Putin on Trump

[9erempiree]

Vladimir Putin has given the Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump a ringing endorsement, reciprocating Trump’s praise for Russia.

“He is a very colourful and talented man, no doubt about that,” said Putin, speaking after his annual press conference in Moscow on Thursday. “He is the absolute leader of the presidential race, as we see it today. He says that he wants to move to another level of relations, to a deeper level of relations with Russia. How can we not welcome that? Of course we welcome it.”


“We have never closed ourselves off, whomever is elected there. It is they who are always trying to ‘help out’ with what needs to be done inside our country, who should be elected and who shouldn’t, in what way,” Putin said. “We never do this, never interfere.”

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/trump-wouldnt-it-be-nice-if-we-actually-got-along-russia-and-china

An endorsement from another country's president is great.

I don't what he said about Bernie or Hilary. He probably doesn't care about them.

[pastis]

I just hope it wont be Clinton. She represents the bad establishment form me. Some years ago, she demanded 150.000$ for a speach at a public university. :facepalm :facepalm

[Draz]

Could it be reverse psychology? I mean.. other countries like Russia & China don't actually want to see the U.S. be anymore powerful than what it really is, in fact they'd wish we implode from within..

[DonDadda59]

Could it be reverse psychology? I mean.. other countries like Russia & China don't actually want to see the U.S. be anymore powerful than what it really is, in fact they'd wish we implode from within..

Exactly what Vlad wants. He tried playing games with Barry O, got sent to the poor house as a result.

He knows Trump is a buffoon who would be easy to toy with politically. Just keep feeding into his bloated ego and play him like a sap.

[JohnFreeman]

http://i.imgur.com/7RvHzBu.jpg

[Dresta]

Yup, this is exactly why Trump is preferable to Hilary and Rubio, the couple of war-hawks that they are. Reigning in the military is probably the most important issue for me, as i'm really getting tired of the kind of perpetual warfare we are now needlessly engaged with, and which causes (and has caused) untold suffering and misery, all over the world.

Cruz isn't as bad as those two (he's at least willing to deal reasonably with Russia, rather being set on marginalising and antagonising them), but he's still a bit too hawkish for my liking.

Sanders vs. Trump would be real change, rather than the farce of change we saw from Obomba.

Exactly what Vlad wants. He tried playing games with Barry O, got sent to the poor house as a result.

He knows Trump is a buffoon who would be easy to toy with politically. Just keep feeding into his bloated ego and play him like a sap.
Says the moron who wants a Clinton/Rubio election, two corporately owned bellends who seem set on starting a large and unnecessary war over something that has nothing to do with this country. If it is Clinton vs Trump watch all the neocon maniacs jump over to the Democrats, as many of them (e.g. Victoria Nuand) already have.

'Barry O's' foreign policy has been disastrous, incoherent and illogical. His incessant nattering about "moderates" in Syria has now been proven to be nothing but a lie, and his refusal to deal or coordinate with Russia in Syria has extended the war and the suffering of the Syrian people he pretend to care about. And then when atrocities are committed against American citizens, or against Parisians, he starts idiotically talking about the crusades, showing what a pitiful masochist the man is.

Putin has actually achieved his foreign policy goals--what has Obama achieved exactly? Aside from arming Islamic terrorists and destabilizing sovereign nations, of course.

[dude77]

alphas acknowledge each other and show respect .. they're not threatened by each other for obvious reasons .. there's no estrogen fueled hating like a female .. only the little beta eunuchs have that disdain for an alpha .. it's easy to see who falls into which category just by reading the posts on these internet boards

[DonDadda59]

Says the moron who wants a Clinton/Rubio election, two corporately owned bellends who seem set on starting a large and unnecessary war over something that has nothing to do with this country. If it is Clinton vs Trump watch all the neocon maniacs jump over to the Democrats, as many of them (e.g. Victoria Nuand) already have.

:no:

I want Trump to complete his destruction of the GOP. Dude just buried the Bush Dynasty in South Carolina. His Manchurian Candidacy is just getting started.

This time next year, you're going to have a Dem as President, a Dem majority in Congress, and a left-leaning Supreme Court.

We can't achieve these goals with Ricky Rubio throwing a wrench in the game.


