Vladamir Putin a clear and present danger to peace in Europe.

PopePalpatine

FRoZeNxPyRo wrote: »

'Putin has a poor record of Human Rights'

He does? I never knew his human rights were violated.

No doubt Pussy Riot comes to mind. Despite their sentence being handed out by a federal judge, it is the presumption that Putin, so angered by a 'rock' group singing bad things about him in a church, gave them 2 years personally. If you've ever actually followed Putin, his behavior, his mannerisms, he doesn't strike as the kind of man that would risk political outcry because some girls hurt his feelings.

I recommend you watch how US cops deal with Human Rights these days. Let me sum it up for you: mace, tazers batons, and corruption.
No, I'm not bothered with sources because you can find all this yourself and I haven't got time nor the permission to root around for links.

Seeing as you want us to "find sources for US human rights abuses" by ourselves, maybe you could look at Russian human rights abuses by yourself?

Or, I might spare you the hassle of opening up a link:

There has been a number of high-profile cases of human rights abuses connected to business in Russia. Among other abuses, this most obviously involves abuse of article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[78] These include the case of the former heads of the oil company Yukos, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and Platon Lebedev whom Amnesty International declared prisoners of conscience,[79] and the case of the lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, whose efforts to expose a conspiracy of criminals and corrupt law-enforcement officials earned him sustained abuse in prison which led to his death.[80][81][82] An analogous case was the death in custody of the businesswoman Vera Trifonova, who was in jail for alleged fraud.[83] Cases such as these have contributed to suspicion in other countries about the Russian justice system, which has manifested itself in the refusal to grant Russian extradition requests for businessmen fleeing abroad.[84] Notable instances of this are the cases of the tycoon Boris Berezovsky and former Yukos vice president Alexander Temerko in the UK, the media magnate Vladimir Gusinsky in Spain[85] and Greece,[86] Leonid Nevzlin in Israel[87] and Ivan Kolesnikov in Cyprus.[88] A case that will test the attitude of the French authorities to this issue is that of the shipping magnate Vitaly Arkhangelsky. The Wikileaks revelations indicated the low level of confidence other governments have in the Russian government on such issues.[89] Cases involving major companies may gain coverage in the world media, but there are many further cases equally worthy of attention: a typical case involves the expropriation of assets, with criminals and corrupt law-enforcement officials collaborating to bring false charges against businesspeople, who are told that they must hand over assets to avoid criminal proceedings against them. A prominent campaigner against such abuses is Yana Yakovleva, herself a victim who set up the group Business Solidarity in the aftermath of her ordeal.

Also, the USA isn't quite as dangerous for journalists as Russia is. The very existence of Fox News (when the Democrats are in power) and MSNBC (when the Republicans are in power) shows that the White House and Congress don't have the same stranglehold on freedom of the press in the USA as the Kremlin does in Russia. Yes, I'm aware of the case of Edward Snowden, but something tells me that if he were a Russian revealing that the FSB has a massive Internet spying programme, he wouldn't fare very well.

And don't get me started on the rampant homophobia and racism in Russia.

Nodin

SeanW wrote: »

Apologies if I misinterpreted, but it did seem like you were excusing Stalin of genocide because he "wasn't trying to kill."

I do consider Stalin to be guilty of mass-murder and I also consider the attempt to exterminate entire nationalities - which I believe happened to the Baltic countries and likely to Ukraine - to be genocide.

No, he was killing and not worrying about it, but I don't accept he intended to wipe out every Ukranian, as opposed to Hitler was the plan was entirely related to wiping out a distinct race/ethnicity.

Elmer Blooker

http://www.veooz.com/news/SHOkUp3.html
The "west" meaning USA obviously, is blocking attempts of reinstating the cease fire at the crash site. Why on earth would they want to do that? Surely they want as much evidence as possible because a Russian missile brought down the plane? Right?
You never hear this on the news, you have to go looking for this kind of information for some reason.

Funny the way homophobia is a major issue in Russia but no one really cares about it in the Gulf States....... the oil rich Gulf States that is!

nala_rinaldo

weird thing is people say it’s putin. but he is just hired by russian thug mafia that is russia. one person does not make russia. also russian does not make you a rich person that makes political descisions. you are irish, are you making any desicions your country makes? does irish president call you and ask your opinion? well then what makes you think if a person is russian that he is a politician?
it just shows you that politicians can do whatever the hell they want. usa is never out of war but no one can do anything about it. same here. both countries are alike.

