[W:#149]An interview if you want to understand Putin's thinking behind the war

[CaughtInThe]

Trump understands Putin and doesn’t suck at anything

 

[CaughtInThe]

Ad homs, cherry picking and red herrings won’t save anyone from this one.

The interview, in of itself, is invalid.

Someone presuming to know something is just opinion.

Let the facts fall as they may.

you presume to know lots of stuff.

 

[noonereal]

they are so scared and jealous of successful and/or strong women.

but it makes sense doesn't it? they should be scared. they can't compete.

In truth, I don't think the are smart enough to be scared. They are "that" unaware, sheltered, removed from the power dynamics of business.
Joe Six Pack has no such exposures.

 

[Luckyone]

And Putin responds saying, "US warship F you. If you do anything, tactical nuclear weapons will be used in Ukraine." And he means it. And what then? We proceed and he uses them? Bad idea. So you have just added another of the 'Obama said red line and didn't back it up' stories to the list INCREASING the danger. This is why red lines need to be used carefully and we have to accept a lot worse things than we'd like to avoid destroying the world.

That, as I've been saying, is the cost of our deciding to keep nuclear weapons in existence.

Putin is a typical bully and he will do whatever he can to accomplish his goal. He will use anything and everything but "up to a point".

One thing that Putin "knows" is that he cannot win an all out war. He, and Russia, would be destroyed. Yes, half the world would be destroyed as well, but he and Russia would be "gone" from this world (never to return) and therefore he will push as much as he thinks he can but somewhere along the line and if we do not pull back or give in on his threats, he will back off.

He miscalculated and was surprised at how NATO and the U.S. stood up to him and to what degree but he had it "somewhat" figured out what would be done and he felt he could overcome it so he went forth. He will continue to go forth and perhaps use chemical weapons and maybe even some form of nuclear attack but he will do it "slowly" and see what reaction occurs before he even thinks of going full blast. If the responses he gets along the way match his, ultimately he will back off as he will not take the chance of Russia getting blasted out of this world forever.

Nonetheless, the one thing that is an absolute "must" from the West is that they cannot back off one inch at any step along the way. If he uses chemical weapons, we should give Ukraine chemical weapons as well. The same thing with nuclear. We must remain firm as that is the only way to beat a bully down. We can destroy him and he knows it. He just thinks we won't go that far. We need too meet him fist to fist at every step of the way.

 

[Luckyone]

Read Garry Kasparov's twitter feed.

https://twitter.com/Kasparov63/with_replies?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

For the record, I'm not posing as some genius analyst or anything. I don't know the Russian language. That's why I trust people who know Russian and who've personally had first-hand encounters with the man, as Garry Kasparov, former chess champion, turned Putin critic, turned exile, has.

We're being too weak with Putin. We've been too weak for far too long.

Unfortunately, being what the other party is makes you the same and that is not what life is all about. This is not about being the strongest but being the best at using your head and being a better person than the other one. That means that muscles are the last thing that need to be used. It is about having principles, respect, caring and all the things that make people better.

I have no idea what you mean when you say being "weak" with Russia. What specifically would you suggest having been done in the past?

 

[multivita-man]

Unfortunately, being what the other party is makes you the same and that is not what life is all about. This is not about being the strongest but being the best at using your head and being a better person than the other one. That means that muscles are the last thing that need to be used. It is about having principles, respect, caring and all the things that make people better.

Look at the pictures of Laviv, Kharkiv, Mariupol -- how's having principles, respect, caring, and all the things that make people better working out for them right now?

I have no idea what you mean when you say being "weak" with Russia. What specifically would you suggest having been done in the past?

It means standing up to a bully and recognizing that sanctions alone may not be enough to stop Putin. As for what we could have done in the past? We could have imposed these sanctions back in 2014, but that's hindsight.