'Barry O's' foreign policy has been disastrous, incoherent and illogical.

Ended Iran's nuclear ambitions without a shot fired or bomb dropped. If Congress wises up, we could have Iran be a lucrative trade partner and a tentative ally in the region.

Ended the Cold War era embargo of Cuba (He's going to be the first President to visit the Island in almost 90 years soon).

Crippled Vlad Putin's economy through use of the oil weapon and sanctions following his f*ckery in the Crimea.

Ws all around.


His incessant nattering about "moderates" in Syria has now been proven to be nothing but a lie, and his refusal to deal or coordinate with Russia in Syria has extended the war and the suffering of the Syrian people he pretend to care about. And then when atrocities are committed against American citizens, or against Parisians, he starts idiotically talking about the crusades, showing what a pitiful masochist the man is.

Yeah, except for that time when Kerry negotiated a cease-fire (http://news.yahoo.com/kerry-says-lavrov-reached-provisional-agreement-terms-syria-103447405.html) with Lavrov a few hours ago. Bad timing. :yaohappy:


Putin has actually achieved his foreign policy goals-

All he's achieved is destroying his country's economy. Stay up to date with current events.


-what has Obama achieved exactly?

See above. :applause:

[Dresta]

Could it be reverse psychology? I mean.. other countries like Russia & China don't actually want to see the U.S. be anymore powerful than what it really is, in fact they'd wish we implode from within..
Or it could just be he'd be happy for there to be an American leader who didn't want an American military presence all over the world, and who would actually allow the two countries to have reasonable relations rather than this completely unnecessary 'new Cold War,' which is something American politicians and the American media have only gotten away with plugging because people still associate Russia with the Soviet Union (wrongly).

America used to see the Russia as another potential America long ago (when the first Kennan visited when the Tsar was still in power), and Americans were very sympathetic to Russians. Bolshevism changed all that, and it was probably the greatest misfortune of the 20th century. It takes a long time to recover from such barbarity, and such an erosion of moral norms. You wouldn't believe how much this changed the country for the worse, in almost every way. Peter Hitchens (who lived there for a while), said just all the things you were used to in civilised countries had disappeared; for example, when he held the door open on a train, everyone looked at him as if he were some kind of lunatic, or as if it were a trap or something.

[oh the horror]

alphas acknowledge each other and show respect .. they're not threatened by each other for obvious reasons .. there's no estrogen fueled hating like a female .. only the little beta eunuchs have that disdain for an alpha .. it's easy to see who falls into which category just by reading the posts on these internet boards



It's funny to me that you guys actually believe Trump is an "alpha".


This is the same guy that sinks to lows while insulting other people, often gets visibly flustered and often angry when in pressure situations.



That's literally the opposite of an alpha male dude. Do you light your farts on fire in your spare time buddy?



Some of you men on this board are a comedy act.

[9erempiree]

http://i.imgur.com/GBmTXpC.webm

[Dresta]

:no:

I want Trump to complete his destruction of the GOP. Dude just buried the Bush Dynasty in South Carolina. His Manchurian Candidacy is just getting started.

This time next year, you're going to have a Dem as President, a Dem majority in Congress, and a left-leaning Supreme Court.

We can't achieve these goals with Ricky Rubio throwing a wrench in the game.



Ended Iran's nuclear ambitions without a shot fired or bomb dropped. If Congress wises up, we could have Iran be a lucrative trade partner and a tentative ally in the region.

Ended the Cold War era embargo of Cuba (He's going to be the first President to visit the Island in almost 90 years soon).

Crippled Vlad Putin's economy through use of the oil weapon and sanctions following his f*ckery in the Crimea.

Ws all around.



Yeah, except for that time when Kerry negotiated a cease-fire (http://news.yahoo.com/kerry-says-lavrov-reached-provisional-agreement-terms-syria-103447405.html) with Lavrov a few hours ago. Bad timing. :yaohappy:



All he's achieved is destroying his country's economy. Stay up to date with current events.



See above. :applause:This post is too stupid to be worthy of serious reply. None of the facile points you've tried to make even contradict any of the things I said in the slightest. Jog along now.

