Thread: How dangerous is Vladimir Putin?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So which dictator annexed part of one of these and claimed it as their own sovereign territory again?

As you are well aware local stooges are introduced and hey, regime change.

Or are you suggesting that the countries now successfully "Democratised" are free?

Originally Posted by Neo

harry and looper getting there arses handed to them... if it's not manufactured consent they're way out of their comfort zone...

You're delusional.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Just a reminder as to how dangerous vlad the dictator is:

Seen any facts from the still unseen, secret report or just "possibilities"? Please do share with us.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So which dictator annexed part of one of these and claimed it as their own sovereign territory again?

As you are well aware local stooges are introduced and hey, regime change.

Or are you suggesting that the countries now successfully "Democratised" are free?

You're attempted deflection is quite meaningless.

Now, if you'd like to have a go at being more specific in your answer, it would be appreciated.

I'll have a go.

Iran - Under a religious dictatorship since 1979. no free and fair elections.
Iraq - Dictator removed in 2003, Free and fair elections (with a bit of sectarian payback)
Syria - Under a murderous regime propped up by Vlad the dictator and the mad mullahs/Hezbollah.
Sudan - The partition effectively ended a civil war that killed 1.5 million people. North Sudan still a dictatorship.
Yemen - Shitstorm between Saudi and Iran. That one is a de facto US/Vlad proxy war.
Libya - Dictator murdering his own people with military weapons; had to go. But as is usual with the US and NATO, no thought for a transition plan.
Venezuela - Robbed blind by greedy politicians using populist tat. And they would have got away with it if it wasn't for those pesky kids. Er sorry, if the Saudis and the US hadn't flooded the world with cheap oil and pulled the rug from under their feet (although that wasn't the reason for them doing it).
Afghanistan - This one was a political stunt to show all the Merkins the baddies wouldn't get away with 9/11 (and a nice little earner for the Bush family and their cronies). Free and fair elections established, but in my view a waste of time as the Taliban will crawl out of their holes as soon as the coalition of the shilling leave.

What do you see different?

And, again, which dictator annexed part of one of these and claimed it as their own sovereign territory?

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Just a reminder as to how dangerous vlad the dictator is:

Seen any facts from the still unseen, secret report or just "possibilities"? Please do share with us.

What secret report?

The public one the showed that a Buk missile fired from Russian held territory shot down a commercial airliner?

Oh god, go and read the other thread, no need to go through all that again here.

Why the Ukraine flight control ordered the plane through the fighting area that no longer been used by others?

The flight control records had not been made available, lost, equipment broken, national security, you name it... (Similarly as at 911?)

Justice elusive 3 years from MH17 crash in east Ukraine | Malaysia | Al Jazeera

Ukraine never handed over primary radar data, claiming that its installations were broken or down for maintenance at the time.

(why not to proceed according to the model Lockerbie?)

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by Neo

harry and looper getting there arses handed to them... if it's not manufactured consent they're way out of their comfort zone...

You're delusional.

Says the bloke that thinks Crimea is in the east

Annexation of land is an anachronism.

It is simply not done any more by civilised countries.

Crying about interference in political processes doesn't work as a justification as it is not in the same ball park.

The act of annexation is a gigantic step backwards for world politics.

Looks like Vlad is getting fiendishly clever with his next move though and is going to fool the world by making his next annexation a 'separate new country' called Malorossiya.

Nobody will ever suspect that Malorossiya is a puppet state of Russia and a sham cover for annexing more land from Ukraine and dragging the world further back into the dark ages of international diplomacy.

The Putin-tards must all be so proud of their hero.

Originally Posted by Neo

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by Neo

harry and looper getting there arses handed to them... if it's not manufactured consent they're way out of their comfort zone...

You're delusional.

Says the bloke that thinks Crimea is in the east

Says the bloke who knows it's in the east because he didn't fail O-level geography like some c u n t s here.

MH-17: Russia Convicted By Propaganda, Not Evidence - PaulCraigRoberts.org

Why does Kiev refuse to release the communications between Ukrainian air traffic control and MH-17? Why was a civilian airliner routed over a combat zone? The Dutch report does not answer these questions. Washington prevented all answers that conflict with its propaganda.

