Russia can only use the United States as an excuse for so long

[dud]

I found this an interesting read. Wondered if you agreed and what your opinion was:

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-deba...e-the-united-states-as-an-excuse-for-so-long/


"The Russian president has received many Western plaudits — from the Republican candidate for presidential nomination Donald Trump, from Marine Le Pen, leader of the French National Front; while Alex Salmond, former first minister of Scotland, said that he had “restored a substantial part of Russian pride and that must be a good thing.” He’s credited with being a master tactician, alert to every Western weakness, whose realism has allowed him to support Syrian President Bashar al-Assad over chaos. Reluctantly, the United States has had to climb down from demanding Assad’s ouster so that the Western allies can, with Russia, concentrate on defeating Islamic State, the greater threat because of its enthusiastic sponsoring of terrorism.

But tactics get you so far. He can certainly tweak the American nose, painfully. But what’s the strategy?

It will have to be good – for under his leadership, Russia has found itself encircled with enemies, and uncertain friends. In the west, Ukraine – dismembered and bankrupt — is now, more than ever determined to carve out a future as a European state. Beyond Ukraine, Poland’s most powerful politician, the leader of the ruling Law and Justice Party Jaroslav Kaczynski — who picked and promoted both the president, Andrzej Duda and the Prime Minister, Beata Szydlo —insists that the truth has not been told about the death of predecessor Lech Kaczynski. Kaczynski was killed when his Polish Air Force jet crashed in Russia on the way to Smolensk on April 10, 2010, and many in Poland blame a Russian conspiracy.

In the north, the Baltic states have troops from other NATO members stationed along their boarders as a warning to their giant neighbor. In the south, Turkey, once a friend, is now a despised lackey of the United States after its shooting down of a Russian fighter. In his end-of-year press conference, Putin said the country was “licking the U.S. in a certain place.” To the east, China is – according to Fu Ying, the head of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Peoples’ Congress, “not an ally,” and it will not “form an anti-American bloc” with Russia — though relations are business-like, with trade much increased.

Of the other post-Soviet states, Moldova and Georgia are seeking Western alliances; China is wooing the Central Asians with much success, and even loyal Belarus is hedging its bets.

It could be different – and in an optimistic view, it might be. The accord reached between U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier this month might yet be built on a withdrawal of Russian military from Eastern Ukraine, a de-escalation of anti-Western propaganda, a search for common projects, a commitment from the European Union that Ukraine could have trade agreements with Russia as well as with the Union. All these could fundamentally alter the relationship between Russia, the EU and the United States.

But it’s unlikely. When the Soviet Union collapsed, Georgy Arbatov, the Communist regime’s main expert on the United States, said to the West that “we are going to do a terrible thing to you… to deprive you of an enemy.” The Putin regime has worked hard at reversing that terrible blow: and has helped create enmity once more, since it needs enemies for its legitimacy. It won’t want to let them go easily."

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I agree -- sort of.

There are myths about Russia or the former USSR which still reside in the American mind.

Russian history has a tradition of autocracy much longer than western democracy.

Russian Orthodoxy never died. If it was repressed, it was repressed as a state-regulated religion.

Western policy toward Russia has caused some of this reactionary nationalism, with something of an over-defensive posture. It's part of a mentality tutored by episodes of Napoleon and the Wehrmacht.

And I remember when there was this echo back and forth between Putin and his public over the last big financial melt-down: "It was all America's fault."

In the future, we need to avoid going out of our way to manufacture an Enemy from these other hegemonies -- Russia and China. But I hear this talk all the time from the Right, suggesting some new belligerent posture.

The emergence of cell-phones and microcomputers made it impossible for the old USSR autocracy to continue, and Putin's "predecessor-in-his pocket" Medvedev had observed that -- publicly.

The world is becoming a crowded neighborhood. "Speak softly, but carry a big stick."

Sometimes I wonder if Americans think that Cyrillic is a real-world manifestation of Klingon writing. It's just a variant or offshoot of the Greek alphabet.

 

[cubby1223]

The middle east has been doing a stellar job of getting extended use using the United States as an excuse to continue being the back-asswards corner of the planet they are.

I think Russia can squeeze many more years out of the U.S. if they choose that path. It all comes down to how much Russian leadership will care about the well-being of their citizens.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

The middle east has been doing a stellar job of getting extended use using the United States as an excuse to continue being the back-asswards corner of the planet they are.

I think Russia can squeeze many more years out of the U.S. if they choose that path.

I think Russia needs more Pussy Riot and less Putin.

 

[flexy]

"Boarders".

CRINGE....

 

[MongGrel]

Putin is still doing fine.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/video/news/russians-can-buy-a-putin-2016-calendar/vi-BBo20Kk

😛

 

[sm625]

The Putin regime has worked hard at reversing that terrible blow: and has helped create enmity once more, since it needs enemies for its legitimacy. It won’t want to let them go easily."

