Vladimir Putin Addresses America In NYT

The United States of Russchina.

Maybe he does have a right afterall to directly speak with the American people with all of the gold we owe him.

Interesting how he states we are all equal. I thought Russia thought that they are the Global Texas?

would have loved to see a video of Obamas and Kerrys reaction to this article

I am surprised that no one mentioned the following part of Putin's words in the article:

Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.

This sentence is a political earth quake! This message was clearly addressed to those who are behind the Syrian military strike plans.
Putin has clear evidence and PROOF! of these plans otherwise he would not make such a statement.

This means there is no more room for false flag attacks!

reply to post by Indigo5


I'm autistic. You didn't ask for that information.

On the topic, whereas whether or not Putin is a sociopath or not is pretty much up to any therapist that happens to counsel him, I agree that Russia has been extraordinarily harsh with their journalists over the last 100 years. The fall of the iron Curtain, as far as I can tell, did very little to offer up more protections to Russian journalists or even political dissenters. When I was in the USSR, I made an acquaintance with a young woman from Moscow who not only expressed fear of the police (even in the case where she was a victim of crime) because if the police found anything about her to be questionable, she would disappear. Now, that was some 26 years ago, but like I said previously, old habits die hard. Even if such extremes do not still exist, a good chunk of the population of Russia would most likely have those fears thoroughly ingrained in them.

As far as Russia's involvement in Syria, Russia is actually more of a stakeholder in Syria than the US. For one thing, Russia is Syria's ally and, second and perhaps more importantly, Syria is the residence for a Russian naval base. Protecting their assets within a foreign ally is most definitely something of their concern. As far as the US goes, we have little very little measurable stake in Syria. We have no military bases within Syria. Our ally, Israel, has long ignored the annual ruling that their occupation of formerly Syrian lands, Golan Heights and is accused of engaging in military strikes against Syria since January of 2013: www.washingtonpost.com... story.html Overall, it would seem that Israel cares more about Iran than Syria: www.washingtonpost.com... Jordan, our other ally that on the border of Syria, apparently does not want to involve itself in an attack on Syria: www.cbsnews.com...

So, in terms of stakes technically, Russia has more at stake than the US does when one of our stakeholders will not even act as a launching point and the other is waffling.

VoidHawk
What if, they're all in this together (Obama and Putin) and the world is being played!

What if, Russia and America were threatening each other! Would we all start crapping ourselves and beg our leaders to protect us?

I think its all a game.

The BRICS are setting up their own World Bank and even Global Currency fcs.
TPTB have purposefully bankrupt the West starting with the 90's free trade agreements with China.
Euro (a premeditated failure) and US Dollar are on the way out.

So I gather they're making the western puppets do this stuff on purpose, behaving as idiotically as possible and riggin the economies and institution up for collapse.

The only limit is the public's dumbness, they can't be too explicit about it.


So yeah it's probably all a scheme. Control both sides in a conflict and all that.

reply to post by Brucee


It has been in the news and i think many will be wary of another attempt to try to force an attack.
The socalled rebels Israel and the Saudi's and the west are not happy at the moment with the current situation, that much is clear.
But proof? an idea or a plan is mere speculation, nothing has happened yet, let's hope it stays that way.

reply to post by WhiteAlice


Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the other Gulf Arab states care very much.

The USA cares about what they care about since if they started selling oil another currency it would chop the USA off at the knees and bring about an inevitable transition earlier than it would otherwise happen.

The UK cares since the fortunes of the UK are somewhat tied to the fortunes of the USA. Also, unlike most of Europe the UK gas and power infrastructure is set up to use LPG and the majority of the LPG we use comes from Qatar in tankers. We were also dumb enough (cheers political class !) to not secure long term contracts for the supply. They can cut us off and leave us literally in the cold.

www.ft.com...

If you are a junkie you are inclined to do what your dealer wants. Even if it means spinning a web of lies and being the smelly weird guy nobody else talks to.

