Thread: How dangerous is Vladimir Putin?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

he's also slaughtered thousands of Syrian rebels who are not terrorists

He hasn't mistakenly hit any wedding parties yet though

"A vicious minority government lead by a dead man walking'- this is where we differ.

I don't see the Assad regime as particularly vicious, or moribund- in spite of western propaganda. I mean, how long now has the lapdog western press been saying Assad will fall within weeks or months? For years- and I have correctly told you from the beginning that this is nonsense. The 'reasonable' or moderate rebels are a myth- if you want a free and diverse fighting force comprised of all religions and sects practised in Syria, I'm afraid you have to look at the Syrian army. In case you hadn't noticed, the Kurds are more busy fighting the vile islamists than the regime- and to the best of my knowledge, Vlad has not targeted them. Furthermore they have their own agenda that the west is not onside with- namely a greater Kurdistan.

There were no squeals of excessive brutality coming from our bleeding hearts or government/media complex concerning the Assad regime, until of course the dumb and ill fated decision was made to side with the (overwhelmingly) Islamist rebellion against Assad- and, for what? Had he or his operatives ever bombed us, or Israel? Nope, never. For geopolitics, that's why- an attempt to isolate Iran. But, err, have I missed something here- didn't we make peace with Iran anyway? So whatever shred of credibility this typically dumb piece of ME strategy may have once had, no longer exists. Now, it's just sour grapes against dear old Vlad for showing us up for the hypocrites we are. An unlikely angel, you say? Indeed so. Shame it wasn't us.

You want a fair and free election in Syria? bring it on- but in the absence of any united opposition, Assad would win. Want more regional autonomy, a more pluralistic government system- I'm totally cool with that, but don't kid yourselves that is what the Islamists are offering, snigger. Or the Kurds. The worse thing for Syria now would be for Assad to fall- but it ain't gonna happen anyway.

Simply put, our enemy isn't Assad- it is the Islamists of IS and AQ.

Originally Posted by sabang

Putin has taken a principled and effective stand against islamic terrorism

He is a shallow opportunist who hijacks a principled cause for his own short term regional political gains.

Originally Posted by Neo

wedding parties

Its always a frigging 'wedding party'. Is that the only kind of gathering they have in Afghanistan or wherever?

Can they not be a bit more imaginative in their accusations of collateral damagery?

Originally Posted by sabang

"A vicious minority government lead by a dead man walking'- this is where we differ.

I don't see the Assad regime as particularly vicious, or moribund- in spite of western propaganda. I mean, how long now has the lapdog western press been saying Assad will fall within weeks or months? For years- and I have correctly told you from the beginning that this is nonsense. The 'reasonable' or moderate rebels are a myth- if you want a free and diverse fighting force comprised of all religions and sects practised in Syria, I'm afraid you have to look at the Syrian army. In case you hadn't noticed, the Kurds are more busy fighting the vile islamists than the regime- and to the best of my knowledge, Vlad has not targeted them. Furthermore they have their own agenda that the west is not onside with- namely a greater Kurdistan.

There were no squeals of excessive brutality coming from our bleeding hearts or government/media complex concerning the Assad regime, until of course the dumb and ill fated decision was made to side with the (overwhelmingly) Islamist rebellion against Assad- and, for what? Had he or his operatives ever bombed us, or Israel? Nope, never. For geopolitics, that's why- an attempt to isolate Iran. But, err, have I missed something here- didn't we make peace with Iran anyway? So whatever shred of credibility this typically dumb piece of ME strategy may have once had, no longer exists. Now, it's just sour grapes against dear old Vlad for showing us up for the hypocrites we are. An unlikely angel, you say? Indeed so. Shame it wasn't us.

You want a fair and free election in Syria? bring it on- but in the absence of any united opposition, Assad would win. Want more regional autonomy, a more pluralistic government system- I'm totally cool with that, but don't kid yourselves that is what the Islamists are offering, snigger. Or the Kurds. The worse thing for Syria now would be for Assad to fall- but it ain't gonna happen anyway.

Simply put, our enemy isn't Assad- it is the Islamists of IS and AQ.

Fuck me, have you been overcelebrating the festive season or what?

In a free and fair election, the majority of Syrians would vote for Boris fucking Johnson rather than Assad.

There won't be free and fair elections while he is in charge, there never have been.

A federation of three states would work, but just not with Assad in charge. I suspect that is probably what will end up happening.