This is just a bunch of nonsense, no doubt imported directly from some neocon whore bastion of propaganda. Putin has done about the best anyone can do given the sheer size of the herd of American sheeple that are blindly marching against Russia. It wasnt Russia who created ISIS. It wasnt Russia who armed Boko Haram. It wasnt Russia who funded the coup in Ukraine. And it certainly wasnt Russia who made Americans so damn blind of what their own government is doing.

 

[werepossum]

I think Putin's abilities have been vastly overplayed. The article is correct in the negative effects (negative for re-recreating the Soviet Empire) he has created, but all that has correspondingly made him stronger domestically. Perhaps his goal was never to re-recreate the Soviet Empire, but merely to pretend to do so to be President-for-life. If so, he's played us all. But on the other hand, while he certainly made Obama look like an idiot over Assad, in the end Putin is doing what is best for America, and the world knows it. At some point as Russian casualties mount, people are bound to start wondering who played who.

Please don't fling me in dat brier patch, Brer Bear! Please don't embarrass me by killing those folks I want killed!

EDIT: I would also like to suggest that our new Ambassador to Russia be Bill Cosby. Let's see you put THOSE photos on a calendar, motherfucker.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

This is just a bunch of nonsense, no doubt imported directly from some neocon whore bastion of propaganda. Putin has done about the best anyone can do given the sheer size of the herd of American sheeple that are blindly marching against Russia. It wasnt Russia who created ISIS. It wasnt Russia who armed Boko Haram. It wasnt Russia who funded the coup in Ukraine. And it certainly wasnt Russia who made Americans so damn blind of what their own government is doing.

I really can't differ in the least.

In the realm of public opinion -- an entity that has been successfully manipulated in the past more than many Americans currently realize -- there is "action-reaction."

It is mostly my concern now that the Russians are in "reaction-mode" given their own perceptions of the world as it is. And I hold to a belief that it might have been avoided.

By the way. Does anyone know what happened to Pussy Riot after they were released?

As for Putin, any worries I might have about Putin are tempered by the observation that you shouldn't fear someone too much who covets his Harley-Davidson three-wheeler. Not unless they're wearing a "Mongols" jacket, descending on some restaurant in Texas.

I've got more concerns about Kim Jong Un than about either ISIS, Putin or anyone else. And we can't "fix" the Korean Peninsula without two other major players. Old vestigial alliances die a hard death.

 

[Mike64]

Putin has done about the best anyone can...

"Putin the Great" has done the best job anyone could of advancing his own political career, the financial interests of his plutocrat buddies and the influence of the Russian Orthodox church (in return for their political support) ... to the detriment of the average Russian citizen. And like their American counterparts, the Russian sheeple lap up the nationalist propaganda and continue to re-elect him (ignoring the often blatant political and electoral "shenanigans" of course), their actual self-interest notwithstanding... Welcome to Democracy.🙄

 

[BonzaiDuck]

"Putin the Great" has done the best job anyone could of advancing his own political career, the financial interests of his plutocrat buddies and the influence of the Russian Orthodox church (in return for their political support) ... to the detriment of the average Russian citizen. And like their American counterparts, the Russian sheeple lap up the nationalist propaganda and continue to re-elect him (ignoring the often blatant political and electoral "shenanigans" of course), their actual self-interest notwithstanding... Welcome to Democracy.🙄

No argument there, either.

 

[werepossum]

"Putin the Great" has done the best job anyone could of advancing his own political career, the financial interests of his plutocrat buddies and the influence of the Russian Orthodox church (in return for their political support) ... to the detriment of the average Russian citizen. And like their American counterparts, the Russian sheeple lap up the nationalist propaganda and continue to re-elect him (ignoring the often blatant political and electoral "shenanigans" of course), their actual self-interest notwithstanding... Welcome to Democracy.🙄

It's worth pointing out that the "average Russian citizen" was much worse off without democracy, under the benevolent enlightenment of Communism.

 

[cubby1223]

It's worth pointing out that the "average Russian citizen" was much worse off without democracy, under the benevolent enlightenment of Communism.

I have a good friend who moved to Czech Republic, and his business partner lived there during and was in the crowds of the velvet revolution. It was a massive change when the Soviets pulled their military out of the country. So many people were paralyzed not knowing what to do. The Czech government didn't even know what to do. Do people continue beyond the Soviets? Do they start forming a new government? Will the Soviets return? If so, will they throw everyone who did anything anti-communist party in jail when they return?

But more than that, the communist party provided the citizens with very defined structure to their lives. It was a shitty structure filled with a lot of corruption and poverty, but it was structure none-the-less. A lot of people, especially the mid and older generations, didn't take the transition away from communism well, because they had no idea how to think for themselves. Very few knew anything about businesses to be able to set up and maintain them. Transportation, distribution, obtaining life essentials, learning new skills, taking initiative in anything, these all were completely unknown concepts to a large majority of people. And they struggled a lot, many lived under communism for too long and were not capable of making the transition to a western-style free-market. It was very bad.