I think people here and elsewhere don't understand what Putin's doing. He's not just attacking Ukraine - this isn't just about his desire to control Ukraine. He's attacking the international geopolitical system that the United States and allies created after 1945. He wants to tear it apart and replace pro-democracy alliances with a system in which its every country for itself and the strong dominate the weak. He's absolutely going to test NATO resolve once he's finished in Ukraine.

 

[Craig234]

Putin is a typical bully and he will do whatever he can to accomplish his goal. He will use anything and everything but "up to a point".

One thing that Putin "knows" is that he cannot win an all out war. He, and Russia, would be destroyed. Yes, half the world would be destroyed as well, but he and Russia would be "gone" from this world (never to return) and therefore he will push as much as he thinks he can but somewhere along the line and if we do not pull back or give in on his threats, he will back off.

You have no idea what he'd do, but you are happy to play games and chicken with nuclear war on your gut feeling what he would and wouldn't do.

Your argument would be like someone lecturing you how stocks are never underpriced or overpriced because people will always pay what they're worth. Hey, glad you believe that, you might say, but their rant would only cost money.

He miscalculated and was surprised at how NATO and the U.S. stood up to him and to what degree but he had it "somewhat" figured out what would be done and he felt he could overcome it so he went forth. He will continue to go forth and perhaps use chemical weapons and maybe even some form of nuclear attack but he will do it "slowly" and see what reaction occurs before he even thinks of going full blast. If the responses he gets along the way match his, ultimately he will back off as he will not take the chance of Russia getting blasted out of this world forever.

Nonetheless, the one thing that is an absolute "must" from the West is that they cannot back off one inch at any step along the way. If he uses chemical weapons, we should give Ukraine chemical weapons as well. The same thing with nuclear. We must remain firm as that is the only way to beat a bully down. We can destroy him and he knows it. He just thinks we won't go that far. We need too meet him fist to fist at every step of the way.

I don't think you understand escalation or nuclear risk. What can be controlled and what can't and what gets out of control and risk management.

Our 'cannot back off one inch' has been defined as an attack on a NATO country. That's not perfect, but it is clear and does help prevent escalation. You don't seem to understand how this 'don't give in one inch' mentality applies to BOTH sides, and he might feel the same about that from NATO expanding to his border as you do about his attacking Ukraine. If I told you a wrong stock pick would kill everyone in your city, would that affect your risk taking?

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

An airstrike less than fifteen miles from the Polish border tells me all I need to know.
He's DARING NATO.

 

[Craig234]

An airstrike less than fifteen miles from the Polish border tells me all I need to know.
He's DARING NATO.

Or, he's NOT DARING NATO because it's on the side of the line NATO drew.

If he wanted to dare NATO, he could bomb inside Poland. I wonder if your Russian counterpart is posting how NATO is DARING PUTIN by pushing NATO on his border?

 

[multivita-man]

You have no idea what he'd do, but you are happy to play games and chicken with nuclear war on your gut feeling what he would and wouldn't do.

Your argument would be like someone lecturing you how stocks are never underpriced or overpriced because people will always pay what they're worth. Hey, glad you believe that, you might say, but their rant would only cost money.


I don't think you understand escalation or nuclear risk. What can be controlled and what can't and what gets out of control and risk management.

Our 'cannot back off one inch' has been defined as an attack on a NATO country. That's not perfect, but it is clear and does help prevent escalation. You don't seem to understand how this 'don't give in one inch' mentality applies to BOTH sides, and he might feel the same about that from NATO expanding to his border as you do about his attacking Ukraine. If I told you a wrong stock pick would kill everyone in your city, would that affect your risk taking?

I think you're the one who doesn't understand, Craig. You don't understand history. You need to re-take the history course that deals with Europe in the 1930s and how European countries repeatedly tried to negotiate with an autocrat who refused to respect territorial sovereignty, and repeatedly got laughed at and told to go **** themselves.