Only Washington, whose presstitutes can be relied on to control the explanations for Washington, and Washington’s vassal in Kiev had anything to gain from downing the airliner. Whether intentional or an accident, the downing of MH-17 was used to blacken Russia and to convince the EU to go along with Washington’s economic sanctions and military moves against Russia.

As the Romans always asked: “Who benefits?” The answer to that question tells you who did it.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

MH-17: Russia Convicted By Propaganda, Not Evidence - PaulCraigRoberts.org

Why does Kiev refuse to release the communications between Ukrainian air traffic control and MH-17? Why was a civilian airliner routed over a combat zone? The Dutch report does not answer these questions. Washington prevented all answers that conflict with its propaganda.

Only Washington, whose presstitutes can be relied on to control the explanations for Washington, and Washington’s vassal in Kiev had anything to gain from downing the airliner. Whether intentional or an accident, the downing of MH-17 was used to blacken Russia and to convince the EU to go along with Washington’s economic sanctions and military moves against Russia.

As the Romans always asked: “Who benefits?” The answer to that question tells you who did it.

More fucking whackjob nonsense.

There was nothing stopping anyone flying about the 32,000ft ceiling and other aircraft were in the vicinity.

You should stop reading these looney tunes conspiracy theory websites, they make shit up for idiots like you to lap up.

Originally Posted by Looper

Annexation of land is an anachronism.

It is simply not done any more by civilised countries.

Crying about interference in political processes doesn't work as a justification as it is not in the same ball park.

The act of annexation is a gigantic step backwards for world politics.

Looks like Vlad is getting fiendishly clever with his next move though and is going to fool the world by making his next annexation a 'separate new country' called Malorossiya.

Nobody will ever suspect that Malorossiya is a puppet state of Russia and a sham cover for annexing more land from Ukraine and dragging the world further back into the dark ages of international diplomacy.

The Putin-tards must all be so proud of their hero.

You're still coming out with the same old shit, but avoiding actually discussing the arguments you're using..

Originally Posted by Neo

Originally Posted by Looper

Well I thought that was part of the explanation and justification favoured by the putin-tards for Vladimir's annexation nonsense?

(US politcal meddling in Ukraine - boo hoo - cry me a river)

And as usual you avoid the discussion with some childish nonsense.

In the post I quoted you from the one salient point you made worth discussing is:

Originally Posted by Looper
fear of being being outmanoeuvred politically in the Ukraine by the US

Yes I agree and I have always said that, when it comes to Crimea, Russia was astute in claiming it as their own when the alternative would be the Ukraine not having the resources to maintain it and the US positioning a base there, effectively cutting off Russia from the Black Sea in the event of conflict.

So, you tell me.. why the US should be allowed to out maneuver Russia, but Russia should not be allowed to out maneuver the US?

Why should the US be able to extend its military hegemony by controlling Crimea but Russia cannot?

here..

Originally Posted by Neo

Originally Posted by Looper

annexation of land that breaks all modern rules of international engagement

there you go again.. it's just cloud lala land... you keep basing your argument on Russia breaking 'modern rules of international engagement'

show us where these rules exist

and here..

MH17 was really MH370 | Veterans Today

(interesting the discussion underneath)

Originally Posted by Klondyke

MH17 was really MH370 | Veterans Today

(interesting the discussion underneath)

So you are clearly a paid Russian shill posting shit like this and your Engrish is clearly not so good comrade.


Readers Beware! To the best of our judgment, Veterans Today | Military Veterans and Foreign Affairs Journal ? VA ? Veterans Administration is neither Real nor are they Satire! They are alarmist conspiracists


. . . who have been labeled by multiple sources as anti-Semites1, Nazi-Sympathizers2, and all-around jerks3. If this were satire, then one could praise them for having taken Poe’s Law to the Nth level. (But it’s not satire and I doubt they are that clever.)
They also have a rather extensive list of editors, contributors, and staff that have been employed in some way in Palestinian, Chinese, Iranian, and/or Russian government or military. This is likely why there are few articles that question Palestine, China, Iran, or Russia. Clearly, the ‘veterans’ in the name does not refer to American military.