As for:

I mean, how long now has the lapdog western press been saying Assad will fall within weeks or months? For years- and I have correctly told you from the beginning that this is nonsense.

I have been telling you since he started veto'ing UN resolutions that Assad would have been long gone if Putin hadn't protected him.

Putin is solely to blame for allowing what should have been a swift transfer of power from Sunni to Shi'a into a shitfest of sectarian violence.

For him to come in and try and paint himself as some kind of hero doing the world a favour is beyond a fucking joke.

Originally Posted by Looper

He is a shallow opportunist

aka, "I don't like Vlad". Fine- but in a few months, he has done more damage to the vile islamists than the disingenuous so called western coalition has done in years. That makes him an angel in my books, even if he kicks small puppies. And, along with the Paris atrocity, he has been instrumental in persuading the West to take meaningful action too, instead of pissing about pretending there is some sort of 'reasonable' rebel opposition. There isn't- the 'reasonable' ones put down their arms long ago, when they realised the rebellion was being dominated by Islamists and their agenda(s). Or perhaps they joined with the Islamists, or joined the Syrian army to fight this menace.

Heck- I could really learn to like old Vladimir!

BTW- why haven't any of the usual suspects called me a Muslim lover recently?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Putin is solely to blame for allowing what should have been a swift transfer of power from Sunni to Shi'a into a shitfest of sectarian violence.

Absolute poppycock. You are so frickin' deluded here. Again- I told you at least two years ago (before Vlad even got involved) the regime was not on the verge of collapse- and I was proven right by events on the ground. Can you say the same about the clumsy propaganda that lied to you? The Assad regime looks less likely than ever to fall now, and thank goodness for that. Don't confuse spoon fed propaganda, or whatever spurious wish list has been fed you by our media, with facts on the ground.

Originally Posted by sabang

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Putin is solely to blame for allowing what should have been a swift transfer of power from Sunni to Shi'a into a shitfest of sectarian violence.

Absolute poppycock. You are so frickin' deluded here. Again- I told you at least two years ago (before Vlad even got involved) the regime was not on the verge of collapse- and I was proven right by events on the ground. Can you say the same about the clumsy propaganda that lied to you? The Assad regime looks less likely than ever to fall now, and thank goodness for that. Don't confuse spoon fed propaganda, or whatever spurious wish list has been fed you by our media, with facts on the ground.

Another who just invents shit to back up their arguments.

The universally agreed date for the start of the civil war was March 2011; that's when Assad's troops first opened fire on peaceful protestors.

The first UN resolution veto'ed by Putin was October 2011. He's used the veto on Syria three times since.

You might be correct that the Assad regime is less likely to fall now. But that's mainly down to the fact that it now controls only about 25% of the country.

At present it is merely treading water.

Unless Syria fragments, Assad will already have the packers in, and a container or 20 heading to Teheran.

I look forward to saying "Good riddance".

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

that's when Assad's troops first opened fire on peaceful protestors.

For sure harry the "peaceful protesters" had no agenda stimulated by external forces.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

The first UN resolution veto'ed by Putin was October 2011. He's used the veto on Syria three times since.

The gist of the proposed resolutions were what Harry, not regime change by chance?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

But that's mainly down to the fact that it now controls only about 25% of the country.

When attacked by a coalition of superior military forces, fed, trained, armed and directed by the most "powerful" countries in the world he has actually survived for a long time.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

At present it is merely treading water.

The Syrian government and it's own coalition is actually expanding it's footprint in Syria. The change came when the coalition was formed and acted. The results illustrated the lies and double crossing of the crusader coalition which, allegedly, had been "fighting" for years. During which many 100,000s of innocent civilians had been slaughtered or ran for their lives.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

In a free and fair election, the majority of Syrians would vote for Boris fucking Johnson rather than Assad.

Where are you getting your "information" from which indicates your assertions?

Ruh Roh here comes the chief tin foil muppet.



75% of Syria is Sunni you fucking idiot.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

There won't be free and fair elections while he is in charge, there never have been. A federation of three states would work, but just not with Assad in charge. I suspect that is probably what will end up happening.

Which countries, in your opinion, hold "free and fair" elections?

Lots of them, are you stupid?

Any one where the ruling party are not permitted to decide who votes, and more importantly not permitted to make up numbers to suggest they have won when they haven't. That covers a fair amount of the West, unless you can suggest otherwise.

