4 Reasons Putin Is Already Losing in Ukraine

DJW001
reply to post by Agit8dChop

 

The world cannot sanction Russia, Russia is the key holder to European energy. I

The United States can supply Europe's energy more cheaply. Obama will use the sanctions against Russia as an excuse for finally clearing the Keystone Pipeline.

You seem to forget there is another nation that can provide energy to Europe even cheaper than America and that is Iran. With sanctions being lifted people will line up to buy oil and gas from them and it won't take a couple of years to get it there like it would with the Keystone which the president is against being built.

With respect to markets ?

They go up, and they go down.

And they are particular sensitive to 'wars', 'uncertainity'.

While I wish the West would put Putin on the real world version of facebooks dislike.

Because any 'actions' will have no real effect.

I am not holding my breath.

buster2010

DJW001
reply to post by Agit8dChop

 

The world cannot sanction Russia, Russia is the key holder to European energy. I

The United States can supply Europe's energy more cheaply. Obama will use the sanctions against Russia as an excuse for finally clearing the Keystone Pipeline.

You seem to forget there is another nation that can provide energy to Europe even cheaper than America and that is Iran. With sanctions being lifted people will line up to buy oil and gas from them and it won't take a couple of years to get it there like it would with the Keystone which the president is against being built.

You seem to forget that Iran would need to kick the Russians out and stop trading with them if the Europeans are going to start replacing Russian gas with Iranian gas. America can undersell them, too. Immediately.

reply to post by pheonix358


Your on the mark mate. Well said.
Completely agree and its true.

DJW001
reply to post by Agit8dChop

 

The world cannot sanction Russia, Russia is the key holder to European energy. I

The United States can supply Europe's energy more cheaply. Obama will use the sanctions against Russia as an excuse for finally clearing the Keystone Pipeline.

What a pretext, and well said. Clamp the pipelines going through the Eastern Bloc, and up the anty to the EU so their toes don't stick to the carpet from frostbite.
It was and is always about control of the natural resources, except I don't think Putin's going to be as willing a dance partner as Saddam.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Your wrong
he's winning by a mile..

He's literally running circles round the West.

All these Western leaders are terrified of him.

rigel4
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Your wrong
he's winning by a mile..

He's bitterly running circles round the West.

All these Western leaders are terrified of him.

Perhaps you would like to respond to this post, then:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

DJW001

rigel4
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Your wrong
he's winning by a mile..

He's bitterly running circles round the West.

All these Western leaders are terrified of him.

Perhaps you would like to respond to this post, then:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't believe it.. you're blinkered by you're own beliefs.
Russia doesn't expect you or me or anyone else to believe their story.

Their making a point and showing the greedy governments of the West for what they are.

The West won't even sanction Russia for fear of losing Russia's laundered money.
Putin knows this and has just proved it.

reply to post by rigel4

Russia doesn't expect you or me or anyone else to believe their story.

So... if you don't believe their story, why are you rooting for them?

DJW001
reply to post by rigel4

 

Russia doesn't expect you or me or anyone else to believe their story.

So... if you don't believe their story, why are you rooting for them?

I'm not rooting for them...Far from it.

Taking lend of Russia started way back in 1991 .. When we kicked out Saddam
Iraq was their Allie.. Two years before that if we had attacked Iraq would have sparked WWIII.

With the fall of the Soviet Union.. we (America and NATO) decided.. rather than build a new fairer system and learn from the past,We could have built bridges with Russia.. not humiliated them at every turn.
We decided that we didn't have any natural predators to keep us from doing what we pleased.
We went Bullying for profit.

How many Countries have been bombed,invaded and fleeced since then?
How many Countries has the EU absorbed?.. Most of the new EU countries are no where near on an equal footing
economically with Western Europe.. They got to join so they could be added to Nato..

Slowly encircling Russia.. That's where the respect comes in.. Would the United States put up with Russia slowly taking Countries in South America.. Until the Last one was Mexico.. I hope I'm making my point.

All this.. is about Capitalism gone wild and unchecked. We really are out of control.
These idiots in power see Russia as a legitimate target .. their #ing insane

Only we as citizens can stop this.. I don't have the answers.. but without us.. the powers that be have nothing.

reply to post by rigel4

We could have built bridges with Russia.. not humiliated them at every turn.

Could you provide an example of the US humiliating Russia?

reply to post by rigel4

Do your own research bud!

Translation: you cannot think of any. The US and Russia have been co-operating in space as equal partners. Russia has had a tendency to back governments the US does not like, but any humiliation that came from that was self-inflicted.