SeanW

Nodin wrote: »

No, he was killing and not worrying about it, but I don't accept he intended to wipe out every Ukranian, as opposed to Hitler was the plan was entirely related to wiping out a distinct race/ethnicity.

He didn't need to kill every single Ukrainian/Estonian/Latvian etc.

Just had to kill enough and deport enough and move in enough Soviet colonists to extinguish the nationalities. Like what Britain did to Ireland and what China is currently doing to Tibet, the latter having had more success than the UK in the 1800s and the Soviets in the 30s and 40s.

Still genocide.

Nodin

SeanW wrote: »

He didn't need to kill every single Ukrainian/Estonian/Latvian etc.

Just had to kill enough and deport enough and move in enough Soviet colonists to extinguish the nationalities. Like what Britain did to Ireland and what China is currently doing to Tibet, the latter having had more success than the UK in the 1800s and the Soviets in the 30s and 40s.

Still genocide.

I just don't accept he wised to exterminate the Ukranian nationality. Decimate, demoralise etc perhaps, but exterminate, no. I rarely use the term genocide as its often improperly applied, theres arguments over the definition and so on.

Corkfeen

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Funny the way homophobia is a major issue in Russia but no one really cares about it in the Gulf States....... the oil rich Gulf States that is!

Eh, I and many others do view homophobia and the treatment of LGBT in the middle east as a serious issue. I care very much so about it and I imagine many engaging in this topic do. You'll also find that in general that there are many public outcries about Human Rights abuses in the Middle East(and in relation to most of the globe tbh) but if we do the same about the state of Russia, it apparently makes us Russophobic. Curse my general humanity!

A reversal of rights also tends to be high profile, for example Uganda got much attention for similarly dodgy laws. Then Russia hosting the winter olympics where Putin stated that gay people would be safe as long as they keep away from the children is also going to draw more attention and reflect negatively upon Putin and his government which supports regression of human rights. The fact that they are hosting the 2018 world cup also draws more attention. Brazil received much negative attention and the same applies to Qatar who are hosting the 2022 world cup. But apparently we all ignore these things!

mulbot

so back to OP,what reasons are there for thinking Putin is a clear danger to europe,what countries in particular? to be honest without US interference i don't think there is any threat

Elmer Blooker

Perhaps Putin, (a strong leader in the Russian tradition as opposed to Mikhail Gorbachev who was used and humiliated by the west) is a result of US/NATO aggression which successfully started Cold War 2 for the simple reason that Wall Street thinks its good for business.
If NATO kept their promise in 1989 "not to spread one inch east" then its quite likely that Putin wouldn't be in power now.
I must say though this Ukraine business has been a brilliant plot by the US to weaken BOTH the EU and Russia while Uncle Sam sits on the fence laughing his head off at the dumb Europeans who fell for it hook, line and sinker

gandalf

Well Nato themselves say there was no agreement.

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_109141.htm

If there was I am sure the Russians would be able to produce a document.

If it was a verbal agreement well you know the phrase a verbal agreement is worth the paper it's written on :rolleyes:

Elmer Blooker

Theres a big protest organized for the NATO summit at Newport, Wales on Sept 4/5.

“Many of us are increasingly worried by the threat that NATO poses to world stability and peaceful relations,” said the organizers.

“Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has reinvented itself supposedly as a tool of the ‘international community’ to safeguard ‘freedom and security’.

“In reality it is a vehicle for US-led use of force in the interests of the rich and powerful, accelerating militarization, bypassing the United Nations and the system of international law, and escalating spending on arms,”

can't argue with that, fair play to them!

sin_city

Corkfeen wrote: »

The gay law is one of many reasons of why I view a Putin as a dangerous and evil individual tbh. I'm never going to trust a man who jails his opponents tbh or annexes a state with a clearly illegal referendum.

What part of the law?

What part of Article 6.21 bothers you?

This is a good reason for supporting neo nazis in government in Ukraine vs Russians in Ukraine?

Crazy world we live in.

czx

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Perhaps Putin, (a strong leader in the Russian tradition as opposed to Mikhail Gorbachev who was used and humiliated by the west) is a result of US/NATO aggression which successfully started Cold War 2 for the simple reason that Wall Street thinks its good for business.
If NATO kept their promise in 1989 "not to spread one inch east" then its quite likely that Putin wouldn't be in power now.
I must say though this Ukraine business has been a brilliant plot by the US to weaken BOTH the EU and Russia while Uncle Sam sits on the fence laughing his head off at the dumb Europeans who fell for it hook, line and sinker

No. Just Russia refusing to come out of the cold

czx

mulbot wrote: »

so back to OP,what reasons are there for thinking Putin is a clear danger to europe,what countries in particular? to be honest without US interference i don't think there is any threat

I feel sorry for Russia. Without Crimea it didn't have any breathing space. The USA was dominating it. They clearly need an extra time zone. It's crazy to expect a country to let itself be hemmed in like this. They have clearly bought they Chinese border.