[9erempiree]

This post is too stupid to be worthy of serious reply. None of the facile points you've tried to make even contradict any of the things I said in the slightest. Jog along now.

Typical post by him.

[DonDadda59]

This post is too stupid to be worthy of serious reply. None of the facile points you've tried to make even contradict any of the things I said in the slightest. Jog along now.

AKA you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about as you are, as I've said all along, just Poido with a thesaurus. :applause:

[oh the horror]

This post is too stupid to be worthy of serious reply. None of the facile points you've tried to make even contradict any of the things I said in the slightest. Jog along now.



Good. You'll spare all of us from a long winded half a page rant to explain something that you could have used far fewer words.

[Cactus-Sack]

Ended Iran's nuclear ambitions without a shot fired or bomb dropped



Why do idiots keep repeating this retarded meme? Anybody who knows anything knows that Iran abandoned any and all plans to build a nuke when the US invaded Iraq. They know that just by having one, they would be invaded.

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/mossad-cia-agree-iran-has-yet-to-decide-to-build-nuclear-weapon-1.419300

[DonDadda59]

Why do idiots keep repeating this retarded meme? Anybody who knows anything knows that Iran abandoned any and all plans to build a nuke when the US invaded Iraq. They know that just by having one, they would be invaded.

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/mossad-cia-agree-iran-has-yet-to-decide-to-build-nuclear-weapon-1.419300

So basically you linked a story about intelligence officials not being sure about anything. :lol

You know what we are sure about though? Iran flooding its Nuclear reactor (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-araq-idUSKCN0UP1Y120160111) with cement per the deal. Takes all the guess work out of the equation. :applause:

[ALBballer]

:no:

I want Trump to complete his destruction of the GOP. Dude just buried the Bush Dynasty in South Carolina. His Manchurian Candidacy is just getting started.

This time next year, you're going to have a Dem as President, a Dem majority in Congress, and a left-leaning Supreme Court.

We can't achieve these goals with Ricky Rubio throwing a wrench in the game.



This sort of mindset is why I dislike American politics. The battle always become left vs right with absolutely no middle ground or any sort of independent reasoning. Keep sipping the kool-aid into thinking an all liberal team is the best for America.

[Dresta]

AKA you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about as you are, as I've said all along, just Poido with a thesaurus. :applause:
And you obviously can't even read if you think that the "achievements" you posted have any bearing on what i first said whatsoever. I mean, what is a bunch of war-torn countries filled with Islamic terrorists, armed with American weapons (and weapons smuggled by the CIA through Turkey), and helped into a positions of power by Obama and his allies, when compared with improved relations between Cuba and America (something that was inevitable since the collapse of the USSR that had been on the cards for years)?

:hammerhead:


Good. You'll spare all of us from a long winded half a page rant to explain something that you could have used far fewer words.
You don't have to read it buddy. Stop being so insecure.

Plenty of people like to have discussions that contain some substance and insight rather than snarky one-liners, groundless accusations, and poorly worded insults. Your speciality, I believe?

[DonDadda59]

This sort of mindset is why I dislike American politics. The battle always become left vs right with absolutely no middle ground or any sort of independent reasoning. Keep sipping the kool-aid into thinking an all liberal team is the best for America.

http://sausedo.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/koolaid-good.png

[Im Still Ballin]

From beyond the grave

[masonanddixon]

Exactly what Vlad wants. He tried playing games with Barry O, got sent to the poor house as a result.

He knows Trump is a buffoon who would be easy to toy with politically. Just keep feeding into his bloated ego and play him like a sap.

As opposed to the luminous tactician Obama is?

Obama is literally THE least intelligent American president of all time.

[Im Still Ballin]

As opposed to the luminous tactician Obama is?

Obama is literally THE least intelligent American president of all time.
Alexander the Great
His name struck fear into hearts of men
Alexander the Great
Became a legend 'mongst mortal men!

[masonanddixon]

Alexander the Great
His name struck fear into hearts of men
Alexander the Great
Became a legend 'mongst mortal men!

Your mom is a legend.

