Thread: How dangerous is Vladimir Putin?

Originally Posted by OhOh

One pays for a well designed/put together piece of kit. You get what you, or in my case what was agreed as part of your employment package, pay for.

With a company car, there's a risk of becoming Mondeo man...

Are you seriously saying Japanese and American cars of today are not well designed?

Originally Posted by OhOh

I had a fun couple of years with a 308

That is a classic. I envy you now

My experience of North American cars is limited to one Ford saloon. It did it's job but nothing more. I sold it for a short wheelbase Toyota Landcruiser which was more suitable to my needs and Canada's environment. I see American company badged cars now nothing is exiting just bland acres of tin.

Japanese cars had good engineering and took the piss out of the then UK offerings, probably still do now. The aesthetics now are a little odd but the engineering is probably still there.

The fit and finish of Audi's are very good. Technologically advanced and capable, by design, management and luck, of winning very different types of racing events.

The Ferrari looked and sounded fabulous. It was old so, compared to newer saloon cars, the performance was nothing special. Still a couple of years of pleasure was had. Dropping the kids off at junior school had the local mums wetting themselves. Fear or lust who knows.

Oh to be a fly on the wall....

JERUSALEM, Sept 16 (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will visit Russia next week for talks with President Vladimir Putin on Russia's expanding military deployment in Syria, an Israeli official said on Wednesday.

"The prime minister will present the threats to Israel emanating from the increased flow of advanced weaponry to the Syrian arena and from the transfer of lethal weaponry to Hezbollah and other terrorist groups," the official said.

Moscow has come under increased international pressure to explain its moves in Syria, where the Kremlin has been supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in a 4-1/2-year war.

(Reporting by Dan Williams; Editing by Jeffrey Heller)

Netanyahu to Russia next week for talks on Syria - Israeli official

I'm quite sure Mr Putin will remind Netanyahu of the advanced weapons Israel currently has and the promise by the USA of even more weapons and a US promise to keep Israel at the top of the weapons superiority pile. Mt Putin will then likely remind Netanyahu of the threat posed by IS and that Russian actions are intended to help deal with that threat. Putin will then wish Mr Netanyahu a safe trip back to Israel.

Putin has to draw a line against Islamic enchroachment, what better place than in someone else's front yard...

Originally Posted by Neverna

I'm quite sure Mr Putin will remind Netanyahu of the advanced weapons Israel currently has and the promise by the USA of even more weapons and a US promise to keep Israel at the top of the weapons superiority pile. Mt Putin will then likely remind Netanyahu of the threat posed by IS and that Russian actions are intended to help deal with that threat. Putin will then wish Mr Netanyahu a safe trip back to Israel.

I'm sure Mr. Putin will take a look at the cheques coming in from Iran and Syria, offer Benny a cup of tea, and then look at his watch and rush off saying "I forgot, I've got a dental appointment".

Well they're not going to send troops in to remove the Russians from Crimea, so what other option do you think they have other than a negotiated treaty to stop Putin advancing further?

The tea leaves have suggested there is no reason at all for Putin to "advance" anywhere. The exceptional crusader coalition is fucking itself royally with whatever they do.

Let them continue, but politely don't mention it in dispatches.

Originally Posted by OhOh

The tea leaves have suggested there is no reason at all for Putin to "advance" anywhere. The exceptional crusader coalition is fucking itself royally with whatever they do.

Let them continue, but politely don't mention it in dispatches.

I would suggest there is no reason for Putin to steal more Ukrainian territory.

But he seems to want to reform the USSR.

Originally Posted by OhOh

no reason at all for Putin to "advance" anywhere. The exceptional crusader coalition

Back in the USSR?

The Beatles

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

But he seems to want to reform the USSR.

I agree with you nearly . There is no reason for further advancement, see post 1436. The crusader coalition has buckled in Afghanistan, Ukraine and Syria.

Afghanistan can't be won, the Russians proved that first. That's what made the US going in there even more absurd.

But right now the US is pulling out and the talitubbies will take back over again.

Putin wants a deal on Ukraine and the US isn't giving him one. He wants sanctions lifted and they aren't playing. This is covered in another thread.

The US could give less of a toss about Syria, they aren't in any rush to replace Assad, and they love seeing Putin expending money he hasn't got.

Meanwhile his countrys biggest export is selling for peanuts and it's going to get worse when Iran comes back onstream.