Why do you suggest that splitting a country into a number of parts would improve the citizens lot? Looking at just recent "country splitting" the success rate is zero. Going back in history the results indicate a similar reduction in democratic stability. A countries growth and stability rest on a number of requirements: An economy which supports the populations ambitions, a stable system of administration, no interference by outside powers etc.

If you think the success rate is zero, I would suggest you go and talk to some Kosovans. Or Slovenians. Or Slovakians.

The acceptance of sovereign countries seems to me to be one of the cornerstones of civilisation. The imposition of "regime change" by other countries, whatever their motives and means is a barbaric relic from the past.

The acceptance of mass murder by the dictatorial leader of a minority would seem to me to be even more barbaric in this day and age.

Only Putin asslickers seem to think it is acceptable.

Originally Posted by sabang

he has done more damage to the vile islamists than the disingenuous so called western coalition has done in years.

You have declined into a pathetic troll. I never thought I would call a man who served as an officer in the AUS Navy a troll but that is what you have become. Pathetic man. Pull your head out of your on vomit.

Nice map Harry ^^ still keeping it simple I see

Originally Posted by OhOh

For sure harry the "peaceful protesters" had no agenda stimulated by external forces.

Unfortunately it's feeble sarcasm like this that shows you are totally out of your depth discussing topics like this one.

Put your tin foil hat back on you dribbling ignoramuis.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Where are you getting your "information" from which indicates your assertions?

He got the map from Big Bird

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by sabang

^^ The US & Nato, certainly up until the Paris slayings, were absolutely not going all out to destroy & incapacitate the Islamists- that is no conspiracy theory. And the Israeli's have been helping Isis- that is no conspiracy theory either. And yes, I do have a long term disdain for Israel- no conspiracy there. So umm, where's the conspiracy theory?

Putin has taken a principled and effective stand against islamic terrorism that, at least in part, has shamed the west into more action. I applaud him.

Yes, but he's also slaughtered thousands of Syrian rebels who are not terrorists.

The US has slaughtered millions of people who weren't terrorists since the end of the Second World War.
So where does that leave us?

Originally Posted by OhOh

Which countries citizens are able to determine the candidates that are available to vote for. Which countries are able to influence the legal system as to determine the outcome of the election results.

What on earth are you babbling on about? Is this a Booners-like feeble attempt at changing the subject?

It has nothing to do with Assad's election rigging. Open another thread on versions of democracy if you so desire.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I would suggest you go and talk to some Kosovans. Or Slovenians. Or Slovakians.

The countries you have named are not exactly bastions of peace even years after being split from the original sovereign country by brute force.

Er... yes they are, actually. What's up, doesn't suit your fantasy?

Assad was democratically elected on a number of occasions. The acceptance of mass murder is a world wide phenomena, why selects one leader and not accuse many others countries leaders or call for regime change?

(a) He has not been democratically elected on a number of occasions, any more than Kim Jong Il has. You would just like to think that.

(b) How many leaders do you know that have used military hardware to murder thousands of their own people in order to stay in power?

Funny, I can list three off the top of my head.

Two of them are dead.

Not that there aren't a few other dictators for whom a double tap would probably benefit their countrymen.

Russia springs to mind.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Open another thread on versions of democracy if you so desire.

You are the poster that, once again, introduced this red herring.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Er... yes they are,

Any numbers of citizen satisfaction, any numbers on demonstrations, any numbers of imposed governments attempting legislation without the consent of the countries citizens?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

How many leaders do you know that have used military hardware to murder thousands of their own people

Take a look at the casualties from the last few wars harry. How many of their soldiers died, how many of the countries population were salughterd.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Not that there aren't a few other dictators for whom a double tap would probably benefit their countrymen

Yes many countries leaders have disappointed the sheeple who voted for "hope and chnage". Luckily the voters have yet to rebel against their "elected leader" and started slaughtering them. Generally these countries just enjoy the "shock and awe" imposed on undefended foreign countries populated by brown men, women and children. It's easier for them to turn on the TV open a bottle and sleep.

It seems that some are concerned that Russia will supply a defensive system which would stop the war mongers from attempting to invade and destroy their country. The weapons system which are not proven as being effective , yet are making some countries military to question their own ability to "project force".

No-Fly Zone: Russia's Lethal S-400 Goes Global | The National Interest Blog

"The proliferation of weapons like the S-400 and its S-300 predecessor pose a serious challenge of U.S. and allied air power. Both weapons systems are highly mobile, networked and can protect vast areas. Effectively, weapons like the S-400 and S-300 make an entire region inaccessible to conventional non-stealthy combat aircraft.

