Thread: How dangerous is Vladimir Putin?

OhDohs usual dump of Russian propaganda turds that no one reads.

An intriguing article to keep you entertained while I head off to the shithole that is Sin City for some festive amusement.

Merry Christmas one and all!

Vladimir Putin’s Last Stand: The Promise and Peril of Russian Defeat

Originally Posted by sabang

It sure beats reading the continuous drivel of liquid shit you two never-endingly post, day in day out. Geddalife. TD would drastically improve in quality overnight, if we could get you to share a room in Alcatraz.

Speaking of jail, Putler used the word war.

“Our goal is not to spin the flywheel of military conflict, but, on the contrary, to end this war,”

According to his law he has to go to jail now. And with all the fake BS Sabang is posting he can go right along.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Vatican apologizes to Russia – Moscow

Russian Foreign Ministry: “No apology from the Vatican” on Pope's comments

Russian Foreign Ministry: “No apology from the Vatican” on Pope's comments | ROME REPORTS

I wonder what the war criminal used this time?

December 27, 2022

Two Russians Die Within Days In Same Hotel In India


Two Russian men have reportedly died at a hotel in the eastern Indian city of Rayagada within few days of each other under mysterious circumstances. Millionaire Pavel Antov was found lying in a pool of blood outside the hotel on December 24, days after another Russian, Vladimir Bidenov, who was accompanying Antov, reportedly died of a stroke. According to media reports, Antov had voiced criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine.

Two Russians Die Within Days In Same Hotel In India

Ah, another Vlad-style defenestration.

Reports in Russian media said Mr Antov, 65, had fallen from a window at the hotel in the city of Rayagada on Sunday.

And still he is idolised by several non-Russians

I wonder what the war criminal used this time?


December 27, 2022

Two Russians Die Within Days In Same Hotel In India


Two Russian men have reportedly died at a hotel in the eastern Indian city of Rayagada within few days of each other under mysterious circumstances. Millionaire Pavel Antov was found lying in a pool of blood outside the hotel on December 24, days after another Russian, Vladimir Bidenov, who was accompanying Antov, reportedly died of a stroke. According to media reports, Antov had voiced criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine.

Two Russians Die Within Days In Same Hotel In India


I have heard on a newscast quoting a supposed russian insider that there is a takeover going on between some of the elites. It may actually not be Putin inspired this time. Just standard company takeovers Russian style.

Interesting to hear the take on the history and politics of Ukraine from a scholar and historian

Got to 24 mins.

He starts up with a lot of Kanye related stuff (jewish) and then gets going.

And I disagree with his guest on a fundamental point

Maybe later

To avoid years of warfare in Ukraine, the West needs to deal with Russia as it is now, not as it should be


All eyes are on the end of the Putin era, it seems.

Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyi issued a decree in September declaring negotiations with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin to be “impossible”. This could imply a Ukrainian strategy of no negotiations at all (which is unlikely) or an expectation that the end of the ‘Putin era’ is in sight.

Likewise, many among the Russian intellectual elite and Western political community are hedging their bets that change is coming, and that a new leadership in Russia would be a more pliant partner.

Such hopes are misplaced.


Three reasons why a post-Putin leadership will not be easy

First, there is no sign that Putin – whatever his .

The war has given Putin an opportunity to express his long-held and pent-up frustrations with the West, which he had to suppress at times of diplomacy. Now the gloves are off.

Leaving the messy business of Ukraine to a successor is not how Putin understands a leader’s role

Putin believes that time is on Russia’s side in a long war of attrition against Ukraine. The notion that he might step down, under the weight of guilt and shame for the damage he has done to Russia, is misguided.

Putin is on a mission, and it must be accomplished. Leaving the messy business of Ukraine to a successor is not how he understands a leader’s role. Having assumed the burden, he is the one who must end it.

Second, even if Putin does leave power, a stage-managed successor chosen by him is unlikely to be a progressive. The task of the new leader (or leaders) would be to modernise Russia – without necessarily reforming it politically along liberal Western lines.

Russia’s painful experience of reforms in the 1990s, coupled with acute knowledge of the West’s own problems, make this prospect unappealing. Most citizens are ready to believe that the Western model of development is not suitable for Russia. Far more attractive seems to be the Chinese model of tight political control, coupled with economic liberalism and a welfare state.

The fact that many liberal and anti-war members of Russian society have left the country makes such a plan easier to implement. With leading Kremlin critic Alexey Navalny in prison, there is so far no evidence of a serious challenger to Putin from the opposition.

Big business would have a say, but not on matters that challenge the political order. Moreover, significant business figures have been sanctioned, and are correspondingly cut off from the West. Although financial and economic strategy is one of the few areas where different opinions are welcome in Russia, the state controls 71% of the economy – almost twice the 38% share it held in 2006.