Yet you still think Putin is winning?

Its not meant to be won




"Damn! Those rag heads cut off the opium that we love so much. What year is it? 2001? Good - lets invade the fuckers, and get the drugs flowing again"

How Bad is Vlad now huh..? US Special Forces crying like that bitch Ant Robertson cos he dropped some bombs on them and broke up their party... aww diddums US

I would be very clear in my opposition to Russian involvement in Ukraine but in this situation Russia is doing the right thing. That the right thing happens to also suit Russia's plans is a happy coincidence. The US and Europe have been an utter disgrace throughout this entire stupid war. Assad is a shithead but compared to what has come out of this he is a girl-scout...
What happened in Ukraine with the Malaysian Airline flight was obviously a very bad and stupid mistake. ISIS would do it on purpose if they could and if somehow there were survivors they would sacrifice them in an elaborately horrible way. This is a Death Cult we are dealing with and the only way to deal with them is with as much ammunition as possible....
...The Saudis are behind this whole mess. They fund and arm ISIS with US made weapons. They bribe western politicians to support the policy, and they were behind the US and UK's attempts to bomb Assad.

I hope Russia doesn't stop in Syria...

Fair play to Obama for leaving it to the Russkies.

It's about time someone else picked up the bill for keeping these chattering mussies quiet.

And it will be Russians going home in body bags, not Americans.

Personally I'd carpet bomb the whole fucking place, Damascus included, but Putin wants somewhere to park his deckchair when it's cold in Moscow.

Originally Posted by Neverna

I'm quite sure Mr Putin will remind Netanyahu of the advanced weapons Israel currently has and the promise by the USA of even more weapons and a US promise to keep Israel at the top of the weapons superiority pile. Mt Putin will then likely remind Netanyahu of the threat posed by IS and that Russian actions are intended to help deal with that threat. Putin will then wish Mr Netanyahu a safe trip back to Israel.

The problem here is Russia is not attacking ISIS, they are attacking the rebels against Assad.

You mean the US special forces that aren't really supposed to be there.
The US was officially outraged for all of 12 hours but don't seem willing to highlight it further. Russia confirmed that only 13 out of 18 missions were aimed at ISIS.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by Neverna

I'm quite sure Mr Putin will remind Netanyahu of the advanced weapons Israel currently has and the promise by the USA of even more weapons and a US promise to keep Israel at the top of the weapons superiority pile. Mt Putin will then likely remind Netanyahu of the threat posed by IS and that Russian actions are intended to help deal with that threat. Putin will then wish Mr Netanyahu a safe trip back to Israel.

The problem here is Russia is not attacking ISIS, they are attacking the rebels against Assad.

Yes, that would be because they have supported Assad from the beginning.....

13 out of 18 missions were aimed at ISIS according to Neo (I don't know his source). Presumably the other 5 missions were other armed factions fighting against the Syrian government (terrorists in Assad's view). Whatever your view of the "rebels", if they go into hiding due to the Russian bombs rather than fight the Syrian government, the Syrian government can concentrate on fighting IS, which is surely the biggest, most dangerous and (if the propaganda is to be believed) nastiest of all the groups in Syria.

All a game show anyway. Putin - is he on the same side as Obomba and caMoron?



It's only a gameshow. The Cartels have been backing all sides of all conflabs for centuries.

Originally Posted by Neverna

13 out of 18 missions were aimed at ISIS according to Neo (I don't know his source). Presumably the other 5 missions were other armed factions fighting against the Syrian government (terrorists in Assad's view). Whatever your view of the "rebels", if they go into hiding due to the Russian bombs rather than fight the Syrian government, the Syrian government can concentrate on fighting IS, which is surely the biggest, most dangerous and (if the propaganda is to be believed) nastiest of all the groups in Syria.

The biggest threat to Assad is the Syrian people, not IS.

But he wants to wipe *any* opposition out and stay in power.

His biggest fear about IS is that he's seen them send Iraq troops running for cover, and probably has little confidence that his own troops won't do the same.

Most Syrians back President Assad ? but you'd never know from western media | Jonathan Steele | Comment is free | The Guardian

Assad's popularity, Arab League observers, US military involvement: all distorted in the west's propaganda war

Suppose a respectable opinion poll found that most Syrians are in favour of Bashar al-Assad remaining as president, would that not be major news? Especially as the finding would go against the dominant narrative about the Syrian crisis, and the media considers the unexpected more newsworthy than the obvious.

