How dangerous is Vladimir Putin?

**Dragonfly** · 05-11-2015, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Its all out there and been posted so many times on here that there is really no point.

snub is the villiage idiot, don't forget he is american, and conservative

**harrybarracuda** · 05-11-2015, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

Putin signs law allowing retaliatory sequestration of foreign property in Russia

Russia passes an law enabling it to seize assets in Russia.

"According to the new law, the jurisdictional immunities of a foreign state and its property could be limited on the territory of Russia on the principle of mutuality, in the case that the jurisdictional immunity of Russia has been found to be suffering limitations on the sovereign territory of that country.The provisions of the law would not be applied if Russia and the other country have reached an agreement to act differently."

??????????? ????????????? ???????? ????? ? ??????????? ????

Sanctions must be hurting.

**panama hat** · 06-11-2015, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by Dragonfly

snub is the villiage idiot

**OhOh** · 06-11-2015, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Sanctions must be hurting.

The Russians like to work in a legal fashion Harry. Some other countries, not so bothered.

**bsnub** · 06-11-2015, 08:38 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

The Russians like to work in a legal fashion Harry.

**panama hat** · 06-11-2015, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Sanctions must be hurting.

The Russians like to work in a legal fashion Harry. Some other countries, not so bothered.

OhOh, I used to cover Russia as my 'territory' but only went twice - couldn't get me back there, but let me assure you that Russians work anything but in a legal fashion.

**harrybarracuda** · 06-11-2015, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Sanctions must be hurting.

The Russians like to work in a legal fashion Harry. Some other countries, not so bothered.

Whether it's legal or not is irrelevant.

It simply proves that the sanctions must be hurting.

**Dragonfly** · 06-11-2015, 01:37 PM

the sanctions are definitely hurting, but when you went through 50 years of Communism, you can get through anything

go Russia, go

**panama hat** · 06-11-2015, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by Dragonfly

the sanctions are definitely hurting, but when you went through 50 years of Communism, you can get through anything

xanax makes a valid point - Russians are far more mentally prepared for tough times than westerners

**harrybarracuda** · 06-11-2015, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Dragonfly

the sanctions are definitely hurting, but when you went through 50 years of Communism, you can get through anything

go Russia, go

Yes, well if that were true, Putin wouldn't have felt the need to threaten a bit of tit-for-tat, would he?

**Exit Strategy** · 06-11-2015, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by bsnub

The Russians have no experience waging wars that are not directly on their own boarders. They lack the skills and experience to wage war in a foreign theater. You can not learn these things from a book it only come from experience. The US is by far and away the master of logistical warfare. That is experience that the Russian can not come close to matching. Your posts clearly show that you do not have a clue as to what you are talking about.

Correct.

And that is US and UK armed forces that are light years ahead in actual fighting capacity compared to anyone else on this planet. You don't learn this from a book, or in training camp.

**OhOh** · 08-11-2015, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by Exit Strategy

You don't learn this from a book, or in training camp.

I admit it does take a great deal of guts, training, intel, ensuring you have enough fuel/food/survival kit in the right place i.e. close at hand, not 1,000's of kilometers away as we all know missiles and bombs only fly 2km.

Possessing expensive weaponry to bomb two JCB's in the middle of the desert, clearly labeled hospitals or wedding celebrations. When you have the best planes, the best fighters, the best missiles and the best bombs who would think after 10+ years in Afghanistan there wouldn't be a terrorist left. Or after two previous wars in Iraq there wouldn't be any terrorists their either.

It takes an intelligent leader with a plan to win, not the dipshits the western sheeple "elect".

**bsnub** · 08-11-2015, 10:17 AM

^ A pathetically oversimplified analysis.

**OhOh** · 08-11-2015, 10:59 AM

^I try to keep it simple for the likes of you.

**bsnub** · 08-11-2015, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

When you have the best planes, the best fighters, the best missiles and the best bombs who would think after 10+ years in Afghanistan there wouldn't be a terrorist left. Or after two previous wars in Iraq there wouldn't be any terrorists their either.

Your comment reinforces how little you understand the situation in either country. Like I said pathetic oversimplification.

Originally Posted by OhOh

It takes an intelligent leader with a plan to win

I am going to assume you are talking about your idol Putin. I will say that that didnt help the Russians during there disastrous occupation of Afghanistan.

**Neo** · 08-11-2015, 05:04 PM

Yeah because USA showed everyone how to do it in Afghanistan eh snub

**bsnub** · 08-11-2015, 05:42 PM

^ They have done better than anyone else has ever done. They have controlled whatever part of that country that they have been in and have never lost a battle. So yes on a tactical level the US military has had an epic level of success unprecedented in history. Strategically it is a different story.

I am ready to be flamed by those of you who can not define the difference between strategic and tactical success.

**Neo** · 08-11-2015, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by bsnub

I am ready to be flamed by those of you who can not define the difference between strategic and tactical success.

What... again...? Change the record snub.

As of October 1, 2015, there have been 2,326 U.S. military deaths in the War in Afghanistan. 1,856 of these deaths have been the result of hostile action. 20,083 American servicemembers have also been wounded in action during the war.[1] In addition, there were 1,173 U.S. civilian contractor fatalities.[2]

Tell me one tactical success in Afghanistan that can justify 3,500 US deaths and 20,000 casualties.?

