Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Would Putin Make a Better President Than Obama?

Posted 1 year ago on July 22, 2012, 3:36 p.m. EST by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/07/20/would-putin-make-a-better-president-than-obama/

“Every rouble spent in the social sphere should ‘generate justice.’ An equitable social and economic system is the main requirement for ensuring our sustained development during these years.”

– Russian President Vladimir Putin

Is Vladimir Putin really the “KGB thug” the US media makes him out to be?

Take a look at this except from a book review in the New York Times and see what you think.

“A decade ago it was possible to imagine two inner Putins wrestling for his soul: the K.G.B. thug versus the modernizer. Sadly, events since then suggest that the inflexible misanthrope we see is the only Putin we get…

Even the most casual Putin-watcher has marveled at his narcissism, manifested in his odd habit of inviting cameras to record him bare-chested on horseback, swimming the butterfly stroke in a Siberian river, scuba diving and collecting skin samples from whales, among other stunts. Gessen traces his self-absorption back to his youth.

Putin’s childhood ambition was to be a spy in the K.G.B., but Gessen reveals that his actual experience was more Walter Mitty than James Bond. He was basically a paper-pusher, collecting press clippings in Dresden while the East German Stasi did the real dirty work of recruiting informers and policing dissent….Putin soon hitched himself to the first of a series of flawed, small-d democrats, who would propel him to power.” (“Reclaiming the Kremlin”, Bill Keller, New York Times)

Read enough?

Okay, so according to the Times, Putin is an ass-kissing, paper-pushing, self-adsorbed, autocratic thug who has dreams of greatness. Did we miss something? Oh yeah, he’s also a misanthropic slacker who let’s everyone else do the heavy lifting.

Is that what they call objective journalism at the NYT? Its worth noting that this laughable bit of propaganda was written by the Times editor himself, Bill Keller! Can you believe it? I mean, wouldn’t you think that the editor of the nation’s number 1 newspaper would make some effort to hide his bias?

But, no, when it comes to serving the folks in power, Keller is just as willing to run his credibility through the mud as the next guy. And, so he has, but what does that tell us about Putin?

It tells us that Putin is despised by powerful members of the US policy establishment. That’s what it tells us. After all, it’s their views that are reflected in the mainstream media via propagandists like Keller.

But, why? Putin is not a fiery leftist like Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro. He’s a right-of-center nationalist who’s not particularly ideological, confrontational, or unreasonable. so, what’s the problem? Besides, Putin has bent over backwards to accommodate the US on everything from nuclear disarmament to the War on Terror. So why the hostility?

It’s because Putin wants to be a partner on global issues, particularly security issues. But the US doesn’t want partners; it wants lackeys and puppets who will follow orders. And that’s why the NY Times and the others in the moron media are ganging up on him, because–in Washington’s eyes–if your not a lackey, your the enemy. It’s that simple.

If you want to know why Russian-US relations have steadily deteriorated, you might want to read this excerpt from an article by Pat Buchanan who asks “Doesn’t Putin Have a Point?”

“Though the Red Army had picked up and gone home from Eastern Europe voluntarily, and Moscow felt it had an understanding we would not move NATO eastward, we exploited our moment. Not only did we bring Poland into NATO, we brought in Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, and virtually the whole Warsaw Pact, planting NATO right on Mother Russia’s front porch. Now, there is a scheme afoot to bring in Ukraine and Georgia in the Caucasus, the birthplace of Stalin.

Second, America backed a pipeline to deliver Caspian Sea oil from Azerbaijan through Georgia to Turkey, to bypass Russia.

Third, though Putin gave us a green light to use bases in the old Soviet republics for the liberation of Afghanistan, we now seem hell-bent on making those bases in Central Asia permanent.

Fourth, though Bush sold missile defense as directed at rogue states like North Korea, we now learn we are going to put anti-missile systems into Eastern Europe. And against whom are they directed?

Fifth, through the National Endowment for Democracy, its GOP and Democratic auxiliaries, and tax-exempt think tanks, foundations, and “human rights” institutes such as Freedom House, headed by ex-CIA director James Woolsey, we have been fomenting regime change in Eastern Europe, the former Soviet republics, and Russia herself.

U.S.-backed revolutions have succeeded in Serbia, Ukraine, and Georgia, but failed in Belarus. Moscow has now legislated restrictions on the foreign agencies that it sees, not without justification, as subversive of pro-Moscow regimes.

Sixth, America conducted 78 days of bombing of Serbia for the crime of fighting to hold on to her rebellious province, Kosovo, and for refusing to grant NATO marching rights through her territory to take over that province. Mother Russia has always had a maternal interest in the Orthodox states of the Balkans.

These are Putin’s grievances. Does he not have a small point?”...

..........Incidentally, Russia – we – are constantly being taught about democracy. But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves.

I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world. And this is not only because if there was individual leadership in today’s – and precisely in today’s – world, then the military, political and economic resources would not suffice. What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilisation.