Alas, not in every case. When coverage of an unfolding drama ceases to be fair and turns into a propaganda weapon, inconvenient facts get suppressed. So it is with the results of a recent YouGov Siraj poll on Syria commissioned by The Doha Debates, funded by the Qatar Foundation. Qatar's royal family has taken one of the most hawkish lines against Assad – the emir has just called for Arab troops to intervene – so it was good that The Doha Debates published the poll on its website. The pity is that it was ignored by almost all media outlets in every western country whose government has called for Assad to go.

The key finding was that while most Arabs outside Syria feel the president should resign, attitudes in the country are different. Some 55% of Syrians want Assad to stay, motivated by fear of civil war – a spectre that is not theoretical as it is for those who live outside Syria's borders. What is less good news for the Assad regime is that the poll also found that half the Syrians who accept him staying in power believe he must usher in free elections in the near future. Assad claims he is about to do that, a point he has repeated in his latest speeches. But it is vital that he publishes the election law as soon as possible, permits political parties and makes a commitment to allow independent monitors to watch the poll.

Biased media coverage also continues to distort the Arab League's observer mission in Syria. When the league endorsed a no-fly zone in Libya last spring, there was high praise in the west for its action. Its decision to mediate in Syria was less welcome to western governments, and to high-profile Syrian opposition groups, who increasingly support a military rather than a political solution. So the league's move was promptly called into doubt by western leaders, and most western media echoed the line. Attacks were launched on the credentials of the mission's Sudanese chairman. Criticisms of the mission's performance by one of its 165 members were headlined. Demands were made that the mission pull out in favour of UN intervention.

The critics presumably feared that the Arab observers would report that armed violence is no longer confined to the regime's forces, and the image of peaceful protests brutally suppressed by army and police is false. Homs and a few other Syrian cities are becoming like Beirut in the 1980s or Sarajevo in the 1990s, with battles between militias raging across sectarian and ethnic fault lines.

As for foreign military intervention, it has already started. It is not following the Libyan pattern since Russia and China are furious at the west's deception in the security council last year. They will not accept a new United Nations resolution that allows any use of force. The model is an older one, going back to the era of the cold war, before "humanitarian intervention" and the "responsibility to protect" were developed and often misused. Remember Ronald Reagan's support for the Contras, whom he armed and trained to try to topple Nicaragua's Sandinistas from bases in Honduras? For Honduras read Turkey, the safe haven where the so-called Free Syrian Army has set up.

Here too western media silence is dramatic. No reporters have followed up on a significant recent article by Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer who now writes for the American Conservative – a magazine that criticises the American military-industrial complex from a non-neocon position on the lines of Ron Paul, who came second in last week's New Hampshire Republican primary. Giraldi states that Turkey, a Nato member, has become Washington's proxy and that unmarked Nato warplanes have been arriving at Iskenderum, near the Syrian border, delivering Libyan volunteers and weapons seized from the late Muammar Gaddafi's arsenal. "French and British special forces trainers are on the ground," he writes, "assisting the Syrian rebels, while the CIA and US Spec Ops are providing communications equipment and intelligence to assist the rebel cause, enabling the fighters to avoid concentrations of Syrian soldiers …"

As the danger of full-scale war increases, Arab League foreign ministers are preparing to meet in Cairo this weekend to discuss the future of their Syrian mission. No doubt there will be western media reports highlighting remarks by those ministers who feel the mission has "lost credibility", "been duped by the regime" or "failed to stop the violence". Counter-arguments will be played down or suppressed.

In spite of the provocations from all sides the league should stand its ground. Its mission in Syria has seen peaceful demonstrations both for and against the regime. It has witnessed, and in some cases suffered from, violence by opposing forces. But it has not yet had enough time or a large enough team to talk to a comprehensive range of Syrian actors and then come up with a clear set of recommendations. Above all, it has not even started to fulfil that part of its mandate requiring it to help produce a dialogue between the regime and its critics. The mission needs to stay in Syria and not be bullied out.

Assad's a popular guy. Same as Qaddafi was.

Anyway, how long until the US, UK or Israel shoots down Russian plane, and the real purpose of the Syrian debacle can begin?

A week? A month?