EDITOR’S ADDENDUM: Plenty of other sites tend to agree with Real or Satire on VT, namely, Hatewatch:

“Veterans Today [. . .] is now squarely in neo-Nazi territory. [. . .] American military veterans looking for information about veterans’ issues and a more balanced take on foreign affairs — as opposed to what looks like an endless stream of Israel-bashing mixed in with some bona fide anti-Semitism — would be better-served looking elsewhere.”

veteranstoday.com - Real or Satire?

From the spl...

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...-israel-agenda

Trash and the typical kind of garbage that propagandists like to push. I am sure neo and you are fast friends.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

MH17 was really MH370 | Veterans Today

(interesting the discussion underneath)

I am now confident in stating that there never was a flight MH17 from Schiphol, that the whole story is a great stinking pile of bovine fecal matter and the truth is so shocking and disturbing that few outside the online conspiracy folks have dared to even consider it could be true.

The plane that crashed in Ukraine was, in fact, Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 that had disappeared months earlier. The plane was full of corpses – the passengers of MH370, murdered and their bodies preserved with chemicals.

In fairness, you are way below this class of fuckwittery. This bloke has beaten every level and hit God mode.

Originally Posted by Neo

So, you tell me.. why the US should be allowed to out maneuver Russia, but Russia should not be allowed to out maneuver the US?

Annexation is not political manoeuvring.

It is essentially an open and blatant and act of war.

Russia might be able tactically to get away this bollocks in its own backyard in the short term but the world will remember and in the long term Russia will pay the price.

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by Neo

So, you tell me.. why the US should be allowed to out maneuver Russia, but Russia should not be allowed to out maneuver the US?

Annexation is not political manoeuvring.

It is essentially an open and blatant and act of war.

Russia might be able tactically to get away this bollocks in its own backyard in the short term but the world will remember and in the long term Russia will pay the price.

maneuvering ... those are your own words ffs.!

Originally Posted by Neo

Originally Posted by Looper
fear of being being outmanoeuvred politically in the Ukraine by the US

you're just making up bullshit as you go along

Originally Posted by Looper

Russia might be able tactically to get away this bollocks in its own backyard in the short term but the world will remember and in the long term Russia will pay the price.

the world has already moved on apart form you who thinks its still 1812 and harry who can't find his own arse with both hands

Originally Posted by Neo

maneuvering ... those are your own words ffs.!

I will try again.

Originally Posted by Neo

So, you tell me.. why the US should be allowed to out maneuver Russia, but Russia should not be allowed to out maneuver the US?

Yes, the US was involved in political manoeuvring.

In a petty tantrum Putin retaliated with what is in effect an act of war.

Putin did not out-manoeuvre the US - he spat the dummy and broke the rules of engagement instead.

He might be able to get away with this in the short term but in the long term the world will make him pay.

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by Neo

maneuvering ... those are your own words ffs.!

I will try again.

Originally Posted by Neo

So, you tell me.. why the US should be allowed to out maneuver Russia, but Russia should not be allowed to out maneuver the US?

Yes, the US was involved in political manoeuvring.

In a petty tantrum Putin retaliated with what is in effect an act of war.

Putin did not out-manoeuvre the US - he spat the dummy and broke the rules of engagement instead.

He might be able to get away with this in the short term but in the long term the world will make him pay.

so the US are allowed to involve themselves in matters of Ukrainian sovereignty but Russia isn't.. ok, I get the point you're struggling to make

so how about these 'rules of engagement' you keep wittering on about... do you have a link to those.. can you tell us who wrote the rules and who is the arbitrator of them..?

Originally Posted by Looper

In a petty tantrum Putin retaliated with what is in effect an act of war.

That's what he does in Crimea (or in Ukraine? or elsewhere? ) ...

Originally Posted by Neo

so how about these 'rules of engagement' you keep wittering on about...

The rules of engagement say that since the end of the 2nd world war, which in effect was the end of the age of empires, it is no longer acceptable conduct to misappropriate the territories of other countries because you have the military might and fancy commandeering them.

Annexation is a term common to the international politics of the 19th century.

Its last gasp was in the manoeuvrings during the early 20th century haemoclysm.

It is now a museum piece and consigned to history.

Unfortunately our master of muppets Vladimir Putin doesn't seem to have studied history at school.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

That's what he does in Crimea

You propagandist can you address the nonsense you posted?

Nope..