[fiddy]

http://i.imgur.com/7RvHzBu.jpg
cringe AF

[fiddy]

Why does this Donna dude celebrate sanctions? Does he not realize that sanctions only affect the poor and weak? He continuously mentions Obama one-upping Vlad with the sanctions, but does he really think these sanctions affect him or his business/"criminal" associations? Theyre still all going to be swimming in Billions. The only people who suffer under sanctions are your average joes who have no say on politics or government policies. While you were sanctioning Cuba, Iraq and Iran.......Castro, Saddam and the Ayatollah's were just getting richer and stronger :oldlol: :oldlol:

Americans celebrating sanctions on Russia, where only poor and innocent civilians will suffer, is akin to Russians, Iranians, Iraqis celebrating terrorist attacks on innocent American civilians. Its grotesque
On the real doe, the U.S. should be sanctioned for the illegal war of 2003.

[rufuspaul]

Exactly what Vlad wants. He tried playing games with Barry O, got sent to the poor house as a result.



:roll: :roll: :roll:


What a joke. Putin played Barry like a left handed bass.

[IcanzIIravor]

:roll: :roll: :roll:


What a joke. Putin played Barry like a left handed bass.


I somewhat disagree with both characterizations. The sanctions have curtailed Russian ambitions in Eastern Europe. The Russian economy itself is in shambles. Putin got some of it back with his actions in Syria, but then lost a bit when Turkey flexed some and shot down that plan. Russian's dependence on oil is what tips the scales in Obama's favor with a little help from OPEC flooding the market and the USA also doing their part.

[greymatter]

Alexander the Great
His name struck fear into hearts of men

That's not all he liked sticking into men, though he probably also played catcher too.

[greymatter]

As opposed to the luminous tactician Obama is?

Obama is literally THE least intelligent American president of all time.

And you literally don't know WTF "literally" even means. Obama isn't even the dumbest US president of the 21st century.

In any case, someone who'd choose your screenname would no doubt take solace in the fact that Ulysses Grant is universally panned as the dumbest US president. Your hero W is ranked 4th dumbest of all US presidents.

[greymatter]

What's hilarious about this ridiculous bromance is that Republicans were once all about being "tough" on foreign policy and opposing everything Putin. Sarah Palin asked during the 2008 election how Obama would handle things if "Putin rears his head".

Now that he buttered up a fellow xenophobe's ego, imbeciles on the right can't fall over one another fast enough to sing his praises. Shooting down an airliner full of civilians is ancient history.

[Dresta]

What Russia is attempting to do in Syria and the Ukraine (What you consider Eastern Europe) is "fix" what the Americans broke on purpose in the first place. Like it or not in International politics there exists an unwritten law that major powers have geographical/historical/ethno-political "sphere's of influence" that must be respected in order to maintain world peace and the status-quo. When these spheres are threatened, its because the threatening state is looking to diminish the power and influence of the other, (eg. What the Cuban Missile Crisis was about), or in worse case scenarios - provoke a conflict.

The Ukraine and Syria were firmly in Russia's sphere-of-influence prior to 2011 (2013 in Ukraine's case) before these "revolutions" occurred. In fact following the dissolution of the Soviet Empire the Russians only kept two foreign naval bases on the planet (compared to NATOS fifty) - one in Crimea, Ukraine, and one in Latakia, Syria.

1) Do you think its a coincidence that the two largest "revolutions/wars" of recent memory occurred in the only two places were Russia has foreign naval bases?

2. Do you think Russia wouldn't do everything in its power to stop this occurring?

Russia's aim, and realistically best possible outcome in these wars, is to return the region to the status-quo that existed a few years back. What they aim to gain from winning these wars pales in significance to what they could lose if they're unsuccessful.

If they win :

*The Ukraine and Syria come back under Russian influence.
*Russian bases on Mediterranean remain un-threatened.
*10 million Russian in the Ukraine not living under a murderous neo-Nazi regime.
*Russia maintains small level of influence in Eastern Europe and the Middle East.
*Can claim they 'outplayed' the United States.

If they lose :

*Russia is completely surrounded by an aggressive NATO
*Loss of two naval bases on the Mediterranean (Well one in Mediterranean the other in the Black Sea).
*10 million Russians left at the mercy of Neo-Nazis which would lead to a refugee crisis
*Minority groups such as Chechens, Tatars, Turkic people etc will receive financial and military support from the West, Turkey, Arabs, to start "revolutions" from within.

