Vladmir Putin

[incognito]

Never trust a KGB.

True enough, i wouldn't trust them. neither the CIA white theres track record, although the give out alto of dollars to ridiculous things.

You go down to the KGB with your opinion and, after torture, you return with theirs!

 

[donperkan]

Really? Only works in theory? Because it seems to work a hell of a lot better than the alternatives.

The alternatives created the most powerful forces of this world, third reich, soviet union, emirates, japan, china and my favourite yugoslavia. The only counterpart is america, wich brings us back to "it doesnt work"

 

[Brother None]

America is your example of it doesn't work? Because it worked a lot better than all those other countries you list, except maybe Japan, which runs by a very similar system.

And what would be the alternative?

A better socio-economic system? Neoliberalism was already bankrupt in the 90s, and Jeltsin was a drunk buffoon. No idea why you bring up communism as an alternative, it's not really relevant, it's even deader than neoliberalism is.

Oh, there are a lot of choices. One fine one that's in the government now would be Prochorov,.

Haha, what? Prokhorov is exactly the kind of criminal that was threatening to take over in the late 90s. The best thing Putin did was shed them. And it's pretty clear he's as much an "alternative" to Putin now as Medvedev is. Legitimate opposition he is not.

But yes, incognito is mostly right. The 90s proved to the Russians that there are worst alternative, and that has strongly stabilized Putin's base. Now that his base is destabilized, it'll take a strong alternative to unseat him. When Zyuganov is the first alternative, you're not getting there.

It's just as bad as it always was.

No. You seem to be pretty fervently anti-Putin, which is fine, he's not much of a leader for the future, but just outright denying any and all improvements is just weak.

Also, drop the ad hominems.

 

[.Pixote.]

Was Putin the main force behind the war in Chechnya?...I remember around that time (late 1990s) buildings in Moscow were blown up and Putin and his boys were quick to blame the Chechen's, who denied any responsibility. Anyway some people in Moscow found some people planting a massive bomb in the basement of their apartment building, and grabbed them...well guess what, they were ex-KGB agents.

The Russian apartment bombings were a series of explosions that hit four apartment blocks in the Russian cities of Buynaksk, Moscow, and Volgodonsk in September 1999, killing 293 people and injuring 651. The explosions occurred in Buynaksk on 4 September, Moscow on 9 and 13 September, and Volgodonsk on 16 September. Several other bombs were defused in Moscow at the time.[1]

A similar bomb was found and defused in the Russian city of Ryazan on 23 September 1999. On the next day Federal Security Service Director Nikolai Patrushev announced that the Ryazan incident had been a training exercise.[2]

Together with the Invasion of Dagestan launched from Chechnya in August 1999 by Islamist militia led by Shamil Basayev and Ibn al-Khattab, the bombings caused the Russian Federation to launch the Second Chechen War.

Although on 2 September 1999, the militia commander Ibn Al-Khattab announced that "The mujahideen of Dagestan are going to carry out reprisals in various places across Russia,"[3] on 14 September he denied responsibility for the blasts, adding that he was fighting the Russian army, not women and children.[4]

An official investigation of the bombings was completed by the Russian Federal Security Service in 2002. According to the investigation and the court ruling that followed, the bombings were organized by Achemez Gochiyaev, who remained at large as of 2010, and ordered by Ibn Al-Khattab and Abu Omar al-Saif, who were later killed. Six other suspects have been convicted by Russian courts.

State Duma member Yuri Shchekochikhin filed two motions for a parliamentary investigation of the events, but the motions were rejected by the Duma in March 2000. An independent[5] public commission to investigate the bombings was chaired by Duma deputy Sergei Kovalev. The commission was rendered ineffective because of government refusal to respond to its inquiries.[6][7] The Commission's lawyer Mikhail Trepashkin was arrested for exposing classified information.[8]

Yury Felshtinsky (resides in the USA), Alexander Litvinenko (assassinated in 2006), Boris Berezovsky (oligarch in British exile), David Satter, Boris Kagarlitsky, Vladimir Pribylovsky, the secessionist Chechen authorities claimed that the 1999 bombings were a false flag attack coordinated by the FSB in order to win public support for a new full-scale war in Chechnya, which boosted Prime Minister and former FSB Director Vladimir Putin's popularity, and brought the pro-war Unity Party to the State Duma and Putin to the presidency within a few months.[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]

Gordon Bennett from Conflict Studies Research Centre, Robert Bruce Ware, Paul J. Murphy, Henry Plater-Zyberk, Simon Saradzhyan, Nabi Abdullaev and Richard Sakwa criticized the conspiracy theory, pointing out problems such as the lack of evidence.[21][22][23][24][25]

If Russia needs Putin, then they deserve Putin...