None of the recent shenanigans are a mystery and neither are they anything to do with dead children and chemical weapons. Thats all nonsense for the gullible.

Its monumentally depressing.

reply to post by earthling42


Mr Putin sure comes off as the more Presidential and Statesman-like peacekeeper imo. I just don't understand why we'd support the terrorists in this Syria debacle...let the Arabs sort it out.

WhiteAlice
reply to post by Indigo5

 

I'm autistic. You didn't ask for that information.

We all fall somewhere on the scale of autism, though I understand that you mean you are technically, diagnostically, autistic....thus when I asked a question, you simply answered it absent sub-text, inferred unspoken opinion etc. etc. as I erroneously assumed you were expressing. Apologies for that. Autism is a fascinating topic to me...but we risk another derailment of the topic.

As to the rest of your informative post, I agree. Yes, Russia does have a much greater stake in Syria than we do, but alas that is not the appeal that Vladimir Putin made in his Op-ed.

He appealed to the wisdom or morality of interfering in a foreign conflict in Syria, while at the same time Russia heavily arms, funds, supplies and defends the Assad regime. He did not defend Russia's "stake" or it's own active "interference" in the civil conflict.

So in that regard the blatant hypocrisy of the Op-ed serves for me as an explanation point on a well thought out political propaganda piece designed to fan the flames of public opposition in the USA to intervention.

His opinion is invalid, it is exploitative, manipulative...it is a demonstration of the devious intellect that allowed him to rise from the slums of the USSR to the KGB to the Tyrant of Russia.

I am opposed to intervention in Syria on practical grounds, but there is no overlap in sentiment or reasoning with Vladimir Putin's Op-ed which ironically exploits our freedom of the press for propaganda purposes in a manner which would never be tolerated in the Russia he rules.

I have no patience for the gullible in the USA that choose to validate him personally or the tactics he employs.

EDIT to add: As far as a therapists's diagnosis being necessary to label Putin a sociopath, I would argue that any close examination of his personal and professional rise in Russia is all that is needed to make a fairly solid diagnosis. He first came to be favored by the KGB as a young man, turning in his neighbors for misdeeds to the secret police. Throughout his career he has never hesitated to have former "friends" or colleagues arrested or killed if it suited his ambition. Intelligent? Well spoken? Adept at public speaking? Absolutely...but also another flavor of Sadam Hussein, Bashar al-Assad etc. There are many types of sociopaths...some as dumb as dirt...some make excellent surgeons or CEO's...not all of them bad people, but Putin is a sociopath of the Bashar al-Assad, Sadam Hussein, Adolph Hitler sort. Smart, Likable, a gift for politics and public persona, egomania and ambition and incapable of empathy for other living beings.

It seemed pretty straightforward what I thought he was saying, that us believing we are God's special creatures is ridiculous. However, I soon learned that he is just a communist and doesn't believe anything he wrote. Also that he doesn't care about anyone at all and that he's ex KGB life was hell for people in the 80's. So now I understand what he really meant, which is the exact opposite of what he wrote. Thank God talk radio could bring me back down to reality.

reply to post by earthling42


for weeks on here I have read a lot of peoples comments on the threat of a syrian strike, and most all people writing posts and threads or at least the majority were saying No don't do it, dont get involved in Syria, I think in the hope a new angle would be found and it could be avoided. What no one and I do mean NO ONE seen coming was a solution put forward which was acceptable by all parties, and it actually made so much sense to all of us too. EXCEPT it came from the opposition, but rather than thank them for their solution everyone now has gone very wary and cautious and are looking for the side effects of this suggestion, because it was provided by putin the russian president. A lot of americans were disappointed that this suggeston didn't come from obama the US president.... Is there a side effect of this solution, no one seems to be pinpointing anything yet, apart from maybe removing syria from the equasion to some degree... I have to say, that it does appear to be too good to be true, we all know there is no such thing as a free dinner. US are slightly miffed at seeing their leader getting his wrist smacked and told to sit down... as seems to be the case by putins input to the problem, what with putting a statment in nyt to rub it in..... I think though everyone is right to be wary, this man wasn't seen as a good guy just one week ago, so what has changed, does a leopard really change its spots.. I think we all know the answer to that.... good post and interesting to read reactions.... ty

