western intervention in the Middle East is actually putting Israel in more danger. But not only from the Middle East, you are getting it from North Africa as well.

We seem to agree that the US is not making things better, for anyone.

Afganistan - Not as stable as people think.

Iraq - Well, we know that's not stable.

Syria - Not stable.

Yemen, Not stable.

Egypt, Not stable.

Libya, Not stable.

All other nations in the area are on the brink of going down this road because of the so called War on Terror which was to resolve these issues. The War on Terror has actually perpetuated terrorism and allowed it to flourish in those nations mentioned above.

[overthere]

It is precisely why Israel and Egypt warned all three nations AND Saudi Arabia not to get into bed with either Sunni or Shiite Mulsim extremists.

That makes no sense.

Saudi Arabia is hardcore Sunni and does not need to be warned about getting into bed with ISIS(even more hardcore Sunni), since they have been in bed for decades with their very own Wahhabi loons.

The only reason they oppose ISIS is that they are destabilizing and impossible to control. The homegrown Saudi nutcases- who export their own brand of well funded extremism from their base in Saudi Arabia around the Muslim world- are allowed to operate within KSA is because they promise to support the ruling class in KSA.

[August1991]

Good one Ghost. Excellent counter point. The Taliban in those days was called Mujahadeen. They were not considered terrorists but freedom fighters against the Soviets.

You have an excellent point on the double standards used by governements.

Roosevelt and Churchill were "friends" with Stalin to defeat Hitler and Nazi Germany.

Rue and Ghost, were Churchill and Roosevelt wrong to sit beside Stalin in Tehran for a photo op? In December 1943, the end result of this war were still in doubt.

=====

When Reagan met these Afghanis, the civilized world faced a serious threat, and Reagan and Kennedy and Nixon and others confronted this Soviet threat in Berlin or Vietnam and eventually we in the West prevailed.

Do we now in the West have the courage/fortitude to confront this new scourge to our civilized society?

Like Reagan beside the taliban, Roosevelt only had to sit beside a tyrant for a photo-op to defeat an evil. I suspect that Truman, without a college education, understood the situation better.

Edited March 6, 2015 by August1991