Along with this, what is happening in today’s world – and we just started to discuss this – is a tentative to introduce precisely this concept into international affairs, the concept of a unipolar world.

And what have the results been?

Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centres of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished. … And no less people perish in these conflicts – even more are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more!

Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force – military force – in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts. As a result we do not have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive solution to any one of these conflicts. Finding a political settlement also becomes impossible.

We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?

In international relations we increasingly see the desire to resolve a given question according to so-called issues of political expediency, based on the current political climate.

And of course this is extremely dangerous. It results in the fact that no one feels safe. I want to emphasise this — no one feels safe! Because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them. Of course such a policy stimulates an arms race.

The force’s dominance inevitably encourages a number of countries to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, significantly new threats – though they were also well-known before – have appeared, and today threats such as terrorism have taken on a global character.

I am convinced that we have reached that decisive moment when we must seriously think about the architecture of global security.” (Russian President Vladimir Putin, Conference on Security Policy in Munich in February 2007)

Can you see why Washington gave up on Putin? The speech identifies the United States reckless behavior as the single greatest threat to global security today. Putin says that the unipolar world-model which operates from “one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making” is unacceptable, has no “moral foundation”, and “plunges the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts.” The speech is a straightforward repudiation of Washington’s lunatic ambition to rule the world, which is why Putin is presently on America’s list of enemies.

Putin’s domestic vision also conflicts with US policy, which is dominated by neoliberal, trickle-down, austerity-crazed, deficit hawkery that transfers the nations wealth to the 1 percent plutocrats at the top of the economic foodchain. The Russian president has made great strides in reducing poverty, eliminating illiteracy, improving healthcare, and raising the standard of living for millions of working people. Here’s an excerpt from a speech by Putin that outlines his domestic priorities:

“Russia is a social welfare state….Social policy has many objectives and many dimensions. It entails providing support for the poor and those who are unable to earn a living for valid reasons. It means implementing social mobility and providing a level playing field for every person on the basis of his or her capabilities and talents. The effectiveness of social policy is measured by whether popular opinion believes the society we live in is a just one or not...

I MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com

44 Comments

44 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by Clancy (42) 1 year ago

I know at least a dozen people who absolutly hate him and left Russia becasue of him.

[-] 1 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Of course people in Russia don't like Putin. I never said he has 100% approval, or even 56%. And life in Russia is still pretty hard and people there would like to come to more comfortable places, no doubt, like the US, Canada, Australia, Germany. How many exile themselves to Turkestan? Let me know.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

The United States has a nasty habit of demonizing government enemies: Bush called Osama Bin Laden "the evil one," as if the disenfranchised Saudi was the devil himself. The government propagandists have consistently pictured Che Guevara as a sociopathic killer, failing to bring up that in his youth--the time of The Motorcycle Diaries, Che and his friend volunteered and actually worked in a leper colony. You won't find American politicians so willing to mingle with hoi polloi.

The American government, controlled by the plutocrats, has an imperialistic aim, and that purpose is simply to make the world a capitalist playground.

Decades ago Che Guevara said politics cannot be separated from economics; each rests on the other. His words ring even more true today.

[-] -1 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

The United States has no nasty habits.

The government of the United States has nasty habits.

The politicians in that government have nasty habits.

The corporations that own those politicians have nasty habits.

The global fascist elite who control those corporations have nasty habits.

The sheeple who have the power but lack the courage to change all that have nasty habits.

But the United States has no nasty habits.

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

You're right, but the United States is a country, so it is easy to extrapolate government from United States. Of course, I should have spelled it out so that you wouldn't be confused.

[-] -2 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

Did I come across as "confused"? I doubt that. You almost posted something intelligent this time, Grasshopper. Don't blow it like you did projecting your ignorance about eastern New Mexicans. Separate the people from the problem, or "My Country Right Or Wrong" will eat your lunch every time. Does that spell it out plain enough, Che Wannabe, or are you still confused?

[-] 3 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

You can't be anyone but yourself; too bad you don't like that person.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

LOL

[-] 3 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

I can only imagine the self-loathing of someone who is barely able to keep his/her/its pseudonyms straight.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

"It" might be the closest of your quest on what to use to represent what RustyButtheadBrucie is. I believe "it" may also be a worshiper of the compulsive and pathological liar Mittens.

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

Double LOL.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Tanks....?....shit....I think I have been infected with a corpoRAT thought.

Somebody - quick - shoot me before I mutate.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

Don't look in the mirror; you may see Mittney's face.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Stop that...I am scared.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago
[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

Invasion of the Mittneys

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Dude! That is just to scary to contemplate. Dollythemittens?

Talk about the start of real clone wars.

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

A little bit of both, but mix them with some Laphroaig. I don't especially care for ignorance or arrogance straight, which you display perfectly.

[-] -1 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

Who are you working for, DKAtoday? Who sent you here to turn this forum into a meely-mouth circle-jerk? Karl or the Kochs?

[-] -1 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

Too late. Way too late...

