Thread: How dangerous is Vladimir Putin?

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Poor Vlad, made to look like a muppet twice in a week.

One wonders where the leaders of the free world publish their own version of:

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

President Vladimir Putin's annual "direct line" television show

Not even a search of fake news sites displays anything of a similar scale and interest.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

"This is how our air force operates," said Mr Putin as he played some grainy video on his iPhone. "These militants are running with arms; not just machine guns, but they have some serious weaponry at their disposal, which they used to destroy army vehicles." Mr Stone nods his head obligingly - but the footage was fake. The Russian president was actually showing pictures of US troops shooting at Taliban fighters in Afghanistan in 2013.

Factually correct, no mention of where, just how and it's targets armaments. The footage was not fake, the "reporter" assumed wrongly. He and harry

You're missing the point HoHo. While Vlad the twat was trying to say how brilliant his air force was, he was actually showing a video of US forces tearing up the talitubbies.

You're as embarrassingly fucking stupid as he is.

But you probably can't order anyone to be executed for showing you up as such.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

You're as embarrassingly fucking stupid as he is.

fucking ironic coming from you

Originally Posted by Dragonfly

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

You're as embarrassingly fucking stupid as he is.

fucking ironic coming from you

Fuck off you fat queer troll, no-one's interested in your perpetual babbling.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Fuck off you fat queer troll, no-one's interested in your perpetual babbling.

another irony, because anyone is interested with your babbling ?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

While Vlad the twat was trying to say how brilliant his air force was,

Perhaps he would impress the world if he said that they have the best chocolate cake...

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

But you probably can't order anyone to be executed for showing you up as such

his latest annual fireside chat allowed text messages which were run on screen

I know, see post #2596.

Deafening silence about Putin on Crimea...

However, a deafening noise in Europe with the funeral of Germany Ex-Chancellor Helmut Kohl, with a pompous ceremony at EU Parliament in Strasbourg, first ever for a politician.

+++ Helmut Kohl funeral - live updates +++ | News | DW | 01.07.2017

Whereas his predecessor Helmut Schmidt had contributed much more for EU. And when he died some year ago - in a full intellectual strength in his 96 - unlike the Kohl - he was not equally honoured by EU. Perhaps since he publicly agreed with Putin's action on Crimea.

April 30, 2015:
If he were in Putin’s shoes, he’d be inclined to act in the same way.

According to Schmidt, Putin is not a war monger. He is just the leader of a nation “in a bad situation.” He is not troubled by the fact that Putin says one thing and does another. This, after all, is what politicians do. Schmidt does not believe that Putin “wants something bigger” (such as an expansion of hostilities beyond Ukraine), but things can happen that he does not want. The tension in east Ukraine, according to Schmidt, does not depend on Putin. If Russia had another leader, we would be confronting the same problems today.

Schmidt allowed that if he were in Putin’s shoes, he’d be inclined to act in the same way.

Putin is simply the leader of a powerful nation that is currently “not successful.” He faces the difficult task of holding the world’s largest nation, by land mass, together. For this reason, Schmidt blames the putative expansion of the European Union into Putin’s backyard (Ukraine, Georgia, and Armenia) as the root cause of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The European Union’s actions have been “idotic…child’s play.” The “nonsense” (“Umfug”) began when Yanukovich was overthrown for rejecting Ukraine’s westward move. If the European Union had minded its business and not interfered in Russia’s back yard, all would be OK today.

Schmidt divides the world into spheres of influence, which are not to be tampered with. Schmidt is an extreme moral relativist. All politics is based on lies and self interest. There is no real difference between Putin’s repression of political opposition and the United States’ involvement in the Middle East. Politicians do what they must do, and they have been doing so for centuries. Putin defends the periphery of the Russian empire just as the Czar’s armies did two centuries earlier.

https://balticscholars.stanford.edu/?p=1185

Originally Posted by OhOh

Try reading the sentence again and point out, here on TD for all to agree or not, where the location of the video shoot was mentioned or the reference to any particular place

Are you being deliberately obtuse or just plain stupid?