Russia is not powerful enough to threaten the United States in open conflict, but they are still more then powerful enough to protect their interests. If they succeed in both Syria and the Ukraine, they wont gain much besides returning to pre- 2011 sphere of influence....and possibly "embarrassing" the United States on the international scene.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What America is trying to do is bleed Russia dry. Why? Because Russia, along with China, is the only real threat to them maintaining their position on top of the food chain (although the threat is extremely minimal). If we want to dissect the current wars in the Ukraine and Syria to determine a winner then its hard not to argue that Russia (and therefore Putin) is beating Obama.

The Ukraine :
*Country is in economic turmoil
*Government in crisis
*Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian 'refugees' fled/still fleeing to Russia
*Entire Eastern Half (Which is also the industrial center) controlled by Russia
*Russia controls Crimea - which was its major strategic goal of the war.

Russia is just going to maintain the stalemate until the Ukraine implodes from within. The EU doesn't really want her, Americas only using her, and even its own people are becoming restless at the non-existent movement towards imaginary "democracy". What you mentioned earlier about Russia's "ambitions in Eastern Europe" been curtailed is also far from the truth, Why? Because (a) It never held these ambitions in the first place, and (b) Its realistic ambitions were at a maximum to maintain control of Crimea and other Russian speaking areas of the country.

The fear that Russia was going to continue its advancement into Eastern Europe and directly threaten NATO members was a complete fabrication by the governments and media of the Western World. Russia would never dream such a thing knowing full well it cant win. Do Russians have ambitions of extending their influence and role in Eastern Europe? Of cors they do. But was it a realistic option at any time before/during/after the Ukrainian conflict? Of course not.

The truth is Russia did very well maintaining Crimea and the East knowing full well the distastrous consequences of losing them to the junta in West Ukraine and their American masters.

Winner : Russia

Syria :

Only a fool would say that any of Obama's policies in Syria (and the wider Middle East) have been successful.

Winner : Russia
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

However, like i said at the beginning, there really wont be a winner. Is Russian victory in the Ukraine and Syria going to threaten the power of the United States? Is it really a victory over the United States? Of course not! Russia is going to go back to where it was before 2011. Maybe national pride will be at an all time high, but they ll be missing BILLIONS of dollars wasted militarily, and BILLIONS lost through economic sanctions.............. America on the other hand will just re-assume its un-threatened position as soul super power on the Earth.

I guess you could say that Russia/Putin is winning when you consider what each sides objective is. America/Obamas was to ruin Russia and diminish its power and influence in certain areas of the world.....That hasnt happened, and likely wont. On the other hand Russia/Putins objective was to regain what was lost/taken. So far hes slowly doing that. Never known though, Obama mite hit a 3 in the last second and take us to overtime. I Hope not though, hes a Carnnt .wow, someone on ISHs that actually understands the nature of geopolitics and power; colour me surprised. You're of a dying breed in this profoundly ahistorical age.

It's hilarious how the neocons and other regime change flunkies don't think Russia has a right to a sphere of influence, while America's sphere of influence creeps right up to its borders at an alarming rate. They also don't seem to be aware that Crimea is historically Russian, and was given to Ukraine as a gift by a Soviet government that never had the sanction of its people (and a guy who spent his early years moving between Ukraine and Russia, when the two were more or less indistinguishable--particularly the Donbas region).

It takes a real historical ignoramus to think any Russian leader would allow Sevastopol to become a part of NATO. These people seriously must know nothing about history, and that is largely why they bring such disaster in their wake: they are constantly intervening in and destabalising regions of which they have very little understanding, and almost zero historical knowledge (see Iraq, see Libya, see their lack of understanding of the East/West divide in Ukraine, or the sectarianism of the Middle East, and so on). Their conceit is incredible. It's also interesting to note, that most of the neocon warmongers, were actually ex-Trotskyists, an ideology they clearly haven't given up, as they seek 'permanent revolution' by other means (i.e. humanitarian intervention and regime change). Thus we find ourselves fighting perpetual war for perpetual peace, and Americans, in their gullibility, lap it up.


What's hilarious about this ridiculous bromance is that Republicans were once all about being "tough" on foreign policy and opposing everything Putin. Sarah Palin asked during the 2008 election how Obama would handle things if "Putin rears his head".