You also don't understand the history of Russia. Sanctions are necessary, and they will definitely put pressure on Putin's regime, but they are not going to deter him from his objectives of trying to break the current international world order. If you look at Russian history, they've deliberately resisted being a part of the West. They reject Roman Catholicism in favor of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, which is more conservative and more autocratic-friendly. They rejected the Enlightenment and individual rights. More recently, they've rejected the international economic system. They don't believe in it, which is why Western capitalism failed miserably there, why Yeltsin failed, and why Putin succeeded. They sell their resources, their commodities. Sure, they have McDonald's and Coca-Cola. But they're not really well-integrated into the global marketplace. They're not really economically liberal, and they're obviously not a liberal democracy, either. They're a closed system. Russia has an identity that is separate and apart from Europe and Asia. They're Eurasian, and they dominate Eurasia.

A Russian leader like Putin cannot be beaten with sanctions alone. Their adversary has to demonstrate that they have the strength to stand up to them. That is Russia. That is Russian culture. That is who they are. Nobody in this thread has advocating attacking Moscow or making reckless threats, but sitting around and letting a nuclear-armed country use its nuclear weapons to give itself license to invade whomever they wish is asking for bigger trouble later.

 

[multivita-man]

An airstrike less than fifteen miles from the Polish border tells me all I need to know.
He's DARING NATO.

He's not daring NATO, but he's certainly testing and probing NATO. Putin doesn't really want a hardcore confrontation with NATO. The problem is, he's not convinced we're all-in on defending certain countries .

Putin and his ideologues in the military have always believed that America and the West were weak, and that people like Mikhail Gorbachev were backstabbers who sold out Russia to the West. They view Gorbachev the same way some right wingers view those who withdrew from Vietnam, that they're treasonous scum who sold out the country to disgusting foreigners.

That's why they level Ukraine. They believe that they are superior to us because they assume that Westerners are narcissists who care about their money, and that if they can cause so much as a recession, that will be enough to destroy our resolve to wage conflict with Russia. By contrast, their assumption is that they've conditioned Russians to accept hardship in the name of God, family, and country.

Putin and his circle believe that they are really stronger than Westerners. They believe that Western ideals are inferior. They believe that our capitalism and consumerism make them susceptible to corruption and greed, and that we don't have values we'd die or sacrifice for. They believe that our culture has become Godless, feminized, and gender-confused. They believe that race and ethnicity will divide us. They believe we'll fight a weaker nation like Iraq and Afghanistan but that we're not actually willing to fight a power that has equal capabilities.

That's why they're leveling cities in Ukraine. They're creating a continental humanitarian crisis. They meddle in our elections. They drop cruise missiles just a few miles from the border of a NATO country. They don't believe we have the courage and character to confront them with more than threats of economic consequences.

 

[Luckyone]

You have no idea what he'd do, but you are happy to play games and chicken with nuclear war on your gut feeling what he would and wouldn't do.

Your argument would be like someone lecturing you how stocks are never underpriced or overpriced because people will always pay what they're worth. Hey, glad you believe that, you might say, but their rant would only cost money.


I don't think you understand escalation or nuclear risk. What can be controlled and what can't and what gets out of control and risk management.

Our 'cannot back off one inch' has been defined as an attack on a NATO country. That's not perfect, but it is clear and does help prevent escalation. You don't seem to understand how this 'don't give in one inch' mentality applies to BOTH sides, and he might feel the same about that from NATO expanding to his border as you do about his attacking Ukraine. If I told you a wrong stock pick would kill everyone in your city, would that affect your risk taking?

Craig, I don't respond well to people that say to me "you don't understand". We may see things differently but understanding is not a problem I have. I do as much searching for information and listening to as many opinions and facts as I can and my opinion on this is as valid as yours.

 

[Luckyone]

Look at the pictures of Laviv, Kharkiv, Mariupol -- how's having principles, respect, caring, and all the things that make people better working out for them right now?



It means standing up to a bully and recognizing that sanctions alone may not be enough to stop Putin. As for what we could have done in the past? We could have imposed these sanctions back in 2014, but that's hindsight.