InTheTrees

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Funny the way homophobia is a major issue in Russia but no one really cares about it in the Gulf States....... the oil rich Gulf States that is!

What total drivel.

Of course people care about it.

And anyway even if they didnt why does that mean russia should be excused? You dont make any sense.

InTheTrees

Any post that contains the phrase "you wont hear about this in the....."

Is suspect at best.

InTheTrees

Its weird that some irish people would happily have russia invade ireland just because they dont like the USA...

I dont get the logic of that.

???

sparksfly

Russia invade Ireland? What the hell are you taking?

sin_city

InTheTrees wrote: »

Its weird that some irish people would happily have russia invade ireland just because they dont like the USA...

I dont get the logic of that.

???

This is a fantastic post....Awesome.

I'm glad someone noticed this.....When is Russia going to learn to stop surrounding Nato?

Anyone see the US is bombing again in Iraq....not sure how many people died...they are giving Israel weapons...not sure how many dead in total in Gaza.....they colluded to remove the democratically elected government in Ukraine...not sure how many died.....anyway, I could go on.

How many people has Russia been responsible for killing in the past 20 years? I know it was 0 in Crimea....

Funny how the truth gets lost in propaganda.

mulbot

sin_city wrote: »

This is a fantastic post....Awesome.

I'm glad someone noticed this.....When is Russia going to learn to stop surrounding Nato?

Anyone see the US is bombing again in Iraq....not sure how many people died...they are giving Israel weapons...not sure how many dead in total in Gaza.....they colluded to remove the democratically elected government in Ukraine...not sure how many died.....anyway, I could go on.

How many people has Russia been responsible for killing in the past 20 years? I know it was 0 in Crimea....

Funny how the truth gets lost in propaganda.

And to think,without Russia getting involved in Syria and stopping the NATO planned bombing campaign there would have being thousands more innocent people killed-

Principle Keeper

No good

Corkfeen

sin_city wrote: »

What part of the law?

What part of Article 6.21 bothers you?

This is a good reason for supporting neo nazis in government in Ukraine vs Russians in Ukraine?

Crazy world we live in.

Okay, so a teenager struggling with his/her sexuality cannot ask anyone for support or guidance.It implies that gay people are a danger to minors which they are not. It also endangers the psychological well being of anyone struggling with their sexuality. Pride rallies are banned.Two men/women kissing on the street is propaganda based on the absurd law. Effectively this forces one to hide their sexual orientation. This further stigmatises homosexuality in Russian society.
.
A knock on societal impact is that violent groups have both targeted and entrapped gay people. Little has been done to stop them. You also had some high profile incidents of gay people being beaten on the street in Russia while people just stood and watched. You would have to be a complete imbecile to not see that the law is regressive and dangerous hence the international outcry over it.

Once again you appear to have ignored all my other points though. You asked why I think that Putin is dangerous I explained in detail. I know illegal annexing is no biggy for you but I have an issue with groups such as the Tatars being mistreated all over again. Putin invading one zone is not out of a moral obligation so I'm not going to have a sudden swell of relief when one danger is replaced by another.

mulbot

Principle Keeper wrote: »

No good

mulbot

Corkfeen wrote: »

Okay, so a teenager struggling with his/her sexuality cannot ask anyone for support or guidance.It implies that gay people are a danger to minors which they are not. It also endangers the psychological well being of anyone struggling with their sexuality. Pride rallies are banned.Two men/women kissing on the street is propaganda based on the absurd law. Effectively this forces one to hide their sexual orientation. This further stigmatises homosexuality in Russian society.
.
A knock on societal impact is that violent groups have both targeted and entrapped gay people. Little has been done to stop them. You also had some high profile incidents of gay people being beaten on the street in Russia while people just stood and watched. You would have to be a complete imbecile to not see that the law is regressive and dangerous hence the international outcry over it.