Now that he buttered up a fellow xenophobe's ego, imbeciles on the right can't fall over one another fast enough to sing his praises. Shooting down an airliner full of civilians is ancient history.
Oh, look, another baseless straw-man from this imbecile. I suggest you read N. Tesla's post and actually learn something for once rather than engaging in this kind of inane name-calling simply because you do not have an argument to counter with.

Most people who are supporting Putin on this are doing so because they're tired of America undermining every government in the world it does not like, because time and time again, it has brought about untold destruction and carnage. But as is typical of those who support regime change, you ignore these facts, and instead focus on flinging mud at your opponents, pretending they admire tyrants for being tyrants, and other such rubbish.

Just because you and your ilk hero-worship Obama (the man who drones civilians all over the world), and therefore assume that those who think Putin is right on these issues must be hero-worshippers too, doesn't make it true. Most of the people who like Putin like him because he's one of the few people in the world standing up for the sovereignty of nations in the face of America's desire for world domination.

And how are you blaming Putin for the shooting down of that plane? Why was a civilian plane flying over a warzone in the first place? And what possible motive could either side have for deliberately shooting it down? These things happen when you start wars, so you'd be well advised to stop encouraging people to go to war, and to stop supporting the funding of NGOs that seek the destabilization of sovereign governments. Unsurprisingly, western Ukraine is still riddled through with corruption, as the Euromaidan movement has proven itself to be nothing more than a democratic pretence, a pretence to allow western involvement for the sake of 'democracy' (of which there is none).

[9erempiree]

What's hilarious about this ridiculous bromance is that Republicans were once all about being "tough" on foreign policy and opposing everything Putin. Sarah Palin asked during the 2008 election how Obama would handle things if "Putin rears his head".

Now that he buttered up a fellow xenophobe's ego, imbeciles on the right can't fall over one another fast enough to sing his praises. Shooting down an airliner full of civilians is ancient history.

I am the OP and I said it was great for another country's president to praise a candidate.

They usually don't even engage or have an opinion on a president much less a candidate.

I'm not falling heads over heels for Putin but I do like the positive comments from Putin because this can only result in a positive relationship if Trump is elected.

I'm for good relations and not the meddling and provoking we've seen from this administration especially Clinton and Kerry poking their noses into everything.

[Nick Young]

If Trump comes in to office, USA and Russia can finally become friends again.

Mend the broken alliance.

In WWII Russia and USA united and achieved a great thing by taking down Hitler and the Nazis.

Let our two nations unite so together we can achieve greatness again.

#ONEWORLD
#ONELOVE
#PEACEONEARTH

[Dresta]

Dresta,

A few months ago you gave some excellent arcticles in regards to the history of NATO encroachment on Russia over the last 20 years. There were also some very good ones on the history of Russia-US relations before the Bolshevik Revolution that were fascinating. Do you mind re-posting the URLs to all these articles? Or if you prefer just PM me.

Cheers!
I remember this one:

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/bringingrussiain

Which is good because it recognised and predicted the NATO expansion problem all the way back in 1997. There was one by Peter Hitchens at the Spectator that was good, but they have their articles behind a paywall now, so i can't see it. I can't remember any others, so all i can do is suggest this book:

http://www.amazon.com/American-Mission-Evil-Empire-Crusade/dp/0521671833/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1456256432&sr=1-1&keywords=The+American+Mission+and+the+%27Evil+Empi re%27%3A+The+Crusade+for+a+%27Free+Russia%27+since +1881

From which there are loads of references that can be followed up if you want to read about the pre-Bolshevik period in more detail.

There's a bunch of reviews on it here (which I should think shed some light on the matter):

http://h-diplo.org/roundtables/PDF/AmericanMission-Roundtable.pdf

I have a pdf i can upload on early Russian perspectives on America if you know a good place to do so? And you can find the reporting of the older Kennan (who visited Russia in the 19th century) here:

https://archive.org/details/Kennan_1891_Siberia_and_the_exile_system

Other than that, i'm not too sure--you have any idea what sites the articles were on?