Not only did he say "This is how our air force operates", he then went on to describe them as militants, the implication clearly being that they are IS militants and it was his airforce bombing them.

Just in case you've forgotten, the Russians have not been fighting the taliban in Afghanistan (at least since they last got their arses kicked there).

I'm afraid Putin was made to look like a prize c u n t.

Don't make yourself look a bigger one by trying to find some pathetic excuse for it.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

the implication clearly being that they are IS militants and it was his airforce bombing them.

The Lord states it was his airforce, Russian I agree, I am assuming the "grainy video" shows his airforce attacking somebody.

I have not viewed it so possibly the video shows ISIS flags, men with long beards, men carrying home the heads of Syrian soldiers or even a voice over/Title stating "THIS VIDEO CONTAINS IMAGES OF ISIS TERRORISTS BEING SLAUGHTERED IN SYRIA."

Your own "interpretation/implication/opinion" was not what I asked for. The facts are that the LORD did not state who, where or what the Russian armed forces were attacking, the LORD did not say and was not quoted as saying.

According to your post, #2596

"The second public relations debacle centred on the footage Mr Putin showed filmmaker Oliver Stone during his much-derided documentary on the Russian leader.

"This is how our air force operates," said Mr Putin as he played some grainy video on his iPhone.

"These militants are running with arms; not just machine guns, but they have some serious weaponry at their disposal, which they used to destroy army vehicles."

Mr Stone nods his head obligingly - but the footage was fake."

Your assumption, because you misread or didn't understand the sentence, is wrong. Your source, you link to it, is fake.

Twat.

The video is not new, watch your Olly Stone wankfest and look at it.

You *are* a bigger tit than Vlad.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Twat.

The video is not new, watch your Olly Stone wankfest and look at it.

You *are* a bigger tit than Vlad.

I suppose that you - as a truth seeker - have seen the 4 hours talks of "Olly Stone" with the "Vlad".
Could you enlighten us what particular lies the "Vlad" had disseminated, or just did not say the truth? (beside the "fake" combat video)

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Twat.

The video is not new, watch your Olly Stone wankfest and look at it.

You *are* a bigger tit than Vlad.

I suppose that you - as a truth seeker - have seen the 4 hours talks of "Olly Stone" with the "Vlad".
Could you enlighten us what particular lies the "Vlad" had disseminated, or just did not say the truth? (beside the "fake" combat video)

Why would I waste four hours of my life watching that shit?

Do you honestly think it matters?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Twat.

The video is not new, watch your Olly Stone wankfest and look at it.

You *are* a bigger tit than Vlad.

I suppose that you - as a truth seeker - have seen the 4 hours talks of "Olly Stone" with the "Vlad".
Could you enlighten us what particular lies the "Vlad" had disseminated, or just did not say the truth? (beside the "fake" combat video)

Why would I waste four hours of my life watching that shit?

Do you honestly think it matters?

How many hours of your life are you wasting here? However, it does matter, doesn't it?

What is the psychology of somebody who does not waste time to listen what was said, however, claims it is a shit?

(Reminds me of the US delegation at UN General Assembly leaving the scene when they do not want to listen what is not convenient to them. And on their whistle all their close friends leaving as well...)

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Twat.

The video is not new, watch your Olly Stone wankfest and look at it.

You *are* a bigger tit than Vlad.

I suppose that you - as a truth seeker - have seen the 4 hours talks of "Olly Stone" with the "Vlad".
Could you enlighten us what particular lies the "Vlad" had disseminated, or just did not say the truth? (beside the "fake" combat video)

Why would I waste four hours of my life watching that shit?

Do you honestly think it matters?

How many hours of your life are you wasting here? However, it does matter, doesn't it?

None, I'm getting paid for it. Gives me something to do at work.

What is the psychology of somebody who does not waste time to listen what was said, however, claims it is a shit?

