and he who would allow the accrual of any positive perception of Mr. Putin in western society due to a regurgitation of views, that emanate from said society, to its detriment?The Annoyed Man wrote:but only a fool would discount 100% of what he says, just because we don't like him.
No, Mr. Putin is cunning, devious and brutal. That's how he attained his "office". Had he exhibited true intelligence under the Soviet regime, he would have entered a scientific studies track. That he didn't and instead was trained as a KGB officer, where said cunning and brutality are an asset, demonstrates that to me and anyone who has studied the Soviet era in Russia.I don't think Putin is some kind of elder statesman, but neither does someone get to his office without being very intelligent.
No, Mr. Putin advances his own interests, to the detriment of the Russian people, Exactly like Mr. Obama. That inexperienced Western observers conflate Mr. Putin’s interests with those of Russia provides him with the cover he needs to exploit public opinion in the West via his PR firm Ketchum*.But there is one thing that I will give Putin, he absolutely advances Russia's interests at all times.....unlike Obama and the U.S.'s interests.
Mr. Putin’s prestige is at an all time low with the Russian people and his cronies. He is no longer able to dispense largess from Gazprom(estimated market value declined from .5 Trillion USD to 79 Billion USD since 2007)or other Russian energy resources.
As the U.S. continues to move electrical generation into natural gas fired plants, American coal has found its way to Europe. These U.S. coal exports have undermined 30% of Russia’s export coal market. Remember Mr. Putin turning off the natural gas to Ukraine, during the winter a few years past, in order to extort increased revenue? How do you think the development of shale gas resources in Poland, Ukraine and Belarus(due to this type of economic terrorism)in partnership with U.S. companies using the same tech that has caused the marked reduction of market oil prices is viewed in Russia? Hydrocarbons are near 50% of Russian gdp. Gazprom alone was 14%.
The loss of the final Soviet era Middle Eastern client state, Syria, and with it, the only extra-territorial Russian naval base, would be a tremendous blow to his prestige and could be devastating to his ability to maintain his power.
Here we can agree, as long as it’s understood that Mr. Putin’s interests are not the same as Russia’s.And sometimes, Russia's interests ought to be our own.
No , you made the point that Russia and the U.S. have mutual interests, with that I agree. Mr. Putin does not equate Russia.I can think of other examples where their interests and ours cross, if you'd like, but I think I've made my point.
If we’re speaking truth better to shade your statement thus “There isn’t a single thing that is attributed to Putin in those two paragraphs that isn’t absolutely true.” Do a little research on Ketchum.There isn't a single thing that Putin wrote in those two paragraphs that isn't absolutely true.
I’ll grant that the every snarky jab at the US, references to the UN and the sovereignty of nations, probably came from Mr. Putin’s pen. Ironic to see the same man use arguments that had absolutely no impact during his excursion into Georgia and the subsequent military annexation of Ossetia, isn’t it?
Finally, I’ll also state that I am an un-repentant cold warrior. I spent a portion of my young adulthood observing Sov Bloc tank armies. My, and my fellows, task was to contain said tank armies, should they attack, long enough that Stateside manpower could mate with pre-positioned equipment sets in Europe. The study of everything Soviet, culture, command doctrine, logistic capabilities, morale, armaments, training and education was not just part of the job. It was, hopefully, the edge that would allow some of us to survive. I can assure you that most of us studied diligently.
I see nothing in Mr. Putin of the "Sovki", he’s just another in a long line of tyrants and should be opposed at every turn.
*Ketchum, the PR firm Putin used to place his op-ed in the NYT, was the same company that the Bush administration used to produce what the GAO later called illegal covert propaganda.
Under contract from the Department of Education, Ketchum paid conservative pundit Armstrong Williams $241,000 in taxpayer money to tout No Child Left Behind in appearances on CNN and CNBC, and to interview Education Secretary Rod Paige for TV and radio ads. Falsified news stories, payoffs to writers and bloggers, the list goes on and on.
But Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin are not alone. In 2010, Mr. Obama's Department of Health and Human Services used stimulus funds to hire Ketchum to promote the department's policy on electronic medical records. Obama is also the single largest recipient of donations from Ketchum employees.
