Comments on: Russia’s President Vladimir Putin Slams Bush

By: polalor

polalor — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 00:57:29 +0000

Just to keep everyone up to date! Today’s US encouraged escalation is clearly represented by the BBC quoting President Putin: “In 1992, Russia unilaterally ended flights by its strategic aircraft to distant military patrol areas. Unfortunately, our example was not followed by everyone,” Mr Putin said, in an apparent reference to the US.

By: holystranger

holystranger — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 19:45:17 +0000

Hey guys, instead of accusing President Putin of anything, or making President Bush innocent and holy, let’s step aside and recall the fact that most people of the WORLD do not support aggressive acts of Bush. He has gone too far – like a little child who has gone too far in a war game when it’s time to pack the guns and go home.

As for President Putin, he had the right to criticize Bush as there was an objective reason for that. Kudos to Putin that he was brave enough to do it instead of waiting when some other president raises his voice.

By: polalor

polalor — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 21:41:09 +0000

I would say to my students that when writing a critical thinking essay be careful not to make blanket statements. These postings are replete with “nationalism.” Nationalism as I teach in Political Science, is an emotional attachment used by the state to enlist people in their cause. They need no basis in critical thinking. The “State” as in State Dept. is an independent entity caring only about its own perpetuation.

As regards President Putin; what other national leader is independent and “brave” enough to make the observation that the American federal government acts out the will of their political leaders; not those whose duty and obligation come from republican virtue but an obligation that comes from an ideology THAT IS CLEARLY NOT BASED IN REPUBLICAN VIRTUE!

Please see the the Foreword and Introduction for an explanation of the political and economic relationship that makes up political economy, as well as the meaning of republic and virtue. You can do this through Search Inside the Book.

Otherwise, ask yourself what influence does American covert involvement and money cause in the world. What has it caused in the past. I’m sure you have read the latest release by the CIA!

By: Jim Satterfield

Jim Satterfield — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 01:36:36 +0000

And here tonight, it’s Celebrity Political Tyrant Deathmatch! Tonight’s matchup is Vladimir “The Killer” Putin versus George “Imperial Presidency” Bush!

By: The Moderate Voice » Blog Archive » Gates Responds to Putin… With Style

Mon, 12 Feb 2007 12:34:45 +0000

[...] I like how Gates responded to Putin (I wrote about what Putin said yesterday): “One cold war was quite enough.” [...]

By: Gray

Gray — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 08:41:16 +0000

“But Boris Yeltsin never looked so good.”

That authoritarian alcoholic? Let’s better say Putin and Jeltsin make Gorbatchev look like a saint.

By: blackshards

blackshards — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:40:33 +0000

I think Laura’s point is very pertinent. Vlad’s failure to control his own nuclear material – deliberate? – is an obvious contributing factor to worries about Iran’s bomb-making abilities. Throw in the murder of a dozen or so Russian journalists and the sale of weapons technology to the major sponsor of international terrorism and what do you have? Hell if I know. But Boris Yeltsin never looked so good.

By: Upinsmoke

Upinsmoke — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 21:43:31 +0000

Sorry he offended your candidate. I suppose if he had said something bad about Mccain or Rudi youd be snickering.

Sorry I just find it funny and I find them both meddling. I just think Howard pointed a finger……Putin waved his hand……same difference.

By: Pyst

Pyst — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 19:40:18 +0000

UIS, Howard was injecting himself into our electoral process, Putin is not. You show an odd patriotism by backing a foreign leader sticking his nose in our elections just because he is ideologically to your personal liking. Thats why quite a few people are ticked at Howard (of AUSTRALIA, which has no troops in Iraq themselves) for sticking his nose in this very independant minded country’s business.

Putin made a comment about our actions abroad of which he is entitled be he viewed as wrong or right he atleast kept out of our business within our own freaking border.

On a side note 3 Republicans (Lieberman added) commented about Putin’s ccomments and not a single one adressed his actual statements. Can’t defend what very well may be correct accessesments while kissing Bush’s ring eh? LOL

By: Upinsmoke

Upinsmoke — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 19:21:56 +0000

this smacks of John Howard in reverse. Both guys have their agenda. Putin to get democrats in to help him and Howard to get democrats out to help him.

Everyone meddles in everyones business. I was surprised to see the outrage over Howard…….well actually no I wasnt.

By: Gray

Gray — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 17:07:54 +0000

Good point, Dave! The focus on Iraq in the recent has resulted in Russian atrocities being very much ‘under the radar’. Putin really isn’t in a position to criticise the US now.

As for “The question we have before us is whether U. S. withdrawal from Iraq in the state that itâ€™s in (for which we have some responsibility) will increase or decrease the stability of the Middle East”, imho it wouldn’t have a serious impact on the growing instability of the region, that was caused by the Iraq war. An active participation of the US in the fight might not even reduce the casualties among the civil population. Imho it might help if the US could really close the borders, so that at least the fueling of the insurgency with arms and ammunitioons would stop. But this would demand the redeployment of the troops in border areas.

The recent WaPo articles by US officers show that US victory, defined as the stabilisation of Iraq under a pro-US government, already isn’t an option anymore. Regarding the demographics, (60% Shia, 20% Sunni) and the high animosity between the sects, it’s inevitable that eventually a purely Shiite national government will run the country. Which of the two main Shiite forces (al Hakim or al Sadr) will prevail isn’t important, since both are essentially enemies of the US. The US can’t gain anything by playing the umpire, each time they will support one party will result in alienating more Iraqis of the other side. So, it looks like helping limit the civil war by using US troops to cut off foreign interference with the sectarian parties is the only reasonable and responsible alternative that’s left. This should happen better sooner than later.

By: Laura

Laura — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 17:07:29 +0000

Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday blamed U.S. policy for inciting other countries to seek nuclear weapons

Pretty ironic statement to accuse us of being responsible for the proliferation of nuclear weapons considering Russia is the one helping the Iranian mullahs acquire nuclear weapons.

There’s a great deal of hypocrisy in the international community in its incessant criticisms of the U.S. and Israel.

By: Dave Schuler

Dave Schuler — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 15:33:41 +0000

Putin may not be the best person to be delivering messages about restraint. Picture of Grozny before Russian carpet bombing Picture of Grozny after Russian carpet bombing At this point even supporters of Putin's administration acknowledge that Russians have killed 200,000 Chechnyans over the last 10 years. The Lancet reports of 200,000 dead in Iraq don't claim that Americans killed them, just that they died. The question we have before us is whether U. S. withdrawal from Iraq in the state that it's in (for which we have some responsibility) will increase or decrease the stability of the Middle East. I believe that intelligent people can differ on this subject but it bears consideration. Iran's secret (now at least partially public) nuclear development program pre-dates Bush's presidency. Putin's claims on that subject are laughable.