**OhOh** · 09-11-2015, 10:29 AM

US Defense Secretary, Ash Carter, has said at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, AP reported on Saturday.

"Terror elements like ISIL, of course, stand entirely opposed to our values. But other challenges are more complicated, and given their size and capabilities, potentially more damaging,” he said.

“Some actors appear intent on eroding these principles and undercutting the international order that helps enforce them… Of course, neither Russia nor China can overturn that order. But both present different challenges for it,” Carter said.

According to AP, Russia and China are challenging “American preeminence” and Washington’s so-called “stewardship of the world order” as they reassert themselves on the international arena as serious military powers.

their “challenging activities” can be seen at every possible level, be it at sea, in the air, in space – or even in cyberspace. “Most disturbing” for the US official, however, is wha he called “Moscow’s nuclear saber-rattling,” which in his view “raises questions about Russian leaders’ commitment to strategic stability, their respect for norms against the use of nuclear weapons, and whether they respect the profound caution nuclear-age leaders showed with regard to the brandishing of nuclear weapons.”

More sabre rattling from an Unexceptional Empire's government official.Specifically, accusations of "under cutting the international order", "challenging America's preeminence", "stewardship of the world order", "nuclear sabre rattling" and lastly "brandishing of nuclear weapon.

Possibly the world order, Americas preeminence and stewardship are now openly questioned or doubted by other world countries leaders. Possibly the nuclear sabre rattling and brandishing of nuclear weapons is due do the American decision to once again deploy nuclear weapons in NATO countries a few hundred Km from Russian borders.

Actions and reactions, who would have guessed some countries actually disagree with the Americans and act accordingly.

**bsnub** · 09-11-2015, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by Neo

Compared to you that just put's up random drunken bullshit and then dodges the flak, let's see what you've got and answer post #1843..?

Originally Posted by Neo

Tell me one tactical success in Afghanistan that can justify 3,500 US deaths and 20,000 casualties.?

Ok I will bite. First off your numbers are wrong. There have been 2273 US personnel KIA in Afghanistan. Secondly you clearly do not understand what "tactical success" is. When the US military confronted the taliban they defeated the taliban. They have been able to operate anywhere in the country when deployed there. Its really that simple.

As the war has dragged on many people including the soldiers themselves have wondered why they are still there and I would agree but that does not change the fact that they have been militarily successful there. With regard to "wiping" the taliban out you cant do that when they spend half the year in Pakistani tribal areas resting, recruiting and preparing to return in the spring.

**harrybarracuda** · 09-11-2015, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by Neo

Compared to you that just put's up random drunken bullshit and then dodges the flak, let's see what you've got and answer post #1843..?

Originally Posted by Neo

Tell me one tactical success in Afghanistan that can justify 3,500 US deaths and 20,000 casualties.?

Ok I will bite. First off your numbers are wrong. There have been 2273 US personnel KIA in Afghanistan. Secondly you clearly do not understand what "tactical success" is. When the US military confronted the taliban they defeated the taliban. They have been able to operate anywhere in the country when deployed there. Its really that simple.

As the war has dragged on many people including the soldiers themselves have wondered why they are still there and I would agree but that does not change the fact that they have been militarily successful there. With regard to "wiping" the taliban out you cant do that when they spend half the year in Pakistani tribal areas resting, recruiting and preparing to return in the spring.

Billions of dollars and thousands of lives later, the US will pull out and the Taliban will be straight back in power.

How you can even dare to call that a "success" I have no idea. Nothing more than a simple act of revenge.

**Dragonfly** · 09-11-2015, 01:41 PM

so nub, you are saying that the US won many battles but lost the war,

or that the US simply won the war by leaving the war theater Saigon style ?

Do you subscribe to the GW Bush school of thought where "mission accomplished" actually means "mission failure" ?

all rethorical questions of course

**Barty** · 09-11-2015, 02:20 PM

Interesting chat with Putin.

Vladimir Putin Tells Everyone Exactly Who Created ISIS

**bsnub** · 09-11-2015, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

How you can even dare to call that a "success" I have no idea. Nothing more than a simple act of revenge.

Why is it that you people have such a hard time understanding the difference between tactical success on the battlefield and a strategic blunder? My point was the soldiers performed brilliantly and did exactly the job they were expected to do. The blunders committed were not theirs.

Know if you ask me do I think that invading Iraq and Afghanistan was a good "strategic" decision my answer would be clearly NO.

**Neo** · 10-11-2015, 12:44 AM

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by Neo

Tell me one tactical success in Afghanistan that can justify 3,500 US deaths and 20,000 casualties.?

Ok I will bite. First off your numbers are wrong. There have been 2273 US personnel KIA in Afghanistan.

As of October 1, 2015, there have been 2,326 U.S. military deaths in the War in Afghanistan. 1,856 of these deaths have been the result of hostile action. 20,083 American servicemembers have also been wounded in action during the war.[1] In addition, there were 1,173 U.S. civilian contractor fatalities.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...in_Afghanistan

Get your facts right snub

Thread: How dangerous is Vladimir Putin?

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions