Vladimir Putin: An Unbiased Perspective

I am creating this post, as I usually do when I see people bringing up alot of post in regards to a specific person in general.

Vladimir Putin has been subject to many ATS threads lately, so I have decided to compose a thread in regards to him and his presidency. The last individual I did was the President of Syria.


Vladimir Vladimirovič Putin:



Putin was not born to a wealthy family, wielding power over the Soviet State, instead he was born in Leningrad, in 1952 (St. Petersburg). He lived in a small Socialist style communal apartment building, his grandfather a chef and his father a foot soldier in the second world war, they where hardly "nwo rich and powerful" that one would assume after looking at Putin now.

Putin graduated from the International Branch of the Law Department of the Leningrad State University in 1975 and was recruited into the KGB. In the University he also became a member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, where he remained until the ban on it imposed in August 1991.

He worked in the Leningrad and Leningrad region Directorate of KGB, where he was acquainted with Sergei Ivanov.[7]

In 1976 he completed KGB retraining courses. In 1978 he entered other retraining courses in foreign intelligence in Moscow. After completing the training he served in the First Department of the Leningrad Directorate (foreign intelligence) until 1983. In 1983-1984 he studied at the KGB High School in Moscow. In 1984 Putin was appointed Major.

From 1985 to 1990 the KGB stationed Putin in Dresden, East Germany,[2] in what he regards as a minor position. Following the collapse of the East German regime, Putin was recalled to the Soviet Union and returned to Leningrad, where in June 1990 he assumed a position with the International Affairs section of Leningrad State University, reporting to Vice-Rector Yuriy Molchanov. At his new position, Putin was reacquainted with Anatoly Sobchak (1937-2000), then Mayor of Leningrad. Sobchak served as an Assistant Professor during Putin's university years and was one of Putin's lecturers. Putin formally resigned from the state security services on August 20, 1991, during the KGB-supported abortive putsch against Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev.

As you can see, his career in the KGB was reletively lame, in the sense that he held no real major powers of any kind, he was not in control of any one and was not exactly wealthy by our standards, though did well for himself.

In the 1980's he married his wife, who was also from lowly origins. He met her when she was an undergrad student, she had at one point been an airline attendant "stewardess". The entire family has no connections to the rich and powerful, but somewhat mediocre origins.

It was during the 1990's that his political career truly kicked off. He started, after his resognation from the KGB, working as "external relations" for the city of St. Petersburg. Again, a lowly position, but a stepping stone to bigger and better things.

In 1996 Anatoly Sobchak lost the St. Petersburg Moyoral election to Vladimir Yakovlev. Putin was called to Moscow and in June 1996 assumed position of a Deputy Chief of the Presidential Property Management Department headed by Pavel Borodin. He occupied this position until March 1997. On March 26, 1997 President Boris Yeltsin appointed Putin Deputy Chief of Presidential Staff, where he remained until May 1998, and Chief of the Main Control Directorate of the Presidential Property Management Department (until June 1998).

This was is most powerful position of sorts in the 1990's, which if you'll notice, was not very long ago at all.

On August 9, 1999 Vladimir Putin was appointed one of three First Deputies Prime Minister, which enabled him later on this day, as the previous government led by Sergei Stepashin had been sacked, to be appointed acting Prime Minister of the Government of the Russian Federation by President Boris Yeltsin (Text of Yeltsin's speech in English: [16]). Yeltsin also announced that he wanted to see Putin as his successor. Later, that same day, Putin agreed to run for the presidency.

IMO, Putin is just a man who was smart and played the game right. That's all politics is, a big game.. and those who can play it well end up on top, those who can't don't last long. It is a Darwinian game and the strongest survive. Being in the right place at the right time helps to.. this was around Soviet collapse and a change in government.

His current policies may seem extreme to some, especially out side of the US because we rarely understand that its OK to be different and not conform to the "western" rules.. and that by suppressing our ideas on everyone else, it actually pushes them away..

IF its unbiased then why don't you fill free to mention all the people he has had murdered, or shut up????

The truth is out there:
www.abovepolitics.com...

Originally posted by Royal76
IF its unbiased then why don't you fill free to mention all the people he has had murdered, or shut up????

The truth is out there:
www.abovepolitics.com...

The truth is always out there somewhere, but I think you gave the wrong link. That link goes to some biased rant about what some person thinks some other person had done. You can dig up enough rumors, to make anyone out as a bloodthirsty murderer focused on outright destruction. Truth lies in long-term observation from all perspectives, not in ability to dig up sensational speculations.

Originally posted by Royal76
IF its unbiased then why don't you fill free to mention all the people he has had murdered, or shut up????

The truth is out there:
www.abovepolitics.com...

It is unbiased in that it is an outline of his carrier, for those who insist is the NWO or what ever crap people dig up.