reply to post by justwokeup



The Financial Times article isn't properly loading for me. I tend to agree very much with your assessment in regards to oil being used as leverage in this activity. The coveting of another's resources has ever been the source of war. Syria is not a major producer of oil in the area but there also pipeline "issues".

oilprice.com...
oilprice.com...

If it is all about the oil or oil being used as leverage, then that makes us little better than a hired thug, which is very, very depressing indeed.

It's sad when we can't just take the words at face value. When we have to do a dance around it and not address that at all but talk about his character we've already lost the debate.

I heard Putin was a bad dude who kills people without trial with drones and a whistleblower recently exposed he spys on his own citizens. We need to stop wasting time with his insidious plans for a diplomatic solution and bomb Syria now if we want lots of the peace and the freedoms

reply to post by Indigo5


Thank you. You are absolutely correct in your assessment of my responses. People just aren't used to that, I think, because it's not typical. I'm a high functioning autistic (for comparison's sake, I score 42 on the autism quotient as friends love to use me as a test to see if the AQ is accurate) with a near eidetic memory and high spatial ability. It's a pain in the arse. If you ever want to mess with me, use a ton of slang.

The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.

The point that in which I agree with Putin on is in regards to international law. Basically, the United Nations was formed with one of its intents being in the hopes to avoid another world war. It established international laws in regards to war and their justifications as well as required the need for approval. The United States is one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and, in a sense, are one of the UN's leaders. If the leadership of any entity does not abide by the rules or laws that the entity requires of all within it, then it basically undermines both the laws' force and the entity, itself.

Outside of that, I do not trust or like Putin. Overall, however, I worry that we are on the brink of entering into, at the least, something similar to another Yom Kippur War. As far as his shipping armaments to Assad, would you want to lose your military base to rebels?

reply to post by WhiteAlice


Yeah, it appears to be a paywall. Weird as i had access to that free in the past. Sorry about that.

I just read the NY Times article written by Vladimir Putin and I must say that it is a very shrewdly written piece.

It is not unlike what one often reads in these very forums. If anything it is even more nuanced and subtle in the way that it responds to an American position that has been a collage of rhetorical bromides on the subject of "freedom and democracy" aimed largely at an infantile audience for a very long time now.

"Teacher" (America) has been lulled into a false sense of security in class because the bright little boy at the back of the room has not spoken up until now. "Teacher" is going to have to start being consistent and cognizant of the necessity to practice what one preaches.

All the other kids in the class were afraid of "teacher" and never spoke up, no matter how inane "teacher's" pronouncements became.

Things are different now.

I don't know if this discussion is being surveilled by NSA or whomever, but if it is, I would very humbly suggest that America rethink a lot of things. If Putin's statement is any indication, Russia has put a considerable amount of brainpower into considering what to do about the "America problem".

The Russians are masters of chess, strategy and in Putin's case, Judo.

But Obama has also shown tact, and a certain humility, and a very sober and apparently accurate assessment of events (unless the chemical attack was a false flag, which it does NOT appear to be, making of Putin a liar for professing otherwise) which I applaud.

That said there's also a slight wimpiness to Obama, like he's a junior President, but, imho, that's by far better than say a McCain or a MIC embedded big company Romney. talk about a lack of choice when it comes to American leadership.

As for Putin, while he may presume that he just checkmated Obama, all he really accomplished by his Op Ed in the NYT was to rally the Congress around the President and his threat of force, without which this whole disarmament plan would not have occurred and would not be possible, so in the final analysis it's a victory for Obama, and a display of a certain arrogance on the part of Putin.