As one senior U.S. Marine Corps aviator told me earlier in the year, the S-300 series is a deadly threat to everything except the most advanced stealth fighters and bombers. “A complete game changer for all fourth-gen aircraft [like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18]. That thing is a beast and you don’t want to get near it,” he said. Only the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, F-35 and Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit stealth bomber would be able to operate inside areas protected by those weapons. But even those aircraft could be challenged if there were enough S-300 or S-400 batteries operating as part of an integrated air defense network."

The game changing, allegedly, system can create an area of non usage for the attacking countries which negate their, allegedly, integrated forces for subjugation.

Originally Posted by OhOh

It seems that some are concerned that Russia will supply a defensive system which would stop the war mongers from attempting to invade and destroy their country. The weapons system which are not proven as being effective , yet are making some countries military to question their own ability to "project force".

No-Fly Zone: Russia's Lethal S-400 Goes Global | The National Interest Blog

"The proliferation of weapons like the S-400 and its S-300 predecessor pose a serious challenge of U.S. and allied air power. Both weapons systems are highly mobile, networked and can protect vast areas. Effectively, weapons like the S-400 and S-300 make an entire region inaccessible to conventional non-stealthy combat aircraft.

As one senior U.S. Marine Corps aviator told me earlier in the year, the S-300 series is a deadly threat to everything except the most advanced stealth fighters and bombers. “A complete game changer for all fourth-gen aircraft [like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18]. That thing is a beast and you don’t want to get near it,” he said. Only the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, F-35 and Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit stealth bomber would be able to operate inside areas protected by those weapons. But even those aircraft could be challenged if there were enough S-300 or S-400 batteries operating as part of an integrated air defense network."

The game changing, allegedly, system can create an area of non usage for the attacking countries which negate their, allegedly, integrated forces for subjugation.

That's great, so now Vlad can drop his objection to the Star Wars project.

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Open another thread on versions of democracy if you so desire.

You are the poster that, once again, introduced this red herring.

I most certainly am not. I said that Assad has never held free and fair elections.

That is unequivocal. You're the one who then decided to start veering off with your tin foil democracy theories.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Er... yes they are,

Any numbers of citizen satisfaction, any numbers on demonstrations, any numbers of imposed governments attempting legislation without the consent of the countries citizens?

No. Maybe you can find some since you said it hasn't happened successfully.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

How many leaders do you know that have used military hardware to murder thousands of their own people

Take a look at the casualties from the last few wars harry. How many of their soldiers died, how many of the countries population were salughterd.

Why are you answering my question with another irrelevant, and vague, question?

Did Obama bomb Americas?

Did Cameron bomb Brits?

Did Sarkozy bomb cheese eating surrender monkeys?

No, so do try and stay on topic, eh?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Not that there aren't a few other dictators for whom a double tap would probably benefit their countrymen

Yes many countries leaders have disappointed the sheeple who voted for "hope and chnage". Luckily the voters have yet to rebel against their "elected leader" and started slaughtering them. Generally these countries just enjoy the "shock and awe" imposed on undefended foreign countries populated by brown men, women and children. It's easier for them to turn on the TV open a bottle and sleep.

This tin foil blather makes no sense.

You're talking shit now.

Have you been drinking?

Originally Posted by Dapper

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by sabang

^^ The US & Nato, certainly up until the Paris slayings, were absolutely not going all out to destroy & incapacitate the Islamists- that is no conspiracy theory. And the Israeli's have been helping Isis- that is no conspiracy theory either. And yes, I do have a long term disdain for Israel- no conspiracy there. So umm, where's the conspiracy theory?

Putin has taken a principled and effective stand against islamic terrorism that, at least in part, has shamed the west into more action. I applaud him.

Yes, but he's also slaughtered thousands of Syrian rebels who are not terrorists.

The US has slaughtered millions of people who weren't terrorists since the end of the Second World War.
So where does that leave us?

With a topic that has absiolutely nothing to do with Vladimir Putin or his actions in Syria.

Suggest you open a "How dangerous is America" thread.

Originally Posted by Neo

Originally Posted by OhOh

Where are you getting your "information" from which indicates your assertions?

He got the map from Big Bird

I have to try and keep it simple so that people like you have a slight chance of understanding it.

Most of that "sunni" area is sparsely populated desert.



Here's a population density map of Syria.