As for his "ethics" that can be your own opinion.. I have seen nothing that I do not approve of as far as his handling of Russia, at the current time. For the economy and keeping dignity for Russia, she needs someone like Putin.. a strong hand. But that is just my opinion .. the history of his becoming is not.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
His current policies may seem extreme to some, especially out side of the US because we rarely understand that its OK to be different and not conform to the "western" rules.. and that by suppressing our ideas on everyone else, it actually pushes them away..

I agree. To understand what Putin is doing, and who he is, you first need to stop paying attention to what Western media says about him- it's all sensationalism anyway.


Everyone in the West (like the case-in-point above) is too busy trying to equate Putin to Western European or US leaders, and his actions and policies to their actions and policies. Well in order to equate a leader of the country to that of another, you first need similar conditions in the two countries.

US/Western Europe have had democracies and capitalism for what now? 150, 200 years on average? Were they built in one day? Did U.S. suddenly become a nation, where everyone is free, equal, able to voice their say, and able to prosper in 1776? The U.S. Democracy took over 200 years to build, and it is still far from complete.

Russia has never had democracy or anything similar untill 1991. In the early 1990's, the entire democracy/capitalism idea was just crushed onto it, without time to adjust, prepare, or absorb the shock (Gorbachev's "shock therapy"). No country of comparable size and power has ever experienced something sudden like this in the last 100 years. You simply cannot not compare these conditions to US or Europe. Many do not understand or know what happened in Russia in the 90's.


To understand Putin you first have to understand Russia in the 90's. -The oligarchs, the corruption, the exploitation efforts by US/UK, the organized crime, and the political factions struggling for power.

When you learn all that, you can get a picture of what Putin is trying to accomplish and what he is trying to fix. Many things he did had negative results, many also had positive. But if you look at the country that was handed to him in 1999, no one knows what someone else would have done in his place, but I can assure you that it probably would have been worse than Putin, if not far worse. In hindsite he did what was best for Russia as a whole. All other interests (like those of US) should come later, if at all. If you wish to argue with this, familiarize yourself with the setting of Russia first, and I am not talking about CNN or FOX News reports.



It is easy to say Putin = murderer, or Putin wants to create an evil super empire out of Russia. For that one doesn't need to think, to understand or to observe- only to use one's prejudiced opinions to see current events from a certain biased point. Alas many look for the easy way out, including too many otherwise intelligent people.




[edit on 27-3-2007 by maloy]

Originally posted by Rockpuck
As for his "ethics" that can be your own opinion.. I have seen nothing that I do not approve of as far as his handling of Russia, at the current time. For the economy and keeping dignity for Russia, she needs someone like Putin.. a strong hand. But that is just my opinion .. the history of his becoming is not.

Observing Russian politics from within, I can tell you that Putin has made many mistakes, and his progress in improving certain areas is lacking (in the sense that he has the power to do more than he is doing).

But is he what Russia needed in 2000? Absolutely. At that point Russia was down to nothing, and to get a strong start you need a strong leader.

The outcome of that election for Russia was either of the following:

1. Leave the past behind, and start building up from the drawing board (what Putin did).

2. Stay on "Yeltsin" track, which led right to rock bottom. Let local oligarchs and Western corporations rob Russia of everything it had left, but hey- if that what they call "democracy"...

3. Go back to militarization. Cancel all treaties. Get its CIS buddies back in before they have a chance to run off and join NATO. Militarization= discipline = civil conduct = military-industrial complex = money from wars = wars = new Cold War.

4. Let everyone separate (Chechnia, Tatarstan, followed by many other regions), and go their separate routes. Eventually what's left of Russia is 50 sovereign states, all fighting with each other (with no less than nukes mind you), and economy is not even an issue anymore. NATO comes in to mediate this kindergarten, or whats left of it, and eventually starts running it.


Yeah- the West was really hoping for #2, or #4 as back-up. Too bad that some people in Russia actually cared about what's best for them...


Putin is putting democracy on hold, while Russia is "building". You can't have uncontrolled democracy and capitalism, and then build a country from it. You need to have a solid foundation on which to build that democracy, or it will all come crumbling down in a matter of a decade (as Russia did in the late 90's).

Democracy can be a priority when order and economic stability is restored. Putin is doing what he needs to be doing, and the Western "humanitarians" and their corporations will just have to wait.

I'll give Russia another decade or so before democracy can truly take hold- and that's if everything stays as it does (pro-Putin politics, fast economic growth, and no interference from the West). That is why Putin and those who support him (a majority I must say) are so focused on keeping the pro-#1,#3, and #4's above out of politics. The questionable factor here is the West. US and NATO is getting closer and closer to Russian borders, and this progress might well be put back another decade.