The final checkmate however may still go to Putin in the joke that Obama should then hand over his Nobel Prize to Putin, particularly in the event that a political solution to the Syrian crisis helps lead the way to a legitimate M.E. Peace Plan/Process. But I'm sure that's a subtle or not-so-subtle irony that Obama could live with if he really leads with humility, and not just an ear to ear smile.

So I think the win actually goes with Obama on this one, something amid all the confusion that no one seems to recognize, and that's another irony and one which Vladimir Putin played masterfully, as if at some level he knows the American people better than the Whitehouse.

It makes for very interesting gamesmanship and if it means no war and the eventual end of a terrible civil war, then that's the best possible outcome. As Putin has pointed out even the Pope says no to this - another masterful move (Putin moves Pope forward on the chessboard..).

I think it's wonderful the way it's working out, if only the US would STOP playing both sides against the middle in Syria, which has DIRE long range consequences for American Security and Interests in Global Security - and instead, work out and uphold within the context of international law and order (Putin's point) a political solution and an end to the war, but I guess that's up to Assad who Obama subtly implied in his speech with a linkage that I caught could be taken out if there's retaliatory action by him as the military commander of Syrian forces.

It's foolishness though for Putin to tell Obama to put the gun away at this point, so the game continues...

Putin's jab at Obama's reference to "American exceptionalism" is just amuzing, nothing to get bent out of shape over, and what's funny there is that to the degree that US politicos are horrified by that statement at the end of Putin's letter, it's proven true, so that's a "double-bind" in favor of Putin as he leverages his knights, with the Pope himself riding at least one of them! My God that IS "chess" at it's very finest because one senses that in referencing his consultation with or statements made by the Pope that it is actually the Pope's words about American exceptionalism which Putin has deftly added, to seal the end of his letter. That's playfully humorous if you ask me, and in the spirit of Pope Francis, and who ever knew that Putin has a fantastic sense of humor and irony... never put anything past a Russian because they always take everything right to the nth degree in terms of rational analysis and gamemanship.

Best Regards,

NAM
although I'm Canadian eh so what do I know got a beer? (where is the beer smiley?)

reply to post by NewAgeMan


With all the recent scandals one after another that USA keeps facing , like the Bengazi, Spy scandal , Snowden's Assylum and now Syria , which politically was handled sloppy by the Obama administration. I would say Obama shot himself in the foot, he said all this things about red line and teaching a lesson to Asad but on the other hand he does not have the support even of his own people. A person with a weak hand like that can only bluff for so long. He is a political corpse either way. The USA faces so many problems at home , yet it still more focused on dropping democracy across the ocean on other people heads. Yet apparently Putin is somehow the Tyrant and Sociopath for speaking some facts regardless if it benefits Russia's interest or not. A lot of people here put to much personal emotions based on some dodgy or comfortable assumptions that would calm their fears instead of facing the truth no matter how bitter.

reply to post by Laxus

A bitter pill to swallow, yes, but it's one that the whole country must take together where "that which hurts, instructs" (Ben Franklin)

I'm just glad Obama isn't a total war hawk like the Bush crazies. In part, that's what I'm saying.

Putin made this possible though, the resolution, so hats off to him, and to Obama for letting himself be played in this way and to have the sober mind and humility to take pause and "give peace a chance". That's leadership, the ability to take the heat for unpopular choices that are nevertheless the right thing to do.

The Bush crazies just pressed the red button right away (that Cheney was probably already carrying in his briefcase down in Florida even before the final outcome of the Supreme court decision was announced).

Imagine the waging of such a war, which was done just like that.

Way to go Obama for allowing Putin to checkmate you on the global stage, now isn't that the final move beginning with the end in mind..?

Leadership arises from Virtue where Virtue may be defined as "power, restrained."

I applaud them both therefore, equally and raise a glass (of Russian Vodka).

Cheers,

NAM