Putin's Warning / Missile Defense Systems Active

I haven't seen any coverage of this meeting Putin held with U.S. journalists, so I felt it necessary to post it here.



what strikes me here is how elegantly he comes off with being personable. You can tell he will not allow his authority to be challenged, and at the same time genuinely looks like he's divulging an honest and complete version of our current events.

a little bit of background on me - I'm Ukrainian, an American citizen, and have lived here for over 20 years. With this, I find myself in the peculiar position of being able to hear perspectives from both Russian and American sides of the media, as well as their respective citizens.

say what you will about Putin, and I would more than likely agree. where I might differ with some of you here is my view on the decisions he's been making over the past few years (in particular, the annexation of Crimea and seeming need to reform the USSR).

From the clip:

"I must remind you, though you already know this, that major global conflicts have been avoided in the past few decades, due to the geostrategic balance of power, which used to exist... It's not in my nature to scold someone - but when the United States unilaterally withdrew from the ABM Treaty in 1972 they delivered a colossal blow to the entire system of international security. That was the first blow when it comes to assessing the strategic balance of power in the world."

Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty 1972

From the link:

On December 13, 2001, George W. Bush gave Russia notice of the United States' withdrawal from the treaty, in accordance with the clause that required six months' notice before terminating the pact—the first time in recent history that the United States has withdrawn from a major international arms treaty.[14] This led to the eventual creation of the American Missile Defense Agency.[15]

Supporters of the withdrawal argued that it was a necessity in order to test and build a limited National Missile Defense to protect the United States from nuclear blackmail by a rogue state. The withdrawal had many critics as well as supporters. John Rhinelander, a negotiator of the ABM treaty, predicted that the withdrawal would be a "fatal blow" to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and would lead to a "world without effective legal constraints on nuclear proliferation." The construction of a missile defense system was also feared to enable the US to attack with a nuclear first strike.

Crimea & Ukraine on the map in relation to Russia:



So, speaking with regards to geopolitics, the picture becomes more clear. More specifically, I believe Putin wants control of Crimea to prevent a US proxy invasion by any means necessary. Based on the map, and Crimea's relative distance to Turkey and the middle east (where we now have and have been having *ample* ongoing military operations, both covert and otherwise), it's clear to see how Russia can be compromised by the positioning of US troops in the region.

He'll take it and will control that border, no doubt about it. He is now firm and steadfast at asserting that we in the US are instigating conflicts and creating clear divides around the globe. One can only think back to his U.N. speech.

I'm not saying he's the good guy here, nor am I saying he's the villain. He's a world leader whose job it is to anticipate future conflicts and prepare accordingly. What is clear to me at this point is that he no longer believes that the US is a superpower like it was a few decades ago. What is clear to Putin is that Russia is a stronger, more independent and militarized country than it was a few decades ago as well. He understands the tide is changing, will not refuse his status on the world stage, and absolutely anticipates us to act like a cornered animal. This, to me, is clear indication that it's been much warmer than a "cold war" for a while now - and, dare I say, 9/11 seems like the kickstarter to our offensive missile systems based on the timeline.

What does ATS think?

a reply to: facedye


Geopolitically speaking, yah at what point do we expect the remaining superpowers like Russia and China to defend themselves form obvious encroachment by the west into Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa?

How far is far enough?

He is now firm and steadfast at asserting that we in the US are instigating conflicts and creating clear divides around the globe

Do the research, I think you'll find he has a point

In the past few years and based on the actions and words of politicians of both east and west, my respect for Russia has grown, while it has been entirely the opposite in regards to the U.S.

Furthermore, every tax dollar spent on the military is a slap in the face to not just American citizens, but the entire world, in regards to making this place better for all.

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum

He is now firm and steadfast at asserting that we in the US are instigating conflicts and creating clear divides around the globe

Do the research, I think you'll find he has a point

In the past few years and based on the actions and words of politicians of both east and west, my respect for Russia has grown, while it has been entirely the opposite in regards to the U.S.

Furthermore, every tax dollar spent on the military is a slap in the face to not just American citizens, but the entire world, in regards to making this place better for all.