Third, if the stakes for ending the war in Ukraine are set so high as to be interpreted as national humiliation in Russia, a patriotic backlash might well occur.

If the Kremlin loses political control and is unable to orchestrate a bureaucratic succession, that could open a space for right-wing forces to influence the country’s politics.

The likes of Yevgeny Prigozhin, head of the Wagner Group of mercenaries, can claim to represent the ‘real Russia’ better than the cosmopolitan elites of Moscow and St Petersburg, who have one foot in the West.


Yevgeny Prigozhin (right) has become a prominent figure in Russia's "party of war"

| (c) Sipa US / Alamy Stock Photo. All rights reserved


Prigozhin is too notorious a figure to aspire to become president himself, but he can play a role of a kingmaker – his anti-elitist sentiment and an image of warrior masculinity find traction in Russia’s depressive towns, low-skilled working class and prison populations.

In a scenario of increased power for Prigozhin and Russia’s ‘party of war’, the version of the war in Ukraine that we have seen so far – a distant conflict playing out on Russian TV screens while the lives of many ordinary people continue regardless – would be over.

Each Russian citizen would have to contribute on the battlefield or in the workplace and abandon their personal plans, hopes and dreams. If Russia’s patriotic political forces can offer a convincing example of living by the values they preach (perhaps by sending their own children into the heat of battle, which nobody among the current leadership has shown a willingness to do), then war would become the norm.

At this point, it might be useful to recall the lessons of history: the social consequences in Germany following the end of the First World War, a civil war and a bitter peace, out of which grew the Freikorps, fascism and the Nazi terror.

And then there’s Crimea

Finally, no Russian president, however keen they are to mend relations with the West, would be willing to part with Crimea. (This is one area where Elon Musk, who suggested that Russia should retain Crimea, may have a point.)

Based on my own conversations with many Russians (including members of the opposition), people’s intense emotional attachment to Crimea means that only an existential threat to the very survival of the country would outweigh its potential loss. The offer of access to global financial markets is not enough.

Not only the leadership but also many members of Russian society are prepared to bear huge costs for the sake of retaining Crimea. The Ukrainian position – that it must control Crimea – does not leave a Russian leadership with any other option but to continue the war.

Waiting for a ‘Russia after Putin’ is like waiting for Godot. A leadership change is not imminent, nor does it open any chances for peace. Instead, we face the prospect of a long-term Syria 2.0 scenario, one that would drain both Ukraine and Russia, and in which there will be no winners.

Politically, the war is already lost for Russia, regardless of developments on the battlefield. Putin is responsible for starting it; it would be consoling if he were forced to face the consequences of his actions. Yet, so far, we have little reason to believe that will happen.

There is no easy escape from the tragedy.

To enable sober forward thinking, it is essential to part with the illusion that a ‘Russia without Putin’ is around the corner and will fundamentally be better. If we are not prepared to deal with Russia as it is – as opposed to what it should be – with Putin being part of the package, we should envisage years of warfare in Ukraine.

And we should start thinking about the effects of a long war upon Europe, on our own societies and how they will respond.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr...ria-successor/

Assuming Trump is now unelectable, I think time is on Ukraine's side. I still believe the sanctions will crush Russia. Russian industry won't be able to manufacture enough arms to come close to winning this war.

Originally Posted by sabang

Politically, the war is already lost for Russia, regardless of developments on the battlefield. Putin is responsible for starting it; it would be consoling if he were forced to face the consequences of his actions. Yet, so far, we have little reason to believe that will happen.

Unfortunately I agree. Putin is going nowhere soon and he has the power and the means to continue this war for years.

I think trouble is brewing for Putin. That's why he's offing many of the elites. His health problems also make him look piss weak. I think Putin will be gone by the end of this year. His successor might be even worse.

Wishful thinking combined with conspiracy theory. Your last sentence is correct though. Here's a little informal wager- I reckon Zelensky will be gone before Putin.

No, I won't take that one up. The Russians will be targeting Zelensky.

Putin started and lost the war. More losses are to come and he's fxcked the Russian economy. He'll be lucky to stay in office. I think the dice are now loaded against him. He's put himself in a piss weak position. It isn't just wishful thinking.

Former U.S. Ambassador to the USSR Jack Matlock says in Ukraine: Tragedy of a Nation Divided:

Interference by the United States and its NATO allies in Ukraine’s civil struggle has exacerbated the crisis within Ukraine, undermined the possibility of bringing the two easternmost provinces back under Kyiv’s control, and raised the specter of possible conflict between nuclear-armed powers. Furthermore, in denying that Russia has a "right" to oppose extension of a hostile military alliance to its national borders, the United States ignores its own history of declaring and enforcing for two centuries a sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere.