 

[KillerBee256]

"Politics, politics never change..." This topic makes me realize politics are messed up everywhere.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

The alternatives created the most powerful forces of this world, third reich, soviet union, emirates, japan, china and my favourite yugoslavia. The only counterpart is america, wich brings us back to "it doesnt work"

So your examples of viability of alternative systems are failed multiethnic empires that wrought misery upon their own people and the entire world, before collapsing in horrific and often genocidal wars?

You wouldn't happen to be a Marxist-Leninist, would you?

Because it worked a lot better than all those other countries you list, except maybe Japan, which runs by a very similar system.

I believe he meant pre-1945 militarist Japan. A.k.a. the only country in human history that ever got nuked. "Alternative" system at work, folks!

 

[Ilosar]

third reich

Not even going to get into why this is a bad example. Anybody with even passing historical and political knowledge should know.

soviet union

You mean the State that collapsed upon itself after merely 70 years and left it's nation in a political void for the next 10 years? Again, not even getting into the gulags, famines, massacres, warfare, ect.

emirates

lolwut. You want to be a client State who relies on one single ressource to even exist?

japan

...Is a democracy. Unless you mean the militaristic, self-destructive pre-nuke one. That got its ass handed to it by democracies. Hint hint.

china

Is the only remotely viable example here, and even then. Let us wait a few more decades before declaring the communist-but-not-really regime is a success.

yugoslavia

See Soviet Union about that one's lifespan.

I also love how your list forgets major European powers. France? Great Britain? Germany? yeah these are failures all right. Excpet for their strong economy, powerful militaries (OK not for Germany but that's a choice more than anything), and huge international influence? I'm just including the Big Three here; there are many functionnal democratic states. Canada. Scandinavia. Eastern Europe is coming this way in places, too.

Really, I wonder if you are in fact kidding, because your statement is quite ridiculous.

As for Putin, well, Russia did get back on its feet somewhat under his rule. But he is way too corrupt to serve as a long term solution. High time the Russians wake up and ditch him.

 

[Sub-Human]

i am merely pointing he is one cleaned up Russia.

He is not the one to have cleaned up Russia - once again, it were people around his rule. Saying he cleaned it up is like praying at the current nation's leader for all good and cursing him for all the bad. A leader does not work alone. But what's important here is that everything that Putin - and Medvedev (since he's merely a little pup) - did to the country secured its downfall.

Btw the police in Russia, do people in still rent a cop ride on trains or go to the stores. Do the mafia have half the police force under there control.

I don't understand what you're saying there with the first example. Do they rent a cop ride to go to the train station or a store? This isn't anarchy, you know.

The mafia doesn't have half the police force under their control. The mafia is the police. You know, there are two good jobs nowdays in Russia that the people are divided in (outside workless lazy alcoholics) - economics/business, and the police (all thanks to Putin and his corrupt system). The first gives you millions and millions. The second doesn't require you to do anything except shake your gun and badge and get whatever you want. Do you know how police works? They will put a fake road sign to take an alternate route. And it is placed so that once you see it, it'll be a little too late. Then they come out of the forest and you know the rest.

Here's an example that shows the police doesn't even work the way it's supposed to! So not only do they rob, they don't even do their part. I remember on 9th May (WW2 end day) I went out on the street, being all happy. Guess who was guarding the parade and the show and concert? The police? No. There was a private guarding company hired to do the job.

Haha, what? Prokhorov is exactly the kind of criminal that was threatening to take over in the late 90s. The best thing Putin did was shed them. And it's pretty clear he's as much an "alternative" to Putin now as Medvedev is. Legitimate opposition he is not.