[BoutPractice]

However convincing it reads on paper I still think realism is only one theory/approach to international relations... in many ways just as flawed as the others because it relies on a model with certain assumptions built in. The same applies to geostrategy, and all that other stuff pro-Russians like to throw at you.

Personally I prefer pure pragmatism. Rather than assuming things like natural spheres of influences, great power interests ruling everything etc., assume anything might happen, especially the unexpected - what doesn't figure in your model.

Now in terms of Russia's situation, this means not caring whether Russia has a "right" to a sphere of influence, and whether this is part of some eternal law of history - but simply understanding that Russia perceives it to be that way, and that this is all that matters for practical decision making purposes (you might call this approach constructivist, but again, I think all -isms make you a potential sucker when it comes to foreign policy).

To be honest though, I don't necessarily believe the problem is that the US doesn't understand this. They just don't... care about it.

The larger problem, I'd say is that a significant portion of the foreign policy establishment tends to begin any study of international relations with the assumption that
1) the world really "belongs" to the United States
2) any large scale violence in the world must have happened due to the United States not demonstrating the right "leadership" over their dominion
3) "leadership" is defined as "bombing stuff"
4) therefore the violence is explained by the US not bombing stuff
5) therefore the solution to this violence is the US bombing stuff

[Dresta]

However convincing it reads on paper I still think realism is only one theory/approach to international relations... in many ways just as flawed as the others because it relies on a model with certain assumptions built in. The same applies to geostrategy, and all that other stuff pro-Russians like to throw at you.

Personally I prefer pure pragmatism. Rather than assuming things like natural spheres of influences, great power interests ruling everything etc., assume anything might happen, especially the unexpected - what doesn't figure in your model.

Now in terms of Russia's situation, this means not caring whether Russia has a "right" to a sphere of influence, and whether this is part of some eternal law of history - but simply understanding that Russia perceives it to be that way, and that this is all that matters for practical decision making purposes (you might call this approach constructivist, but again, I think all -isms make you a potential sucker when it comes to foreign policy).

To be honest though, I don't necessarily believe the problem is that the US doesn't understand this. They just don't... care about it.

The larger problem, I'd say is that a significant portion of the foreign policy establishment tends to begin any study of international relations with the assumption that
1) the world really "belongs" to the United States
2) any large scale violence in the world must have happened due to the United States not demonstrating the right "leadership" over their dominion
3) "leadership" is defined as "bombing stuff"
4) therefore the violence is explained by the US not bombing stuff
5) therefore the solution to this violence is the US bombing stuff

:roll:

Neocon logic in a nutshell.

Ukraine has deep historical ties to Russia; therefore pushing and accelerating the drive for EU and NATO expansion into Ukraine is the opposite of pragmatic. It is either utopian idealism, or the worst kind of cynicism (exploitation for profit; i'm sure there are plenty of American-backed corporations lusting after fertile Ukrainian soil), and most likely a combination of the two. The naive and the cynical on the same side, the former used to as a means to secure the ends of the latter.

[Dresta]

I say, it's funny how quickly the narrative changes. Not long ago western media shills were reporting how the Russians were only bombing "moderates" and that they were helping IS, and that their intervention hadn't achieved anything. Yet their intervention has been the single largest factor in reaching this ceasefire agreement, which could actually be stuck to, and allow IS to be trampled.

Even the BBC is reporting that now:


Moscow's military intervention in Syria has been a game changer.
Not only has it forced the West to sit down at the negotiating table and deal with Russia and its president, but also to recognise Russia as a major world power. And, of course, it has given a huge boost to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
The reason Washington no longer demands the Syrian leader's resignation as a pre-condition to peace is because it knows that is no longer realistic: Russian firepower has made Mr Assad more secure, his armed opponents weaker.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35639970


Not that the removal of Assad was ever a sensible plan of action.


So when is DonDonut gonna admit how full of shit he's been all this time, and how ignorant he has been regarding goings on in Syria?:


http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11757236&postcount=82
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11757193&postcount=80
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11757137&postcount=77
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11757016&postcount=75
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11755698&postcount=64
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11895332&postcount=155
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12070858&postcount=48

Real smart guy that one :applause:.

[Terahite]

NikolaTesla = new alpha knowledge poster

neocons/libtards are dead this summer