[-] -2 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

Based on what proof, you lying sack of shit? Post it, or eat your words.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Don't need to - you end up presenting all the proof that is needed - you are your own worst enemy.


[-] -1 points by vvv0721 (-30) 7 minutes ago

Based on what proof, you lying sack of shit? Post it, or eat your words. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply permalink

[-] -1 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

Who are you working for, DKAtoday? Who sent you here to turn this forum into a meely-mouth circle-jerk? Karl or the Kochs?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I work for Humanity all of Humanity the world/environment.

That follow-up comment/question - are you looking in the mirror again?

Do you suffer from runaway fingers?

[-] -1 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

Bullshit! Who are you working for, DKAtoday? Who sent you here to turn this forum into a meely-mouth circle-jerk? Karl or the Kochs?

[-] -2 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

By posting this you accomplish what, Grasshopper?

[-] -2 points by vvv0721 (-290) 1 year ago

You were starting to improve, Grasshopper, so don't give up! I can't fill all the holes in your knowledge base, but I can help you see when you have missed your potential. This is another one of those times.

[-] 1 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

As lomg as Sheeple as you call them go to places like Afghanistan to comit murder and mayhem based on bullshit lies and as long as the public doesn't even protest it is fair to say that the acts of the government do in a perverse way represent the will of this nation. God help us all

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by JackPulliam3rd (205) 1 year ago

Would Mao? Imagine OWS with a President Mao. It would look like China in June of 89.

[-] 1 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Mao died in September of 1976 and so he had no influence over the events you refer to. In 1989 China was on the edge of sliding into chaos and into the same type of disastrous "Freedom" that gripped Russia (resulting in millions of deaths due to poverty, poor health and demoralization, a downward spiral btw that Putin had a lot to do with slowing down and reversing.) So it was a good and necessary thing that China's leaders did- they rescued their country from catastrophe and saved millions from miserable early deaths like those suffered in Russia. While in general I love OWS one thing that does bug me is this website's adherence to State Department style "color revolutions" especially in Russia. It looks like the State Department hasn't yet given up but that they have a tough adversary in Vladimir Putin.

[-] 0 points by TryingForAnOpenMind (-358) from Yonkers, NY 1 year ago

I work in the Bronx. this is not a bad idea frog man. thank you.

[-] 2 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Capital crimes Main article: Capital offences in the People's Republic of China The list of capital crimes is found in both the Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure Law, which date back to the 5th National People's Congress in 1979. The list of capital crimes includes counter-revolutionary crimes, such as organizing an "armed mass rebellion"; endangerments of the public security, such as committing arson; and crimes against the person, such as the rape of a person under the age of 14.[5] During the 1980s, "economic crimes" such as bribery, drug-trafficking, and embezzlement were added to the legal code.[5] Capital punishment in China can be imposed on crimes against national symbols and treasures, such as theft of cultural relics and (before 1997) the killing of pandas.[11] Executions for political crimes are extremely rare and confined to persons involved in violence or the threat of violence.[5]

[-] -2 points by TryingForAnOpenMind (-358) from Yonkers, NY 1 year ago

party on..excellent post.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

In a word?

NO.

[-] 1 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Then you aren't paying attention. While Obama talks the talk about the middle class Putin talks about and has made progress against poverty = a dirty word for the demopublicans. And unlike Obama Puting hasn't executed anyone without even bringing charges in a court of law, nor had any wedding parties strafed and bombed from the air.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

I'm obsessed with Obama

I must be republican

[-] -1 points by Porkie (-255) 1 year ago

Does it really matter? We're separated by a rather large expanse of real estate, they're not ruling us and we'll never rule them. What is all comes down to is world resources. We want them and we them now. Which is why Putin's military buildup is so frightening.

[-] 2 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Tell that to the lynched black Libyans and the millions of dead Iraqis. The US did in fact overturn the USSR which you might argue was a tougher customer than Russia is today. Russia has lots of oil and other minerals and Putin also had the temerity to jail the Russian Sheldon Adelson = Mikhail Borisovich Khodorkovsky.

[-] -2 points by Porkie (-255) 1 year ago

Lynched black libyans and iraqis? Haha... what part of dementia did that come from?

[-] 2 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

I never said that the Iraqis were black but are you denying that the US murdered millions of them?

as for black Libyans, yes the south of Libya is (or maybe was) peopled by Tuareg tribes, people whose skin is black. Khadaffi had been good to the Tuaregs and predominantly they followed him. Many tuaregs also were in the north of Lybia and many of them were lynched by mobs of "freedom fighters" who now roam Libya in NATO arms making the actual governance of the place impossible.

http://blackagendareport.com/content/lynch-law-and-summary-executions-rebel-held-libya

[-] -2 points by Porkie (-255) 1 year ago

Well, you can't blame this one on Bush, can you? And nobody, nobody, has offered us a reasonable explanation have they? But black, white, or middle eastern, makes no difference to me - they're the enemy.

[-] 1 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Glad to see your ignorance, greed and hatred on dispay. People from all over the world peruse this forum. You're representing the USA so well. thanks.