Now of course, there might not be a lot of ground for support for him to stand on; but let's take the obvious facts. Unlike many and many olligarchs out there in Russia, he made his millions and billions through hard work. He didn't recieve them from the government, he didn't go out and buy these 10,000 ruble tickets like a maniac. Don't you think that a hard-working and willing pal is ought to be better than a former KGB rat with Little Man syndrome and greed for money and power? Sure, he's done some 'sellouts', but as someone who has seats in the Duma, he's the one I'd vote for.

When Zyuganov is the first alternative...

Is he, now? He's a weak pal with brainless supporters. The real alternative here is Navalny, someone that would have given his candidature to President if Kremlin had not rigged the votes. He has supporters from the West, and from people that are willing to think and be open-minded. If Putin makes sure he's disposed of - and oh, that's a possibility - Putin is afraid now - I just can't believe what type of uproar there will be all over the World. 'United' Russia would be thrown out, and Putin would end up like Gadaffi - pulled out of the sewers, killed, and then put into a freezer so you can take a photo.

And as for the ad hominems, excuse me, but as you have guessed I'm quite vocal about Putin's power, even more so than I am about Fallout 3 and this whole Todd deal.

 

[donperkan]

I named those examples bacuse they clearly show what can be achived in a small period of time. Germany was raped after the WW by reparations, Hitler transformed it into what? The same can be said about Stalin and his 5 year plan. Dubai was a fishing settlement a few decades back sure it would still be one if it weren't for the oil but it achived something Nigeria can only dream about. I admit i don't know a whole lot about China and Japan but their transformation trough centralization and industrialization can't be denied. As for Yougoslavia il'l give you an example i experienced, my small town had 5 factories that employed over 50000 people and exported their goods all over the world, prosperity and happiness achived through centrailsed sistem. After we gaind our independence those factories where privatised, now those factories are in ruins and my country imports all those goods it used to make.

Those systems that failed did so bacause the madmen in charge had their own agenda and because America was involved in some form.

One last thing a two praty system is not a democracy

 

[Sander]

I named those examples bacuse they clearly show what can be achived in a small period of time. Germany was raped after the WW by reparations, Hitler transformed it into what? The same can be said about Stalin and his 5 year plan. Dubai was a fishing settlement a few decades back sure it would still be one if it weren't for the oil but it achived something Nigeria can only dream about. I admit i don't know a whole lot about China and Japan but their transformation trough centralization and industrialization can't be denied. As for Yougoslavia il'l give you an example i experienced, my small town had 5 factories that employed over 50000 people and exported their goods all over the world, prosperity and happiness achived through centrailsed sistem. After we gaind our independence those factories where privatised, now those factories are in ruins and my country imports all those goods it used to make.

And yet America (and all of Western Europe) has produced a consistently higher standard of living over a much longer period than any of those countries.

 

[Sub-Human]

Was Putin the main force behind the war in Chechnya?

...and brought the pro-war Unity Party to the State Duma and Putin to the presidency within a few months.

That's ridiculous. It's a well-known fact that Putin has been paying off Chechnya billions of rubles so they left Russia alone. He's certainly not pro-Chechnya War and knows some of the bandits that rule Chechnya quite well, so he isn't about to go and attack them.

Speaking of which, I don't support war usually but with the money Putin has spent it would be much easier to come over there and bust all terrorist ass. Hell, they could build a goddamn new China wall. He spends money that could instead go into new infrastucture, improving medical care and actually getting rid of corruption - but knowing that he wears diamond rings and USD million Rolex watches, I suppose it's all to a better cause.

 

[Brother None]

Chechnya is definitely not an easy issue. I'm not going to take the conspiracy theories seriously. It wasn't the first Chechnya war, and I don't think Putin "needed it" to get into power. It helped, yes, but it wasn't the key.

Putin's put a lot of money into infastructure, and improving medical care, child wellfare, etc. And a ton has gone into the stabilization fund.

Again, he's far from the best option, and he needs to go sooner rather than later. But you're just trying to deny and ignore every good thing he's done. That doesn't make your arguments convincing, it just makes you come across as one-sided.

 

[maximaz]

It's difficult to form a legitimate opinion about Putin from afar. US media tends to really go with the times. When someone needs to be vilified, we hear horror stories; when it's the opposite, we hear the opposite. Still, at least stating all sides of the story isn't going to get you shot in your own apartment in this country (usually), which is more often the case in Russia, from what I hear.

Moscow blasts

I watched a documentary about that (couldn't tell you the title unfortunately) and while it was obviously one-sided and very Alex Jonesy, some facts there just blew me away. Particularly, the way in which FSB handled the Ryazan scandal was just shocking. Even if they were not behind the blasts, their response made it look like they either honestly considered the public retarded or just openly disrespected them by not even giving a fuck. I'm still under the impression that the whole thing is at the very least murky as shit, which really makes you wonder about 9/11 (I'm not saying the government did it but the similarities of the scenarios are disturbing).

That's ridiculous. It's a well-known fact that Putin has been paying off Chechnya billions of rubles so they left Russia alone. He's certainly not pro-Chechnya War and knows some of the bandits that rule Chechnya quite well, so he isn't about to go and attack them.

Sure but wasn't Chechnya on its' own before the blasts? Putin seems to be buddies with chechens now but this is now, when Chechnya is loyal to Moscow. This wasn't the case at the time and Russia didn't like that, particularly the fact that it signed off on the place becoming a self-governed New Reno right under its' nose. A war was actually extremely desirable for Moscow at the time, I'd say. Plus, doesn't Chechnya have oil?

 

[incognito]

Let me just say this, as long as Putin is not replaced by a mad man or incompetent fool i am all fore it.

paying off Chechnya billions of rubles

what do you mean by that, and to whom?

 

[donperkan]

And yet America (and all of Western Europe) has produced a consistently higher standard of living over a much longer period than any of those countries.

It also widened the gap between rich and poor, every day we are witnessing unprecedented levels of decadence while the middle class is slowly choking on debts

Bringing America in this discussion isn't really helping your arguments becuase for every good thing you name there are countles sins performed for the sake of democracy and in it's name.

I'm not arguing that democracy and capitalism for that mater didn't produce many mervelous and shiny things it's the distribution of those accomplishments that are bothering me.

 

[Sub-Human]

paying off Chechnya billions of rubles

what do you mean by that, and to whom?

Putin took the money from the government fund and sent it to that Chechnya leader - unfortunately, I don't remember his name, but he's quite obviously one of those gang bangers, has been around for quite some time, and has a little resemblance to Abramovich in terms of face (this is my opinion, though).

Oh, right, here's the pal.

Putin's put a lot of money into infastructure, and improving medical care, child wellfare, etc. And a ton has gone into the stabilization fund.

Yes, he did. But did he care enough to actually observe the changes? Most of that cash was stolen - by the governor, than mayors, than government locals and finally police sergeants and whatnot. Then those guys care enough to return the money back saying 'We did all we had to', when none of it was. Of course, a single person can't observe everything that goes on in an area of 17 square kilometers - but then again, what does he actually observe? His Switzerland bank accounts and private jets?

And there's a difference between puting a lot and puting enough. Russia is one hell of a big country, and if you're going to take money to trade with your friend Abramovich, buy yourself yachts, purchase expensive watches, build villas and get new cars - you're not going to make much of a difference to the nation.

as long as Putin is not replaced by a mad man or incompetent fool i am all fore it.

The problem here is that Putin is becoming a madman and an incompetent fool. He only knows how to steal, how to steal and how to steal - with absolutely no idea which way to run the country. If not some of the people in the administration, all would be lost a long time ago.

You know, this might be a bit far-fetched, but his 'leadership' can easily turn down the track of Mr Gadaffi, where the police will not be simply violently hitting people civilly protesting, they will be shooting them with rifles and using poison gas. He's managed to establish his current rule to 12 years, and unless someone sensible takes over, he could spoil the reputation of Russia and start some serious world issues.

I don't think Putin "needed it" to get into power. It helped, yes, but it wasn't the key.

Really, Putin didn't need anything to get into power. Jeltsin assigned him to be the new president, and this was the first extremely foolish step to a complete autocracy.

 

[Crni Vuk]

I really hope Russia will achieve a democracy one day. Their people deserve it.

Yes true democracy will solve all their problems.

I'm really suprised to hear that from you crni. I know i'm relatively new to this board but by reading some of your previous posts i got the impression that you are a pretty smart guy who has his feet firmly on the ground. Suerly you see that a democratic system brings more problems then it solves and that it only works in theory.

well. Thx for the comment.

What would be your alternative solution then?

*Anyway I see:
Even though others already explained it better then I could I will share my 5 cent here.

The alternatives created the most powerful forces of this world, third reich, soviet union, emirates, japan, china and my favourite yugoslavia. The only counterpart is america, wich brings us back to "it doesnt work"

Which worked well for them in the end I guess. Particularly the third Reich which was ruling over Germany for a relatively short time compared to other systems (take the Soviet Union or China as example). But that is not the point.

The point is that systems with very extreme systems or corrupt political leaderships (more then usual lets be honest here) work only with very aggressive politics. Those kind of politics are not really good in the long run.

Take Germany as positive example or the European Union. At least inside of Europe there has been for the last 60 years a peace and economic stability. Seriously this is eventually the longest time without a conflict. Democracy alone sure was not the deciding factor here. The Colad and the Soviet Union and the fear of a nuclear/third world war on the other side sure played a very important role as well. But it only worked because the nations had between each other similar principles and systems with their governments - more or less. It is a very complex field. The nuclear bomb was for europe probably the best thing ever. It sure did not stoped wars but it prevented major conflicts inside of Europe at least. Somewhat strange whe you think about it.

Democracy is sure not without its flaws, no system is. But it offers the most choices and chances for the papulation. That is if it is not a defect democracy - not a very scientific therm but I cant name it differently for me personally Russia is no democracy. Just because there are elections does not mean there are choices. They had those in east Germany as well but it was pretty obvious that it was no democracy. Putin and the politics behind the other big players in Russia might look liberal but only if compared to Stalin or Hitler. I am not saying things are flawless here. But they do work better. At leats in the big picture. I am glad to be here and not in Serbia. I know I would not have the same chances there like here. And as east european I know the mentality of the people their xenophobia (somewhat) and the lack of tolerance. particularly against gays. It disturbs me every time I have to think about it.

 

[Sander]

It also widened the gap between rich and poor, every day we are witnessing unprecedented levels of decadence while the middle class is slowly choking on debts

And yet, those problems are much, much worse in oligarchies, dictatorships and every other form of government, including the former Soviet regimes and, again, every country you have named.

Is America perfect? Fuck no. Tons of stuff is a problem in that country, and in many other countries around the world. But why are you judging democracy solely by America, and why are you failing to actually compare countries? Because, let's face it, everything else is worse.

 

[donperkan]

It's not. I had the opportunity to experience it and i can tell you it's not. Maybe i was lucky but me, my family and my friends had it good in former yugoslavia, now everywhere i turn i see misery and poverty. I judge democracy on a count of my surroundings and my experiences, can you blame me for doing that.

What would be your alternative solution then?

If i had the answer to that i wouldn't be here talking to you guys.

 

[Crni Vuk]

well what you experience in the ex-yugoslavian states now is actually the effect of the politics they had not because of democracy.

Democracy or not. It does not protect from corruption. But in general the more democracy we have in Europe the less likely is it to see conflicts. This has more economic reasons then political. It is rather unlikely that for example the US and China will wage a war when they are so closely tied to each other with their economy. Same with Europe.

I know the situation in Serbia and somewhat the states around them. And I can assure you. This has only very little to do with democracy. Not to mention such a change requires time. Milosevic was gone. But the system behind him not. I guess it needs some 10 or 15 years more before we see real changes. Maybe sooner. For a democracy to work correctly you need some educated and clerisy population. The generation which has grown up under the socialistic/yugoslavian politics have a hard time to adopt to democratic values. This is a change which cant be forced. It has to grow naturally over time.

One thing I am really missing in Serbia though is an unbiased view on the past particularly the Yugoslavian war. If you ask the common people they many times don't even know what the real reason was. And they usually blame each other.