Once again you appear to have ignored all my other points though. You asked why I think that Putin is dangerous I explained in detail. I know illegal annexing is no biggy for you but I have an issue with groups such as the Tatars being mistreated all over again. Putin invading one zone is not out of a moral obligation so I'm not going to have a sudden swell of relief when one danger is replaced by another.

in all fairness a countries stance on gays,sexuality isn't a valid argument to suggest that country is a threat to european peace-oh and i suggest you visit the southern american states where you will find an equivalent view on gay people etc

Corkfeen

mulbot wrote: »

in all fairness a countries stance on gays,sexuality isn't a valid argument to suggest that country is a threat to european peace-oh and i suggest you visit the southern american states where you will find an equivalent view on gay people etc

I never indicated it was, it does help fashion one's view on Putin though. Personally, I view his apparent interest in expandin(backing of separatists included) to be an indication of being an exceedingly dangerous individual. I was asked by Sin city to explain the issue with the law.

The way in which he conducts himself in his own country is indicative of he will rule in others if he chooses to do so.

mulbot

Corkfeen wrote: »

I never indicated it was, it does help fashion one's view on Putin though. Personally, I view his apparent interest in expandin(backing of separatists included) to be an indication of being an exceedingly dangerous individual. I was asked by Sin city to explain the issue with the law.

The way in which he conducts himself in his own country is indicative of he will rule in others if he chooses to do so.

fair point-it's not an indication though of how he poses any threat to europe,? It can be argued his interests in countries (where russia once had rule etc) is merely to look out for the Russians there who actually support him-

CptMackey

mulbot wrote: »

fair point-it's not an indication though of how he poses any threat to europe,? It can be argued his interests in countries (where russia once had rule etc) is merely to look out for the Russians there who actually support him-

That's the same argument that dictators always make. We are just looking out for our people in your country. Ethnic Russians are in no danger. Godwins law aside it's the same excuse Hitler used to take over parts of Czechoslovakia before eventually occupying the whole country

Busted Flat.

mulbot wrote: »

in all fairness a countries stance on gays,sexuality isn't a valid argument to suggest that country is a threat to european peace-oh and i suggest you visit the southern american states where you will find an equivalent view on gay people etc

He could talk to some of the Loolaghs that control the GOP in the US, there he would get a mind blowing awakening.:cool:

DazMarz

I posted this a while back in AH, and I think it sums it up quite well... bearing in mind that this was written BEFORE all of this kicked off.

Vladimir Putin

A right-wing politico of whom I'm no big fan (the anti-gay laws that he has thrust upon the Russian Federation are sickening and he grossly mishandled the sinking of the Kursk submarine in 2000, to name but two things he is guilty of).

But he has to be admired, in a grudging way perhaps, for the transformation of Russia from a near-bankrupt nation on its knees that had been led down a road of ruin by an alcoholic buffoon back into a near-Superpower.

Boris Yeltsin gutted the Russian economy by short-sightedly selling off Russia's mineral wealth to the opportunistic oligarchs for a fraction of their worth for a one-off cash injection to prop up the failing economy. This stripped Russia of much of her wealth and the long-term effects could still be utterly devastating.

Yeltsin staggered onwards with his Presidency until 1999, when his approval rating reached a record low of a reported 2%. He finally resigned in near-disgrace and his Prime Minister, Vladimir Putin, succeeded him.

Putin inherited a country that was borrowing over $40 billion from the IMF and others, a country whose economy and currency had collapsed in 1998, a raging Vietnam-esque war in Chechnya and a country in the grip of corruption and oligarchy. Bleak does not begin to describe.

During his first tenure as President (2000-2008), real incomes in Russia grew by a factor of 2.5, real wages tripled, unemployment reduced by 50%, poverty reduced by 50%, GDP grew for 8 straight years (72% total growth), murder rates in Russia halved by 2011, he signed the Kyoto Agreement, several endangered species are now protected by law.

Russia was on the verge of complete collapse in 1999. Putin changed everything. I may dislike the man and his social policies, but I admire him for what he did to the world's largest country. He grabbed her by the hair and dragged her back from the abyss. He is the closest that there is to a legal dictator, but for all his faults, his successes and achievements cannot be denied.

My opinion of Putin was never that high to begin with, and has sunk lower and lower as this shít drags on... but I still think he deserves some credit for preventing Russia from going completely into the toilet.

As I'm fond of saying from time to time, when trying to find virtue in something seemingly without it, "Even Hitler had a mother..."

mulbot

CptMackey wrote: »

That's the same argument that dictators always make. We are just looking out for our people in your country. Ethnic Russians are in no danger. Godwins law aside it's the same excuse Hitler used to take over parts of Czechoslovakia before eventually occupying the whole country

recent events in ukraine show otherwise