I think people here and elsewhere don't understand what Putin's doing. He's not just attacking Ukraine - this isn't just about his desire to control Ukraine. He's attacking the international geopolitical system that the United States and allies created after 1945. He wants to tear it apart and replace pro-democracy alliances with a system in which its every country for itself and the strong dominate the weak. He's absolutely going to test NATO resolve once he's finished in Ukraine.

Again, you are not using your head but using muscle. I don't want to keep explaining this to you. People that "believe" that muscle is the "thing" are of the same ilk and that means that you are replacing one bully with another and the only difference being what each bully wants to accomplish.

 

[multivita-man]

Again, you are not using your head but using muscle. I don't want to keep explaining this to you. People that "believe" that muscle is the "thing" are of the same ilk and that means that you are replacing one bully with another and the only difference being what each bully wants to accomplish.

No, you're not getting it.

It's beyond ****ing stupid to allow your adversary to use muscle while you tell him you're not going to use any muscle in return no matter what he does. And I'll also tell you what I told Craig: you don't know the history of Europe in the 1930s. Read about it sometime. Not the History Channel snapshots of it, but the entirety of it.

 

[Craig234]

Craig, I don't respond well to people that say to me "you don't understand". We may see things differently but understanding is not a problem I have. I do as much searching for information and listening to as many opinions and facts as I can and my opinion on this is as valid as yours.

OK, so if someone tells you that horoscopes are how to invest, and you want to tell them they don't understand investing, you shouldn't because they'd say they don't respond well to being told they don't understand? That's their choice, if they don't want to learn things. Not everyone's opinions are equally valid on different issues. We each understand somethings better than the other does.

 

[Craig234]

I think you're the one who doesn't understand, Craig. You don't understand history. You need to re-take the history course that deals with Europe in the 1930s and how European countries repeatedly tried to negotiate with an autocrat who refused to respect territorial sovereignty, and repeatedly got laughed at and told to go **** themselves.

You're showing who doesn't understand with your trying to draw direct comparisons between pre-nuclear and nuclear powers. You are showing a very simplistic approach to the topic. Obviously there are some parallels between Hitler's aggression and Putin's; some would draw some with NATO's expansion as well. That doesn't mean the responses are the same, when one might have stopped Hitler and the same response now might destroy the world.

You also don't understand the history of Russia.

You are really showing ignorance with your statements like that. I'm not going to waste more time while you hopefully improve.

 

[multivita-man]

Not everyone's opinions are equally valid on different issues. We each understand somethings better than the other does.

That's right, and you might want to remember that the next time you lecture people on international affairs. I've lived outside the United States for almost five years. I've traveled on multiple continents, and about 15 different countries. I speak two languages (intermediate-ish) in addition to English. I read voraciously about foreign policy and history and have a fairly solid knowledge of histories of European, Asian, and North/South American countries. You tell people "You don't understand" a fair amount and you remind me why I can't stand Bernie Sanders - because he (and his biggest supporters) tends to 'Bernie-splain' to everyone.

Bernie guy: Hey, so like who are you votin' for?

Black voter: Uh, Hillary Clinton.

Bernie guy: WTF? Are you insane? Like, you realize you're voting against black people, right?

Black voter: Uh, I'm Black. I think I know my interests.

Bernie guy: No, actually, you don't. See, you probably don't know this, but Bernie actually got arrested at a civil rights protests.

Black voter: Uh, whatever, I know Hillary Clinton and I'll vote for her.

Bernie guy: Dude, she like voted for the 1994 crime bill that put tens of millions of Black people in prison for no reason.

Black voter: Actually, she didn't vote for it. She was First Lady then. But Bernie Sanders voted for that bill. He was a Senator then, and he voted for it.

 

[multivita-man]

You're showing who doesn't understand with your trying to draw direct comparisons between pre-nuclear and nuclear powers. You are showing a very simplistic approach to the topic. Obviously there are some parallels between Hitler's aggression and Putin's; some would draw some with NATO's expansion as well. That doesn't mean the responses are the same, when one might have stopped Hitler and the same response now might destroy the world.



You are really showing ignorance with your statements like that. I'm not going to waste more time while you hopefully improve.

Uh, okay, Bernista.

 

[Craig234]

That's right, and you might want to remember that the next time you lecture people on international affairs. I've lived outside the United States for almost five years.

I don't take away anything from you that shouldn't be. I respond to what you say. If you say something wrong, then living outside the US for almost five year might have taught you a lot, but it didn't teach you what you got wrong. And you making a straw man imaginary conversation abut Bernie Sanders doesn't show you arguing well. It shows the opposite - that you "can't stand Bernie Sanders" for misguided reasons instead of what's important.

 

[Craig234]

Uh, okay, Bernista.

I said while you hopefully improve. Instead you're unfortunately going the other direction. You're not to a point to not read yet, where I think you can post much better, but you're trying to get there.

 

[Craig234]

Speaking of learning about Putin, Oliver Stone had about 20 hours of interviews with him a few years ago that are quite informative.

https://www.youtube.com/show/SCca2WL3EfAJes7MRYGuzcnA

 

[Antiwar]

What a lot of words for an easy enough topic.

I haven't watched the video because that's how DP works.

The USG's tied its own militaristic hands by having nuclear weapons: It can't stomp its big boots on the former Cold War 'enemy,' Russia, because they also have nuclear weapons (because of the Cold War).

So we get (1) the existential threat of mutually assured stupidity and (2) this could turn into a conventional world war.

Stupid USG militarism not only puts everyone in those two no-win positions, it also (3) threatens everyone and everything with further environmental degradation.

Let's not forget that (4) the USG blocked the international justice system, which could have been set up decades ago to prevent and stop human rights abuses and wars.

And didn't (5) the USG break nuclear treaties?

How about (6) USG hypocrisy regarding attacking sovereign nations?

These are the simple things; surely there's a lot more that's way deeper than this mud puddle of a forum can handle because it can't even handle the basics.

USG militarism is the stupidest thing humanity has ever done, and that's saying something.

 

[multivita-man]

Speaking of learning about Putin, Oliver Stone had about 20 hours of interviews with him a few years ago that are quite informative.

https://www.youtube.com/show/SCca2WL3EfAJes7MRYGuzcnA

Right, trust Oliver Stone, who makes conspiracy theory movies, over Garry Kasparov, Masha Gessen, Timothy Snyder, Julia Ioffe, Fiona Hill, and Alexander Vindman.

Okay.

 

[Craig234]

What a lot of words for an easy enough topic.

I haven't watched the video because that's how DP works.

The USG's tied its own militaristic hands by having nuclear weapons: It can't stomp its big boots on the former Cold War 'enemy,' Russia, because they also have nuclear weapons because of the Cold War.

So we get (1) the existential threat of mutually assured stupidity and (2) this could turn into a conventional world war.

Stupid USG militarism not only puts everyone in those two no-win positions, it also (3) threatens everyone and everything with further environmental degradation.

Let's not forget that (4) the USG blocked the international justice system, which could have been set up decades ago to prevent and stop human rights abuses and wars.

USG militarism is the stupidest thing humanity has ever done, and that's saying something.

That's a pretty misguided post. The thread topic is learning about Putin. Not watching the videos don't help you with that. The topic isn't USG militarism; the international justice system, which I want the US to join, wouldn't be able to prevent what Putin is doing; and there have been a lot worse things than USG militarism, despite a lot wrong with it. Ever hear of Adolf, Mao, Stalin for example?

 

[Craig234]

Right, trust Oliver Stone, who makes conspiracy theory movies, over Garry Kasparov, Masha Gessen, Timothy Snyder, Julia Ioffe, Fiona Hill, and Alexander Vindman.

First of all, it's not 'Oliver Stone versus any of those people'. Second of all, you don't understand (you might not like that, but you said what causes it) the difference between listening to Oliver Stone, and listening to Vladimar Putin himself talk to Oliver Stone. Useless post.