You're missing the point. I know Putin is an ex-KGB supremo who has maintained his grip on power by means of corruption and violence.

I know Olly Stone is just going to kiss his arse, and I know he's going to spout nothing but bollocks.

Watching four hours of that pair of c u n t s is not going to teach me something I don't already know.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I know Putin is an ex-KGB supremo who has maintained his grip on power by means of corruption and violence.

As matter of fact, he was not a "supremo" of KGB. Do you know more how he did it as a small guy from a post in East Germany ?

On other hand a real "supremo" of a counterpart of KGB, was Bush sr., director of CIA. How he had maintain his grip on power? (Quite easy for him with his ancestors, wasn't it?)

BTW, can you name a state that does not possess an Intelligence Agency? (Beside such as Kingdom of Tonga, for them it's made by others - free of charge)

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I know Putin is an ex-KGB supremo who has maintained his grip on power by means of corruption and violence.

As matter of fact, he was not a "supremo" of KGB. Do you know more how he did it as a small guy from a post in East Germany ?

On other hand a real "supremo" of a counterpart of KGB, was Bush sr., director of CIA. How he had maintain his grip on power? (Quite easy for him with his ancestors, wasn't it?)

BTW, can you name a state that does not possess an Intelligence Agency? (Beside such as Kingdom of Tonga, for them it's made by others - free of charge)

You know if you're going to spout off on something, at least learn the facts first.

On 25 July 1998, Yeltsin appointed Putin as Director of the Federal Security Service (FSB), the primary intelligence and security organization of the Russian Federation and successor of the KGB. He held that position until 9 August 1999.

Unless you're going to be one of these pedantic wankers who wants to quibble that the KGB had changed its name by the time he took over it.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

On 25 July 1998, Yeltsin appointed Putin as Director of the Federal Security Service (FSB), the primary intelligence and security organization of the Russian Federation and successor of the KGB. He held that position until 9 August 1999.

What does it prove? Should the FSB stay without an Director?

BTW, should Yeltsin stay some time longer at the helm, it wouldn't be any complain from the West, would it?

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

On 25 July 1998, Yeltsin appointed Putin as Director of the Federal Security Service (FSB), the primary intelligence and security organization of the Russian Federation and successor of the KGB. He held that position until 9 August 1999.

What does it prove? Should the FSB stay without an Director?

BTW, should Yeltsin stay some time longer at the helm, it wouldn't be any complain from the West, would it?

And off we waffle at some completely irrelevant tangent, suggesting you might has well have kept your gob shut in the first place since you haven't got a fucking clue.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

And off we waffle at some completely irrelevant tangent, suggesting you might has well have kept your gob shut in the first place since you haven't got a fucking clue.

Where do you got your clues from? Schoolbooks readings or perhaps the headlines of MSM?
Afraid of some other readings? It could be a shock...
Then I assume that you also haven't seen/heard Olly Stone's Untold History? Or no need, knowing for sure it's a crap? I could help you out, 10 CD's...

At the end of the interview, Oliver Stone shakes Putins hand and says thank you for the interview. Putin then asks Oliver Stone directly "have you been beaten?" Stone: "Yes I have tried that" Putin: "then you know how it is, cause you´re going to suffer for what you are doing".

LIVE
Russian & Chinese leaders speak in Moscow
http://www.rt.com/on-air/

cheers!

am not going to read 100 pages, but IMO Putin is brilliant and i love listening to him speak at his 2-3 hour news conferences as he answers questions directly and without much effort can cover 10-20 issues thoroughly in a 5-10 minute answer.

he has high approval ratings in russia, so who is the west to say we don't like him.

thread title: How dangerous is Vladimir Putin?

not dangerous at all.

and, if hillary had won, her admin wouldn't have talked much at all about russian interference in the election, IMO.

obama didn't seem to mind much that putin helped assad prevent ISIS from getting too close to damascus (which would have been a disaster).

so, thanks to putin for that.

:clap: