Russia ‘stoking refugee unrest in Germany to topple Angela Merkel’

[Montecresto]

Bush and Obama at the end of the day, despite all their corporate ties, are accountable to their people, and have their power constrained by rule of law. The same is not true of Putin and his inner circle. The simple fact is that there are degrees of corruption and the US' comes nowhere close to Russia's or China's. I don't think the US is 'benevolent' but I do think it's better and more righteous than Russia under Putin, particularly when one considers its strength and capacities. I would shudder to think of a world where Putin or Xi Jinping had America's unrivaled power at their command.

Again, the Crimea bases were under no material threat. If you have proof that they were, please share it.

Lastly, Putin doesn't give a **** about Russia's interests; never has, never will. He cares about himself, and his own power and self-aggrandizement. If he actually did care, he wouldn't have taken actions that lead to the sustained and continuing collapse of its economy and the wholesale destruction of its currency reserves.

The very act of the Wests in supporting an undemocratic regime change by a coup conducted by a tiny fraction of the Ukrainian population was the threat that Russia has been talking about. As Putin has made clear. They believed, and had good reason to believe that the new regime in Kiev, sympathetic to the West, would cancel the lease in Sevastopol and Putin wasn't waiting around for that to happen. Your opinion or dismissal of that has no bearing on it whatsoever. Putin said he had that concern and he took swift action to protect Russian interests. It is now secure.

As to Putins interests, you haven't a clue what they are. You think Clinton or Trump's interests go beyond their own, lol? Russia will survive despite Western intrigue.

 

[Surrealistik]

The very act of the Wests in supporting an undemocratic regime change by a coup conducted by a tiny fraction of the Ukrainian population was the threat that Russia has been talking about. As Putin has made clear. They believed, and had good reason to believe that the new regime in Kiev, sympathetic to the West, would cancel the lease in Sevastopol and Putin wasn't waiting around for that to happen. Your opinion or dismissal of that has no bearing on it whatsoever. Putin said he had that concern and he took swift action to protect Russian interests. It is now secure.

As to Putins interests, you haven't a clue what they are. You think Clinton or Trump's interests go beyond their own, lol? Russia will survive despite Western intrigue.

Again, you need to actually prove that Viktor was overthrown because of Western intervention, and not because of his own blatant corruption and subversion by Putin.

Further, the election that saw him into power was at best controversial, and at worst straight up rigged: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2010#Fraud_suspicions_and_accusations


Second, please provide evidence that the new government was going to cancel the lease (not that doing so would justify Putin's invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine).


Third, no, I have a pretty good idea of Putin's interests based on his actions which speak far louder than his words. Putin has clearly not served Russian interests so much as his own, using military interventionism and aggression to distract from serious domestic issues and the wholesale destruction of Russia's economy which he is directly responsible for due to his unwillingness to abandon that aggression.

 

[Montecresto]

Again, you need to actually prove that Viktor was overthrown because of Western intervention, and not because of his own blatant corruption and subversion by Putin.

Further, the election that saw him into power was at best controversial, and at worst straight up rigged: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2010#Fraud_suspicions_and_accusations


Second, please provide evidence that the new government was going to cancel the lease (not that doing so would justify Putin's invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine).


Third, no, I have a pretty good idea of Putin's interests based on his actions which speak far louder than his words. Putin has clearly not served Russian interests so much as his own, using military interventionism and aggression to distract from serious domestic issues and the wholesale destruction of Russia's economy which he is directly responsible for due to his unwillingness to abandon that aggression.

I didn't say he was overthrown because of Western intervention. I said that the so called democratic countries of the West supported a very undemocratic process of removing an elected leader. Whether or not he's corrupt, or how much he is corrupt is not a matter for you or I to decide. That's what you're not willing to address I see. No Western country would ever tolerate a regime change by that method in their own countries yet they tout what happened in Kiev two plus years ago as a wonderful display of self determination, never mind that it was conducted by only a fraction of the population. Speak to that, and stop ignoring it.

 

[Montecresto]

Again, you need to actually prove that Viktor was overthrown because of Western intervention, and not because of his own blatant corruption and subversion by Putin.

Further, the election that saw him into power was at best controversial, and at worst straight up rigged: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2010#Fraud_suspicions_and_accusations


Second, please provide evidence that the new government was going to cancel the lease (not that doing so would justify Putin's invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine).


Third, no, I have a pretty good idea of Putin's interests based on his actions which speak far louder than his words. Putin has clearly not served Russian interests so much as his own, using military interventionism and aggression to distract from serious domestic issues and the wholesale destruction of Russia's economy which he is directly responsible for due to his unwillingness to abandon that aggression.

To the bolded. Putin had every reason to believe that his base was threatened by the Western intrigue in Kiev, that's all that's necessary for his swift action. How much US military adventurism have you supported based on concerns that this nation or the other posed a threat to us, hmm?

As to Putins actions, they are prudent and in Russia's best interests. Your problem is that you won't listen. Both Russia and China have been opposing the US at the UN and in the field. Both have made it clear that a US dominated Uni-polar world is a threat to global security. Both countries military expenditures went on steroids after Bush's ME belligerence, and both countries aim to back the hypocritical US up. This is why we need people like Ron Paul or Bernie Sanders to take charge of USFP and dispense with the warmongering that we've seen from both parties now.

 

[Surrealistik]

I didn't say he was overthrown because of Western intervention. I said that the so called democratic countries of the West supported a very undemocratic process of removing an elected leader. Whether or not he's corrupt, or how much he is corrupt is not a matter for you or I to decide. That's what you're not willing to address I see. No Western country would ever tolerate a regime change by that method in their own countries yet they tout what happened in Kiev two plus years ago as a wonderful display of self determination, never mind that it was conducted by only a fraction of the population. Speak to that, and stop ignoring it.

Except his election was probably not even legitimate in the first place, and second, there's no sense in alienating Ukraine's new leadership when it seeks alignment with the west and deposed a corrupt puppet of Putin's.

Further, Viktor's disapproval rating was in the 80s at the time of his removal, while most of Ukraine was perfectly fine with his ouster and replacement.

To the bolded. Putin had every reason to believe that his base was threatened by the Western intrigue in Kiev, that's all that's necessary for his swift action. How much US military adventurism have you supported based on concerns that this nation or the other posed a threat to us, hmm?

Show me why the West actually cares about his third rate naval bases to such an extent that they would employ intelligence assets to shut them down at the risk of giving him an excuse to go to war. Second, no, a perceived threat against these naval bases especially without any material basis for that perception, does not justify military action.

I also did not support any American interventionism in the Middle East beyond prevention of genocide; America's indiscretions and missteps do not excuse Putin's. I understand that deflection is a mainstay bastion for those who are keen to defend his evil, but I am not so easily distracted from the issue that is being discussed here and now.

As to Putins actions, they are prudent and in Russia's best interests. Your problem is that you won't listen. Both Russia and China have been opposing the US at the UN and in the field. Both have made it clear that a US dominated Uni-polar world is a threat to global security. Both countries military expenditures went on steroids after Bush's ME belligerence, and both countries aim to back the hypocritical US up. This is why we need people like Ron Paul or Bernie Sanders to take charge of USFP and dispense with the warmongering that we've seen from both parties now.

A Russia or China lead world is far more a threat to global security and well-being than any American hegemony.

Second, Putin's actions clearly are not in Russia's best interests. Again, the economy is in a depression, living standards for the typical person have degraded immensely, currency reserves are running on empty, its stock markets have collapsed, the ruble has tanked and devalued massively, and inflation is climbing out of control while he continues to burn money on his military instead of tending to his people. All this for what? So he can claim he stood up to the United States and NATO? How's that working out for him? Putin is engaging in adventurism as a means of stoking patriotism and distracting the populace from the devastation he has wrought upon his country as well as his effective seizure of the media and destruction of all meaningful political opposition.

 

[Montecresto]

Except his election was probably not even legitimate in the first place, and second, there's no sense in alienating Ukraine's new leadership when it seeks alignment with the west and deposed a corrupt puppet of Putin's.

Further, Viktor's disapproval rating was in the 80s at the time of his removal, while most of Ukraine was perfectly fine with his ouster and replacement.



Show me why the West actually cares about his third rate naval bases to such an extent that they would employ intelligence assets to shut them down at the risk of giving him an excuse to go to war. Second, no, a perceived threat against these naval bases especially without any material basis for that perception, does not justify military action.

I also did not support any American interventionism in the Middle East beyond prevention of genocide; America's indiscretions and missteps do not excuse Putin's. I understand that deflection is a mainstay bastion for those who are keen to defend his evil, but I am not so easily distracted from the issue that is being discussed here and now.




A Russia or China lead world is far more a threat to global security and well-being than any American hegemony.

Second, Putin's actions clearly are not in Russia's best interests. Again, the economy is in a depression, living standards for the typical person have degraded immensely, currency reserves are running on empty, its stock markets have collapsed, the ruble has tanked and devalued massively, and inflation is climbing out of control while he continues to burn money on his military instead of tending to his people. All this for what? So he can claim he stood up to the United States and NATO? How's that working out for him? Putin is engaging in adventurism as a means of stoking patriotism and distracting the populace from the devastation he has wrought upon his country as well as his effective seizure of the media and destruction of all meaningful political opposition.

The process of removing the president was not at all democratic. As such, EU/US support for his removal by an angry mob which destroyed government property as they ran him out demonstrates my point nicely. That there are no good guys, and the end justifies the means.

And I didn't say anything about a Russia or China led world. I support a balance of power. Global security is threatened by the domination of any one country, even if it's your own. But no worries, Russia and China are working on that.

Furthermore, Putin doesn't need you to confirm his justification to secure his Crimean assets anymore than Obama needed Putins confirmation of justification to regime change Gaddafi. You may not accept geopolitics, but it is what it is. Crimea is Russia.

 

[Surrealistik]

The process of removing the president was not at all democratic. As such, EU/US support for his removal by an angry mob which destroyed government property as they ran him out demonstrates my point nicely. That there are no good guys, and the end justifies the means.

Ukrainian democracy came out intact and without a Putin controlled puppet in power who gained leadership in what was at best a dubious election; despite the unorthodox methodology, that is a good outcome.

And I didn't say anything about a Russia or China led world. I support a balance of power. Global security is threatened by the domination of any one country, even if it's your own. But no worries, Russia and China are working on that.

There should be no balance of power with oppressive autocracies accountable to no one and nothing but the powerlust of their inner circles.

Furthermore, Putin doesn't need you to confirm his justification to secure his Crimean assets anymore than Obama needed Putins confirmation of justification to regime change Gaddafi. You may not accept geopolitics, but it is what it is. Crimea is Russia.

That's fine. Putin can confirm his justification with Russia's continued and worsening economic destruction. Crimea and his war with Ukraine has cost him dearly and may even cost him power if this continues and his people finally decide they've had enough of his ruinous leadership.

 

[Montecresto]

Ukrainian democracy came out intact and without a Putin controlled puppet in power who gained leadership in what was at best a dubious election; despite the unorthodox methodology, that is a good outcome.



There should be no balance of power with oppressive autocracies accountable to no one and nothing but the powerlust of their inner circles.



That's fine. Putin can confirm his justification with Russia's continued and worsening economic destruction. Crimea and his war with Ukraine has cost him dearly and may even cost him power if this continues and his people finally decide they've had enough of his ruinous leadership.

Sorry, it wasn't just unorthodox, it was undemocratic and illegal by IL, and Ukrainian constitution.

All countries are consumed with power lust and inner circle constituencies. You're extremely naive, think Americas **** don't stink and your crows the blackest crow, blah, blah, blah. :roll:

Putins going nowhere.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Sorry, it wasn't just unorthodox, it was undemocratic and illegal by IL, and Ukrainian constitution.

Parliament removes Yanukovych, even as he defiantly promises not to resign or leave Ukraine

The criminal Yanukovych did flee. In the dead of night. With suitcases full of embezzled state money. Fleeing on a state helicopter to Russia ...

[video=youtube;vmXzom400ks]http://www.youtube.com/watch?vmXzom400ks[/video]


No country in the world, not even Putin's Russia, recognizes the Yanukovych government as legitimate. He is a criminal wanted by Interpol.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Those who call for Brexit are handing European power to the Kremlin

Russian propaganda is now firmly on the side of the Out campaign - and the Kremlin's aims are far scarier than the free trade economics of Michael Gove and Boris Johnson.

 

[Surrealistik]

Sorry, it wasn't just unorthodox, it was undemocratic and illegal by IL, and Ukrainian constitution.

I have no sympathy for power illegitimately gained and kept by a corrupt kleptocrat and puppet. Further, as Simplexity pointed out, he ran to Russia, he wasn't actually forced out.

All countries are consumed with power lust and inner circle constituencies. You're extremely naive, think Americas **** don't stink and your crows the blackest crow, blah, blah, blah. :roll:

Rule of law and checks and balances constrains America's political leadership as does its constant turn over; there are no such limits with respect to China or Russia; this is a straight up fact. Bad as the US may be (I don't believe and have never said it is 'benevolent'), Russia and China are worse, and would be far worse if they held anywhere close to the same power. A case in point is that someone decent and good like Bernie actually has a shot in the United States; he would be arrested, disappeared and/or literally shot in either of these countries.

Putins going nowhere.

Only if he gets a grip on Russia's economic crisis which seems increasingly unlikely; the 'Never Again' Russian mentality of the fraught 90s and the political instability it would cause is a very real threat to his power if living standards worsen enough.

 

[Montecresto]

I have no sympathy for power illegitimately gained and kept by a corrupt kleptocrat and puppet. Further, as Simplexity pointed out, he ran to Russia, he wasn't actually forced out.



Rule of law and checks and balances constrains America's political leadership as does its constant turn over; there are no such limits with respect to China or Russia; this is a straight up fact. Bad as the US may be (I don't believe and have never said it is 'benevolent'), Russia and China are worse, and would be far worse if they held anywhere close to the same power. A case in point is that someone decent and good like Bernie actually has a shot in the United States; he would be arrested, disappeared and/or literally shot in either of these countries.



Only if he gets a grip on Russia's economic crisis which seems increasingly unlikely; the 'Never Again' Russian mentality of the fraught 90s and the political instability it would cause is a very real threat to his power if living standards worsen enough.

The only thing agreeable in this post is that Bernie would be a good president. Partly because he wouldn't pursue a belligerent foreign policy as we've seen now for decades.