He does have a point, but he's still the leader of a nation that has no reason to be diplomatic or honest.

I do think he's an amazing leader in our 21st century, however I'm miles away from calling him a benevolent human being.

Have you seen the actions his military took in Crimea? As a Ukrainian I'm too embarrassed to provide a link.

He, too, wasted the lives of his own civilians for "the greater good." Unarmed protesters should never be met with sniper fire.

originally posted by: facedye

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum

He is now firm and steadfast at asserting that we in the US are instigating conflicts and creating clear divides around the globe

Do the research, I think you'll find he has a point

In the past few years and based on the actions and words of politicians of both east and west, my respect for Russia has grown, while it has been entirely the opposite in regards to the U.S.

Furthermore, every tax dollar spent on the military is a slap in the face to not just American citizens, but the entire world, in regards to making this place better for all.

He does have a point, but he's still the leader of a nation that has no reason to be diplomatic or honest.

I do think he's an amazing leader in our 21st century, however I'm miles away from calling him a benevolent human being.

Have you seen the actions his military took in Crimea? As a Ukrainian I'm too embarrassed to provide a link.

He, too, wasted the lives of his own civilians for "the greater good." Unarmed protesters should never be met with sniper fire.

And nor should innocent people be shelled by their own military or be burned alive because they favour Russia over the west. The problems of Ukraine started with the influx of western backed cash, in which some seemed to fall into the hands of various right wing militia groups. I don't know but maybe it's like they were given the idea that they could overthrow their government

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: facedye


Geopolitically speaking, yah at what point do we expect the remaining superpowers like Russia and China to defend themselves form obvious encroachment by the west into Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa?

How far is far enough?

you're absolutely right. I think it went past the point of being far enough with the invasion of Iraq. based on the ABM treaty, and to any foreign power, the timeline would make them start preparing for war indefinitely.

not only did we pull out of a treaty that maintained a confidence of peace between nations, but directly invaded an uninvolved country in an already war-torn part of the world for all the world to see.

to any reasonable person, this is indicative of an aggressive, empire-building nation. a nation that is and has been trying to reinforce itself as the biggest bully in town.

if i were them, i'd lock and load just in case too.

a reply to: Zcustosmorum

I love that you said that. It would appear accurate to say that Putin invaded not out of a thirst for land, but to squash any potential uprising, and put an end to anything that can compromise the region's security & integrity.

It's interesting to see the parallels, too. Did the west propagate this attitude in Crimea? Did Russia actually pierce through our networks and hack our servers?

He's clearly onto something and not playing any f&@(*$^g games.

a reply to: facedye

It would appear accurate to say that Putin invaded not out of a thirst for land, but to squash any potential uprising, and put an end to anything that can compromise the region's security & integrity.

Except the fact that Putin admitted to making plans to take Crimea a month before there were uprisings in Crimea...and you may want to look at what Igor Strelkov...aka Igor Girkin had to say about Crimea as he was there from the beginning.

Russian president Vladimir Putin revealed that he secretly planned the annexation of Crimea months before the country's disputed independence referendum. Putin says that he ordered work on "returning Crimea to Russia" at an all night meeting, days before masked gunmen appeared in the peninsula in February 2014.

www.ibtimes.co.uk...#

He used the problem in Ukraine as a way to hide what he already had planned...sorry he was doing it for the land and saw the time to put that plan in action.

As for Mr. Strelkov...



Guess the truth is really out there it just isn't coming from Vladimir Putin.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

So we would agree, then, that he's not an honest leader.

In my mind the concept of a "land grab" is too simple.

Do You Realize What You've Done?

from the article:

He told the United Nations General Assembly it would be an "enormous mistake" not to cooperate with the Syrian government to combat the extremist group.

"No one but President (Bashar) Assad's armed forces and Kurdish militia are truly fighting the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations in Syria," he said.

I can't agree with your position that he was only looking for land while all of these external influences are in place at the same time. To me, he's clearly and cleverly preparing to retaliate should the US meddle with their territory or security at all.