---

Diplomat and historian George Kennan, quoted in Thomas Friedman’s This Is Putin’s War. But America and NATO Aren’t Innocent Bystanders:

"I think it is the beginning of a new cold war. I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the founding fathers of this country turn over in their graves."

---

William J. Perry, Secretary of Defense under President Bill Clinton, wrote How the US Lost Russia – and How We Can Restore Relations in Sept. of 2022:

"Many have pointed to the expansion of NATO in the mid-1990s as a critical provocation. At the time, I opposed that expansion, in part for fear of the effect on Russian-U.S. relations….Still, the first step in finding a solution [to the war in Ukraine] is acknowledging the problem and recognizing that our actions have contributed to that hostility."

---

Robert Gates, Secretary of Defense under George W. Bush, in We Always Knew the Dangers of NATO Expansion:

"trying to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO was truly overreaching, … recklessly ignoring what the Russians considered their own vital national interests."

---

Ted Galen Carpenter of the Cato Institute in The US and NATO Helped Trigger the Ukraine War. It’s Not ‘Siding With Putin’ to Admit It:

"One can readily imagine how Americans would react if Russia, China, India, or another peer competitor admitted countries from Central America and the Caribbean to a security alliance that it led – and then sought to add Canada as an official or de facto military ally. It is highly probable that the United States would have responded by going to war years ago. Yet even though Ukraine has an importance to Russia comparable to Canada’s importance to the United States, our leaders expected Moscow to respond passively to the growing encroachment.

They have been proven disastrously wrong, and thanks to their ineptitude, the world is now a far more dangerous place."

---

Ambassador Michael Gfoeller and David H. Rundell: in Newsweek‘s Lessons From the US Civil War Show Why Ukraine Can’t Win:

"Before the war, far right Ukrainian nationalist groups like the Azov Brigade were soundly condemned by the US Congress. Kiev’s determined campaign against the Russian language is analogous to the Canadian government trying to ban French in Quebec. Ukrainian shells have killed hundreds of civilians in the Donbas and there are emerging reports of Ukrainian war crimes. The truly moral course of action would be to end this war with negotiations rather than prolong the suffering the Ukrainian people in a conflict they are unlikely to win without risking American lives."

---

Christopher Caldwell: in the New York Times‘ The War in Ukraine May Be Impossible to Stop. And the US Deserves Much of the Blame:

"In 2014 the United States backed an uprising – in its final stages a violent uprising – against the legitimately elected Ukrainian government of Viktor Yanukovych, which was pro-Russian."

---

Thomas Friedman: in the New York Times‘ This Is Putin’s War. But America and NATO Aren’t Innocent Bystanders:

"The mystery was why the US – which throughout the Cold War dreamed that Russia might one day have a democratic revolution and a leader who, however haltingly, would try to make Russia into a democracy and join the West – would choose to quickly push NATO into Russia’s face when it was weak.
A very small group of officials and policy wonks at that time, myself included, asked that same question, but we were drowned out."
America and NATO Aren’t Innocent Bystanders [from the title]"

---

The 2019 RAND Corporation study Overextending and Unbalancing Russia "examines nonviolent, cost-imposing options that the United States and its allies could pursue across economic, political, and military areas to stress – overextend and unbalance – Russia’s economy and armed forces and the regime’s political standing at home and abroad. " It includes the paragraph

Providing lethal aid to Ukraine would exploit Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability. But any increase in US military arms and advice to Ukraine would need to be carefully calibrated to increase the costs to Russia of sustaining its existing commitment without provoking a much wider conflict in which Russia, by reason of proximity, would have significant advantages.

The highlighted words indicate that the authors were quite aware that US provocations would cause Russia to respond militarily.

Below is a graphic version of the above article, a larger version is available here.







https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2023/01/02/putin-apologists/

"They are liars"

Originally Posted by helge

"They are liars"

The question is: "Are they still alive or locked up?"

1x smiley for helge
1x munching popcorn idiot for Sabang

I think Sabang might need a Mudanjiang corn field to figure it out

Perhaps that might make sense translated to German, but can I take it that even you do not consider these people "Putin apologists" hermano?

Originally Posted by sabang

Perhaps that might make sense translated to German, but can I take it that even you do not consider these people "Putin apologists" hermano?

Opinions can be translated in any language except Chinkystan and Putlerstan.
Keep munching

Originally Posted by sabang

Perhaps that might make sense translated to German,

+Mudanjiang (biggest farm in the world)+ corn fields

Originally Posted by sabang

can I take it that even you do not consider these people "Putin apologists"

'crickets'