Straight talk about Putin and Russia

This is a must-read article! Every brainwashed American and European should read it! In these times of lies and false propaganda a dose of truth is very refreshing!
I too had doubts about the sincerity of Putin. I now believe he truly does not want war and is doing his best to avoid it.

Here is a sample from the article:
"....In addition to my personal experience with Putin, I've had discussions with numerous American officials and U.S. businessmen who have had years of experience working with him––I believe it is safe to say that none would describe him as "brutal" or "thuggish", or the other slanderous adjectives and nouns that are repeatedly used in western media."

Read on here:
http://www.russiaotherpointsofview.com/2014/04/russia-report-putin-.html

 

Today is my lucky day! I came across another piece of truth! Now I know what Washington really has been planning with the Ukraine!
Listen to the interview with Sergej Glazjew, a close friend of Putin:

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/...nalyse/interview-mit-sergej-glazjew-ein-muss/
--------------------
The aim is to get the Ukraine to give up its sovereignty and become a member of the EU and follow their orders. The EU is a vassal of the USA.
Put into simple words: The US wants to break up the Soviet Union and use the Europeans to do the dirty work!

I hope some smart users will come forward and respond to this video. It is very serious.

 

I think Putin did exactly what he needed to do. He saw a geopolitic opening and he pulled a brilliant trigger which will have little to no consequences really. Crimea has a Russian history and no historic connection to Kiev, so it made all the sense in the world for it to be Russian territory (again). I think that the West in general doesn't mind that Russia annexed Crimea, I think they are only upset about the way it was done. The problem in this case was (or maybe still is) that the people there didn't show any desire to separate from Kiev and join Moscow. That's what's bugging our politicians. He came in and abused the weakness of the US and Western Europe (who're fighting over nonsense) to reclaim Russian territory.

Had the people said for years that they wanted to separate (like Catalonia from Spain) it would have been a smooth transition. Now it kinda is displayed like a takeover and then asking the people if they approve. You just can't do that in this day and age. It was the correct move from Putin to improve his position and the position of Russia and weaken a neighbor without sacrificing soldiers or anything really. From the Russian point of view it was an ingenious (geo)political coup.

I imagine Europeans are just mad because they didn't see it coming. Not that they expected Crimea to be Ukraine-Territory long term anyhow, but the smoothness and the quickness of it, and them being helpless to do anything else but to look like fools.

 

Well, I think the West minded it very much, because they wanted to capture or chase away Putin's fleet from there, and that would have been open aggression against Russia. Then Putin would have had to hit back, which is the genuine idea of this whole operation.

It may bother the politicians, but they don't count. It was the Crimean people who overwhelmingly voted to go with Russia.

Hmm... I thought the Crimean people were only too happy to get away from the new Kiev Junta. Why are the East-Ukrainians now fighting the Kiev Government? Because they love it so much?

You make me laugh!! What is the US doing the whole time? Ever thought of their tactics? Under the guise of freeing the people from an oppressed ruler and bringing them democracy they break up and devastate one country after the other. Ask them, WHY they do that? To whose benefit must the people suffer??

I agree with you on the smart move. And it was done bloodless!!!!!! Something the West hasn't managed yet.

They still look and behave like fools! By what right, for instance, does Germany impose sanctions on Russia? It makes no sense for any of the EU member states to threaten Russia. Is someone telling them how to react?? You tell me since you live not far from the trouble spot.

 

Well, I'm a historian, so I tend to look at things from a historic context. The Ukraine is and was far to big, hence half of its population is Russian. Nikita Khrushchev did give territory to the Ukraine 1954 which had no Ukrainian history. But since the Ukraine was still a satellite of the SU it didn't matter. I don't think any European leader or politician with any reasonable education ever expected that the Ukraine would maintain its borders for many years to come after it split from the SU. Same thing with Georgia really which was given extra-territory by Stalin.

It is pretty clear to everybody objective (whether politician or not) that the Ukraine cannot sustain itself as a country as long as it is politically Russians against Ukrainians within the country. Russia has a better GDP PPP so obviously the eastern part would prefer to be under Moscow than under Kiev, which makes sense as the majority of the population is Russian anyhow. Also they saw that Crimea did separate and now they see their opportunity. Therefore it makes sense that the Russian population within the Ukraine has a Moscow friendly political strategy. The Ukrainians tend to look west and therefore joining the EU longterm or eventually. Which makes also sense for them. The problem is that obviously we (as in EU) would love to get the Ukraine because of its extraordinary wealth in resources, but all the high-resource areas tend to be in primarily Russian territories of the Ukraine. So our politicians know that longterm these will have to and want to split from the Ukraine and join Russia. And that's why our politicians don't do much. They want this conflict to be over, without them loosing too much face with their own people and without angering the Russians who are very important economic partners as well. You see, Russia for the US is a good partner but economically not as important. For the EU they're extremely important as an economic partner, so no politician would risk conflicts with Russia which could just be the spark needed to again restart the bloody recession in Europe big time.

Obviously Putin knew that when he marched into Crimea...

The Ukraine - as in the Ukrainian part of the Ukraine - will eventually join the EU, and I imagine that is the longterm plan anyhow for both sides, but this cannot be achieved with a war, or with a conflict against Russia. Americans tend to forget that for the EU Russia is just as important of an ally as the US is. They do supply our continent with the resources we need to keep on rolling...

 

I'm no historian, but a curious person who likes to figure out what the politicians are up to.
So, what, in your opinion, was Stalin up to when he gave Russian territory away? Was that after he conquered half of Europe and therefore had more than he could manage?

 

Actually the reasons for giving territory away is pretty strait forward: Nikita Khrushchev was born in west Russia and moved in 1908 (when he was 14 years old) to the Ukraine, where he spend his youth. He had his (first) wife and two children there, and even studied in the Ukraine. I think he left the Ukraine properly in 1925 because of his the political career. Joseph Stalin was born in Gori, today's Georgia.

Every political leader who's gets big power tends to give a little extra for his home. In the case of these two, they just redrew the map

 

It has worked so far. A big problem, I heard, was and is the corruption in the country. Just like in Russia under Yeltsin the Oligarchs looted the country now they are doing it in the Ukraine.
A sample link, so you know what I mean:

http://rt.com/news/ukraine-oligarch-rule-governors-512/

 

I see!!
Do you know where Putin is from? Maybe he will give some land away, too!

 

He's from Saint Petersburg. The position he held in the KGB is worrying to many. His KGB career is pretty much in eastern Germany, so he knows more inside stuff than most leaders. This makes him a very powerful leader. Whenever you have intelligence people in high ranking political positions, they tend to have same sort of intel to shut off any opposition they might have in their own countries. Make no mistake, he is a very smart politician and he will do what's best for Russia.

This is of secondary importance in my mind. Every country in the world has problems with corruption. You have big time corruption in Brazil (just a random example, not trying to offend anybody) yet their country is politically more stable than the Ukraine.

The problem in the Ukraine is really that the Russians are the biggest ethnic group in the country, and they want a Moscow friendly policy, while the minority of Ukrainians who had really bad experiences with the SU want a EU friendly policy. The contrasts of two groups which are distinguishable through languages is just apparent there

 

Now we come to the crux of the matter: It's all about resources, never mind the people! A pro-western Junta in Kiev, consisting of shrewd oligarchs, is desired by the US, EU and Israel, because most oligarchs are Jewish and can be trusted to deliver the goods. First thing they will probably do is sell Ukrainian wealth to foreign, preferably US, companies. It will be a repeat from the 1990s in Russia.
The only thing they have to do is fight and subjugate their own people in Eastern Ukraine, kill them recklessly! Shoot down an airliner on top of it and hope that will help to scare the people and make them run to Russia!!

With your help I am getting some more rounded picture of the situation there. Thanks!

 

First of all, it's always geo-politics in international politics. If you think that Obama actually is thinking about the people of any country other than the US, you have to be delusional. What ever improves the situation for the people of US he will do. Same thing is true for Germany. Angela Merkel doesn't waste a singe hour thinking about what is best for a country other than Germany. So if their country benefits from something, they will consider. What is best for the people of the Ukraine is only considered by the leaders of the Ukraine. We (as in everybody else) are only thinking about the Ukraine, if it is in our economic or geopolitical interest to do so. If the Ukraine is important economically or in another way to another country, then you'll see other leaders getting involved.

The US involvement is limited at best because Obama is just trying to safe face in the local media. Like he's actually doing something...

Russia being involved makes a lot of sense since the Ukraine is full of Russian people who tend to look to Putin and Moscow more than to any other city for leadership. And Putin obviously feels responsible for his people. He will do what ever he can - without starting a war obviously which would be bad for his people - to help Russians. He's just waiting for a stupid move by the Ukraine government so he can justify helping his own, and the EU having to agree with him. There is a reason why the Ukrainian government looks like they're not doing much. They know, if they mess up they will lose their territory easily to Russia, which will be supported by the people in these territories. And I think it is inevitable anyway. They're only postponing what will happen.

Ukraine is important to Russia, as it has a high number of Russian inhabitants.

Here the percentages of Russians in the Ukraine:



The economic situation is not good because the leadership is too split. You can see that in the US as well, whether you're republican or democrat. If they don't work with each other on any level the government is failing...

 

Putin is just doing what America should be doing throwing the Zionist filth out on their a$$. It's funny to me when ever a sovereign country kicks out the Bankers and the corporations that steal their natural resources, and drain the country dry they are deemed terrorist. Americans will learn this the hard way. The only thing saving Americans from what the Russians endured is the right to bare arms. Once we lose that right may God help us all.

 

He must be a colleague of Angela Merkel. She came apparently from the Stasi, studied in Moscow. Are they at all friendly with each other, at least in private? I know Merkel is pushing the sanction button, but that could be because she has to obey her masters.

Yes, Putin was a KGB man and he could be pretty brutal with the Tschetchens. I hated him for that. I don't like brutal men!! But he seems to have mellowed out now. Apparently, he is quite religious.
Here is a very nice video where he speaks about his mother's cross etc. :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3d_yxJhmjk

And that is what he was elected for.
He is also a very disciplined man, which is a big PLUS for him. He is not like any of his predecessors or any in the present time worldwide.

I agree! Corruption seems to get worse and more daring.

 

No wonder Putin wants Ukraine, he is protecting them from the tyrannical Zionist mafia.

 

I like the video with Putin, but I don't know where you got this information. Angela Merkel is East-German yes, but she studied in Leipzig and in East-Berlin. She's got a PhD in Chemistry and a MA in Physics, but maybe she spend a year or so in Moscow, but I don't know ever reading about that. Also the Stasi background is new to me. Could you find a source for either for those things?

I think Angela Merkel might be the best politician of this generation. I'm a big fan of what she does, as she's aiding her country and the entire EU, and making sure that neither France nor UK dare to make a step without taking to her first. Her relationship with the US I think is also terrific as was apparent when she gave her speech in a joint meeting of US Congress (first German to do so) back in 2009 I think.

I imagine she's got a great relationship with most leaders of the world as I cannot imagine they would want Germany on their bad side, and since she's got the support of the German people and she's lead them for so long, she's firmly established.

 

It is hard to understand how cruel leaders can be. I'm soo disappointed with the American about their torture practices. So inhumane, so bare of all empathy... how can anybody like them? The Germans were reprimanded by the Americans among others for not stopping Hitler. Why are they not stopping Bush and Obama?

I guess she is stuck between a rock and a hard place. She definitely has chosen to go with the Western Powers' wishes whether it is good for the Germans or not. I wonder where they will get their gas from should Putin cut them off.

I guess you are right... again!

Sure, he embarrassed himself by right away accusing Putin of having shot down MH017.

Thank you for your patience to explain things to me. I tend to be far too emotional.
Yes, Putin cares about his people. I saw all the hundreds of trucks he sent to the people in Donetsk.

 

Its a matter of perspective I would imagine. I don't think most leaders are cruel at all. I think they're doing what they feel is best for their people. If you run any country at this point, you're running one of the biggest machineries imaginable and any decision you make has life and death consequences for millions of people. Not an easy burden to fall asleep with I imagine. And they are asked to make life and death decisions sometimes within minutes. Of course there are really bad people like Hitler or Stalin who're real maniacs, but the vast majority actually try to do the best they can.

Bush for example:

There are four conditions under which a country's severalty is over:
- repeated aggression towards neighboring countries
- not following the Non-Proliferation treaty
- harboring gangsters, international criminals or terrorists
- genocide

Iraq broke all four before the country got invaded by the US the second time around. So, did he have reasons for intervention on a "moral" ground? Absolutely, but this is a hard message to explain to the US people. Also he did for example a lot to help out AIDS and Malaria victims in Africa. There are measures even "bad" presidents do, which can be argued for without a geopolitical reason. The fact on the matter is though, that judging on what was explained to him, he made the best choices he could for his country, or at least so he thought. History will say whether his decisions were awful or good.

The torturing done in Guantanamo was just stupid, I think. I don't know who came up with that stupid idea, and why it was approved.

Also what you have to keep in mind is, that most leaders don't face consequences if they kill their own people. Hitler killed people next door. Stalin and Mao didn't. You can see a pattern there...

 

Putin only went after the oligarchs who were stealing from Russia and hiding their money somewhere off-shore. Otherwise, he is not against the Jews, not that I have heard.

Right to bare arms???

 

I don't think she's stuck really. At this point Germany is the financial big boy of the EU, and Poland, Austria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia and I bet other countries as well, will instantly follow what Merkel says simply because of their economic dependence of that country. I'd be shocked if she doesn't realize that she's running 50% of the EU, and I'd be shocked if Putin didn't know that as well. Therefore, I imagine that Putin doesn't want Germany upset too much, because the exports of Russia do primarily go into the EU and if he cuts off Germany, they will start buying from another source, and make the EU follow them, which would be also an economic kill of Russia. Russia either has to keep the supply rolling or if they choose to turn it off, just do it as a scare tactic and for publicity. Germany's reserves are actually full. The EU can survive 9 months without foreign oil or gas. And I bet in 9 months the EU can find a new source if forced.

I think its a very complicated game of chess. If Putin says "check" it might backfire, and if Merkel says "check" it can backfire.

You saw hundreds of trucks? Do you live in that area or where you passing through?

 

Good grief... no, I don't live there. I saw the trucks on the internet!

It is so nice to hear your views. It's very calming.
Tell me, do you think there is going to be a war in Europe with Russia? All I hear is that the Americans are pushing and aiming for that. That shoot-down of MH017 was meant to implicate Putin and start a war. Unfortunately, the Kiev Junta effed it up and the false flag went down the drain.
Again, how reckless and cruel to shoot down a passenger plane!

 

The conspiracy theories with that plane are gloriously funny to me. On the Russian side there is the conspiracy floating around that the NSA or CIA highjacked the Malaysian plane in the pacific (that why it's gone), filled it up with bodies and purposely crashed it in the Ukraine, so that the US has a reason to militarily intervene. Ridiculous in my opinion, or at least on par with Putin shooting it down.

I don't think there is a scenario any time soon where Russia would go to war against Europe or the other way around. The time were countries go to war is passé. Also, a democracy has never gone to war with another democracy - one of the big arguments people use for "spreading democracy". The Ukraine will in my opinion get a little smaller, the eastern parts will eventually join Russia, and then the West can finally rule with Ukrainian people at the top. If you followed the development closely, you will know that this entire thing started because Ukrainians didn't approve of the Russian leader who got fairly elected. They overthrew him and he fled to Moscow, then they put a Ukrainian into office who was not elected. So the entire thing happened because Ukrainians didn't accept the election results. Just because they have a more west friendly orientation, our media tends not to mention that.

In the end I feel Russia and EU will become big partners and the US will loose its superior ally status for the EU. I also think that it is only a question of a time before the UK will secede from the EU which will give continental Europe more freedom to work more closely with Russia. I don't think a war with Russia will happen, because they have in us an endless cash-cow they can sell all their resources to. It's harder to find a new customer than another retailer who sells the same product....

The media creates a fictional enemy in other people. China is one of my favorite examples because Chinese have in the last 3000 years not invaded foreign territory. If you look at the map of China 3000 years ago and today it's pretty much the same. Also Tibet is a big time exception which could also be argued for in terms of history. If China will move on any region in the world militarily, it would be a miracle unless it's Taiwan (for obvious reasons). Yet our media tends to make China into a dangerous nation who might attack and overthrow us someday.

Just as a footnote to that: It is historically more likely to get invaded by Holland if you're in South-East Asia than by China.

 

Thank you very much for your efforts. I'm calling it a night now, because I'm getting tired.
If you really live in Austria, you should have been in bed a long time ago!!

http://www.tunesbaby.com/yt/?x=CxbyWqWsoLs

Good Night!

 

lol. Thanks for that song. Actually I'm in Canada right now to study French, but I'm going back home in a week
But it's late I agree!

 

Maybe I miss read something. But the oligarchs are Russian Jewish mobsters...correct??? Yes and the right to bare those arms will never be taken away Had the Russians had guns, in my opinion the Bolsheviks wouldn't have been able to slaughter millions of people.

I have been sick for two days now so if I don't make any sense that would be the reason.