These two instances are not exclusive from one another, rather they are instances and results of the same cohesive narrative.

a reply to: facedye

So we would agree, then, that he's not an honest leader.

Yes just as most world leaders are...even the US.

I can't agree with your position that he was only looking for land while all of these external influences are in place at the same time. To me, he's clearly and cleverly preparing to retaliate should the US meddle with their territory or security at all.

The fact he planned it months ahead show it for what it was...a land grab that he used the uprising as cover for. And the fact that his own people have said how Crimea was taken shows it was a ruse that he did it to protect anyone from outside influences...it was an invasion and illegal annexation that he threatens use of nukes to protect.

These two instances are not exclusive from one another, rather they are instances and results of the same cohesive narrative.

They are two totally different instances as Russia isn't in Syria to take land from Syria as they were in Crimea and did to Ukraine.

when any country advertises their defense sytems, it gets put in the WWIII forums,
when the US and Allies bolster military defenses it goes in one of the political forums.

if there is one country likely to start WWIII, we all here know which country it is/will be

Putin once again firm and straight to the point with no ambiguity. i applaud the man/leader

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Most of Ukraine speaks Russian as their first language.

Ukrainian is a dialect of the Russian language. We are not only connected by land, but language as well.

The attitude of many Ukrainians, and even those in Crimea, is one that is accepting of returning back to Russian territory. The area is by no means wealthy, nor abundant in resources that can sustain a high quality of life for the common man and woman.

We're poor over there - the concept of Russian assistance strikes many there as being an attractive endeavor.

Syria is in the middle east. Crimea and Ukraine are Russia's backyard, and up until a few decades ago were a part of Russia itself. It's also evidently a massively important geostrategic location as my OP shows.

Given the timing and current events of this situation, I can't figure out how you believe his prerogative to control Crimea is not connected to his prerogative to protect his own country.

Not to be too crass, but what use is there to take back control of Crimea, then? What in your opinion is the foremost reason for his secrecy and manipulative nature with which he took back an area of land he'd never want Americans to infiltrate?

a reply to: facedye

The black sea. rbth.com...

The base was leased to Russia by Kiev. Any additions had to be approved by Kiev.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

And wouldn't you know it, speak of the devil!

Russian Jet Intercepts US Spy Plane In Black Sea

I'm posting the map again for quick reference. US spy plane... in the Black Sea. Someone will probably post this on ATS shortly as well.



Still think this land grab has nothing to do with the U.S.? Or was I misinterpreting your point?

And generally speaking, what the hell's a US spy plane doing there?

"Diplomatic Reconaissance," I'm sure.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yes, spot on.

EDIT: interesting passage from your article:

"According to the source, the decision to deploy an additional base on the Black Sea was made in connection with the increased activity of NATO warships in the past few years.

"The deployment of Varshavyanka class Project 636.6) submarines in Novorossiysk allows Russia to control potential threats in Europe and the Middle East," said the source."

looks like it's a case of crossing their t's and dotting their i's.

a reply to: facedye

They are combating globalism. Some of the ramifications of such aren't always discussed. Take Monsanto for instance, the ramifications are talked of but we still don't fully understand. Russia however allows no Monsanto products. Interestingly enough on that point Bayer is looking to aquire them.

The whole point though is we project our power veiled under the justification of freedom and democracy. Two things America is losing on many fronts.

I beg of you, do you speak Russian? I do not trust any videos that have already been translated, he could be talking about cereal for all we know.

a reply to: odzeandennz

originally posted by: Jaxsmash
I beg of you, do you speak Russian? I do not trust any videos that have already been translated, he could be talking about cereal for all we know.

a reply to: odzeandennz

Hey Jax, I do. this translation is spot on.

a reply to: facedye

Already a thread and discussion on this video Here.
This whole subject is getting minimal attention here and in the MSM. You'd think WWIII looming would get peoples attention.

a reply to: JAY1980

The propaganda machine is geared to keep us focused on our circus election. We are kept under the illusion there are differences in the two sides.

Also kind of sad that we are conditioned to be used to being at war all the time.