Even though the citizens are better off now than back in the U.S.S.R. days, it's not always so clear when you're the person right in the thick of the transition.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Putin appeared in some sort of grandiose annual news-conference recently.

I heard him say -- through the translator -- "We understand this . . .desire for . . freedom."

It was like Trump, talking about his religion: "I have my little wine, my little wafer . . . "

What we call "democracy" was still a part of the old one-party system, serving to integrate and articulate local or regional interests with the whole.

But the current level of corruption and lip-service paid to the process makes it little better than what they had during the Soviet era.

I actually had this naïve hope beginning with the Yeltsin period. Looking back in history, one declining empire would hand off its legacy to a new emerging power. So when the Russians adopted the color scheme for their flag, I thought "Oh! Just like France! Australia! Britain! US!"

Frankly, with a country that size, the current autocracy is just feeling its way. A Russian tradition of autocracy is hard to lose. And they have an intrinsic ethnic identity -- they're not exactly a nation of immigrants. But there is really only one way they can go with this, if they want to be a constructive player -- and a major one -- in the future of the human race and human progress.

By putting all their industrial future in fossil fuel, they're not going to be so easy to assist the world in addressing the problem it causes, either.

 

[Mike64]

It's worth pointing out that

Is it really?

the "average Russian citizen" was much worse off without democracy, under the benevolent enlightenment of Communism.

I could further point out that the "average Russian citizen" (if one could call serfs "citizens" in any meaningful sense whatever) was farther better off (so to speak) under Communism than they were under the only other form of government that ever existed in Russia before the Revolution (ignoring for reality's sake the chaotic and untenable short-lived period of the post-Revolutionary Duma's nominal "leadership".)

But what does either have to do with the present situation, in 2015? Except perhaps to highlight Russia's lack of historical experience dealing with democracy, which situation Putin has proven himself highly adept at manipulating... (And in this respect, is his former career as a KGB agent "worth noting"?)

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Is it really?I could further point out that the "average Russian citizen" (if one could call serfs "citizens" in any meaningful sense whatever) was farther better off (so to speak) under Communism than they were under the only other form of government that ever existed in Russia before the Revolution (ignoring for reality's sake the chaotic and untenable short-lived period of the post-Revolutionary Duma's nominal "leadership".)

But what does either have to do with the present situation, in 2015? Except perhaps to highlight Russia's lack of historical experience dealing with democracy, which situation Putin has proven himself highly adept at manipulating... (And in this respect, is his former career as a KGB agent "worth noting"?)

Bush 41 was thick with the CIA going back to Bay of Pigs. He had his foot in it as an intelligence asset, he had another foot in the Congress, and a third foot in the RNC as their chairman around Nixon's terms. Then he was DCIA.

I think the more relevant fact is that of the "lack of historical experience" and the kind of transgressions or morality you can expect from an autocratic political culture that has roots preceding Jamestown.

 

[Mike64]

Bush 41 was thick with the CIA going back to Bay of Pigs. He had his foot in it as an intelligence asset, he had another foot in the Congress, and a third foot in the RNC as their chairman around Nixon's terms. Then he was DCIA.

I'm not sure what your point is here. Shorn of his ability to imprison political opponents on blatantly false/trumped up charges with relative ease, I'd probably prefer Putin. That he's much more interested in furthering their interests, I tend to doubt, but for what little it's worth, I think he must be more "in touch" with the "average Russian citizen" than any member of the Bush family has ever been with the "average American citizen"...

(The only "positive" thing I've ever had to say about that George I is that he's not Dick Cheney. And considering he helped put Cheney in a position of greater power (ie, access) than he'd ever had before, I really don't know how much that's saying...)

I think the more relevant fact is that of the "lack of historical experience" and the kind of transgressions or morality you can expect from an autocratic political culture that has roots preceding Jamestown.

Well, that's certainly true. If you're looking at "Russian" history even before Peter the Great brought together the Russia we know and love today, it goes back wa-a-y before Jamestown....

 

[werepossum]

Is it really?I could further point out that the "average Russian citizen" (if one could call serfs "citizens" in any meaningful sense whatever) was farther better off (so to speak) under Communism than they were under the only other form of government that ever existed in Russia before the Revolution (ignoring for reality's sake the chaotic and untenable short-lived period of the post-Revolutionary Duma's nominal "leadership".)

But what does either have to do with the present situation, in 2015? Except perhaps to highlight Russia's lack of historical experience dealing with democracy, which situation Putin has proven himself highly adept at manipulating... (And in this respect, is his former career as a KGB agent "worth noting"?)

Yes, it really, really is worth pointing out. And I disagree with your conclusion that Russians were worse off as serfs under aristocracy than as, well, serfs under Communism. Aristocrats at least want their serfs healthy enough to work the land, whereas the Politburo engineered famines to kill off undesirables.

Any time you find yourself favoring Putin over Bush, you need to take a hard look at your political beliefs and start a long trek to sanity.