26 replies to this topic

[wilmet]

warheads have been known to leak nuclear material, and the missiles needed to deliver them don't last forever either.

The way I see it, Putin needs to whips up fear to channel his people's attention away from more "uncomfortable" issues. He has largely silenced the press and is trying to put down the opposition. To me this sounds like a regime that is insecure and fears for its own survival, it's definately not a sign of strength.

[Cossack]

I like Putin.

He's highly popular with the russian people and has reversed the devastating effects of Yeltsin's neo-liberal policies. With his nationalization of oil and gas industries (something I blieve Canada shoud do as well), he has capitalized on high oil prices and has given it back to the people of Russia.

Russia is on the rise again, and you pretty well only have Putin to thank for it.

Say what you want about him being anti-democratic, but he has a higher approval rating and does more for his people than any western democratic leader I know of.

Plus, he is one of the only countries that actually has some weight behind it that is denouncing american hegemony. I guess being anti-american isn't just for tinpot dictatorships and leftists anymore

Putin sets a good economic example for resource rich countries to capitalize on high market prices (something Canada has failed to do), as well as a good example in showing that you dont have to be a physco like Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong-Il to see how unilateral american dominance is ruining the world.

Not to mention he's being very diplomatic in trying to offer a compromise to the American missile shield by offereing to have a joint project in Azerbaijan.

So I say...keep up the good work Vladimir!

Edited by Cossack, 08 June 2007 - 02:54 AM.

[Hostile]

Not to mention he's being very diplomatic in trying to offer a compromise to the American missile shield by offereing to have a joint project in Azerbaijan.

Not to be a drive by poster here, but it was Bush who told the russians we should make it a joint project. The russians than responded positively.

I also don't find him to be very diplomatic in actions like cutting off oil to Ukraine and such. Or making statements about targeting european institutions with nukes.

[GorGorgood]

I like Putin.

He's highly popular with the russian people and has reversed the devastating effects of Yeltsin's neo-liberal policies. With his nationalization of oil and gas industries (something I blieve Canada shoud do as well), he has capitalized on high oil prices and has given it back to the people of Russia.

Russia is on the rise again, and you pretty well only have Putin to thank for it.

Say what you want about him being anti-democratic, but he has a higher approval rating and does more for his people than any western democratic leader I know of.

Plus, he is one of the only countries that actually has some weight behind it that is denouncing american hegemony. I guess being anti-american isn't just for tinpot dictatorships and leftists anymore

Putin sets a good economic example for resource rich countries to capitalize on high market prices (something Canada has failed to do), as well as a good example in showing that you dont have to be a physco like Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong-Il to see how unilateral american dominance is ruining the world.

Not to mention he's being very diplomatic in trying to offer a compromise to the American missile shield by offereing to have a joint project in Azerbaijan.

So I say...keep up the good work Vladimir!

'american hegemony' = to include Canadians, Mexicans, Greenlanders, and all of the Central and South Americans and does not = USofA hegemony.

And there is no such thing as USofA hegemony either, neither economically or militarily. British citizens and corporations etc. own a huge share of USofA corporations and real estate as do the japanese, and I do believe there is great industrial etc. production in Europe, Asia, and South and Central America and Australia etc., so it seems the term 'american hegemony' is simple and nonsensical rhetoric from the time of the Cold War comrades. There is plenty of competition for goods etc. production and consumption in the world.

I think that the world is ruining itself. You lay all blame at the feet of the USofA and are clearly a deluded and confused individual. What people are destroying ther own mosques??? Who is to blame for all the conflicts in Africa??? How many countries have environmetal regulations in place and enforce them?? Certainly the former Soviet Union had little or none and neither did China nor India for that matter.

Look at the large sections of defoiliated and nearly destroyed forests in Eastern Europe due to the pollution caused by non-environmentally regulated Soviet-era industry. This problem is existant but very small in the USofA. Also, our West Coast is getting hits with much pollution from China. We have environmental pollution here, I know because I once worked in the environmental field, but not nearly as bad as exists in eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, China, and perhaps India.

Not anything nor anyone is perfect, except yourself I would venture to deem.

Putin is OK in many respects, not perfect either, but he was very heavy-handed in Grozny, although we too have been heavy-handed in situations. No perfection exists.

Chris

Edited by GorGorgood, 03 July 2007 - 07:43 AM.

[Cossack]

Hmmm..... my post was more trying to argue Putins ability as a leader rather than americas role in environmental issues and the middle east, but okay.

What people are destroying ther own mosques???

The better question is what led to them destroying their own mosques. The answer is the United States of America. The explanation is simple. Before the US came to Iraq, there were no mosques being blown up, afters the US comes to Iraq there are many mosques being blown up. Sure the americans are trying their best to stop it, but Saddam seemed to be much more effective at quelling the sectarian violence.

Who is to blame for all the conflicts in Africa???

Again, the US falls into this category as well, but the blame can be put on almost all western nations. Imperialism in Africa, begining sometime in the 1800's and continuing to this very day, has driven the African people into poverty and conflict. Take the Rwandan genocide for example...were it not for danish imperialism it would have never happened.

How many countries have environmetal regulations in place and enforce them??

Almost every western european nation, as well as california (unfortunatly not the rest of the US).

[Ash]

and enforce them??

I believe this was the operative phrase, Cossack.

[GorGorgood]

Hmmm..... my post was more trying to argue Putins ability as a leader rather than americas role in environmental issues and the middle east, but okay.

What people are destroying ther own mosques???

The better question is what led to them destroying their own mosques. The answer is the United States of America. The explanation is simple. Before the US came to Iraq, there were no mosques being blown up, afters the US comes to Iraq there are many mosques being blown up. Sure the americans are trying their best to stop it, but Saddam seemed to be much more effective at quelling the sectarian violence.

Who is to blame for all the conflicts in Africa???

Again, the US falls into this category as well, but the blame can be put on almost all western nations. Imperialism in Africa, begining sometime in the 1800's and continuing to this very day, has driven the African people into poverty and conflict. Take the Rwandan genocide for example...were it not for danish imperialism it would have never happened.

How many countries have environmetal regulations in place and enforce them??

Almost every western european nation, as well as california (unfortunatly not the rest of the US).

Obviously you are unaware of the centuries old Sunni and Shiite Schism. There was a war for control of Mecca around the late 1800's or so, and etc., etc., etc. Then there is Lebannon and Gaza, not to mention other examples of such maddness. Al-Quaida is flaming old hatreds just the same as what occurred in former Yugoslavia between the Serbs, Albanians, Croatians, and Bosnians.

So, to quote you, "The better question is what led to them destroying their own mosques.", and then answer you with the preceding paragraph and to further answer in a more direct manner by saying they themselves are responsible for destroying their own mosques.

There are problems in the Moslem world that are centuries old and existed even before the USA existed, so you simply spout rhetoric Kozak.

In the 1990-91 Gulf War, the Coalition Forces, to include the two army corps provided by Egypt and Syria and the other Arab and Muslim nations' troop contingents, wished to drive on to Baghdad, but the UN unfortunately did not mandate this.

The environmental reference I made was to point out that the USA was more concerned about this issue than the Workers' Paradise of the Soviet Union, just another major issue to illustrate the USA being blamed for everything when in reality this is not rue.

Yeah, if you believe the Rwandan Genocide had anything to do with Danish imperialism, well, have it your way.

Actually, official US policies were against arpatheid etc. Funny that many Africans are pro-Western.

Your posts are filled with rhetoric, and when people address your remarks you attemprt to say that your remarks are not what you are remarking about.

Chris