Possible scenario; Putin occupies Crimea and occupies/threatens other part of Ukraine. UN/Obama calls for calm / cease fire / arbitration. Putin goes to table and generously guarantees Ukraine sovereignty (but keeps Crimea). UN/Obama claim victory, world community hails peace, Putin walks away with Crimea (his original target), and in two weeks stocks/rubles return to pre-incident levels. Stupid leftists in the West think they've accomplished something; realistic officials know they'd better play nice with Vlad or else.

DJW001

rigel4

DJW001
reply to post by rigel4

 

Do your own research bud!

Translation: you cannot think of any. The US and Russia have been co-operating in space as equal partners. Russia has had a tendency to back governments the US does not like, but any humiliation that came from that was self-inflicted.

Is that the opinion of a paid shill?
You going to apologize when i bring examples?

Or just more shillin'

Of course I will apologize when you provide examples! You're the one whose credibility is on the line, not mine.

In your next post I expect you to apologize.. Now your credibility is on the line.
Please don't ask me to get more examples.. it's too easy.. just admit your wrong.

Source

Context: Past Grievances Much of what Russia is saying now involves grievances the country has been harboring since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. These issues have been around for the past two decades, and relate to what the West did and did not do during the time that Russia was in no position to object. In the minds of Russia’s leaders and in the Russian psyche in general, these perceived slights, snubs, and even transgressions are hardly water under the bridge – rather, they live as vivid symbols of the West’s arrogance, disrespect and even opportunism in the face of Russia’s weakness and turmoil in the early post-Soviet era. Now, with its wealth, patriotism, and clout on the international stage resurgent, Russia seeks recognition and perhaps redress for what it believes were crimes perpetrated against the Russian people as well as affronts to Russia’s pride and historical legacy. They include: The failure of the US and Europe to help the struggling USSR as it faced near economic collapse in the late 1980s, even in the midst of Glastnost and Perestroika reforms and conciliatory rhetoric towards the West. When financial aid came, it came after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and it mostly came in the form of loans with strings and austerity measures attached. This sentiment is echoed by many Western experts as well who believe that the West was too quick to declare “victory” in the Cold War and missed a critical opportunity to shore up their erstwhile enemy. No Marshall Plan for Russia materialized as had occurred with the defeated Axis powers of WWII, and the Russian people suffered enormously during the early post-Soviet era. Expansion of NATO into former Warsaw Pact countries in Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. Western and Russian experts agree this expansion occurred despite promises made to Russia that the Atlantic Alliance would stay out of Central and Eastern Europe in return for Russia’s acquiescence to the reunification of Germany. Many of these former Soviet republics and satellites countries were “fast-tracked” into NATO, even while technically ineligible for membership by NATO’s own rules regarding the existence of territorial disputes. Many of these territorial disputes were with Russia, who was never offered full NATO membership. Other promises regarding the de-militarization of NATO went similarly unfulfilled. The establishment of offensive military bases in Romania and Bulgaria on Russia’s strategic Black Sea – again, considered a violation of promises made by NATO to Russia in the 1990s. NATO’s pursuit of war in the Balkans against traditional Russian ally Serbia, initiated without consultation of the United Nations Security Council where Russia would have wielded a veto. US rejection of Russian offers in 1999 for a joint offensive against Muslim terrorist groups including Chechen rebels, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban following the first World Trade Center attack, the attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the Chechen insurgency. Construction of the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan (BTC) crude oil pipeline to move oil from Central Asia through Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey – bypassing Russia. Failure of the US and NATO to give the Russians adequate credit for help in the initial Afghanistan offensive following the attacks of September 11, including the use of Russian airspace, access to bases in Central Asia, and connections with the Russian-backed opposition to the Taliban (the Northern Alliance) in Afghanistan left over from the Russian-Afghan war of the 1980s. US decision to invade Iraq over the objections of Russia and other UN Security Council members. US support for “color revolutions” in Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgystan ousting Communist dictators and establishing quasi-democracies on Russia’s borders. US decision to pull out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. In Russia’s eyes, the Atlantic powers had not only ignored Russia’s national and security interests, but they had done so with willful arrogance. As Dimitri Simes has written, “Great powers - particularly great powers in decline – do not appreciate such demonstrations of their irrelevance.” Others have noted that Russian grievances against the West have much deeper historical roots and that current tensions still reflect a sense in Russia that Europe has been “saved” several times by Russian sacrifices made in wars (against the Mongols, Napoleon, and Hitler), and that Europe has in turn not shown the proper appreciation or even recognition of this reality.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Or it could be, that Putin has crossed a very fine line, where the inevitable has happened and the 'absolute power has corrupted him absolutely.' The Ukrainian pro Russian Government that was, probably left a track of payments to Putin and his Generals. Putin's probably done his dash, anymore and it would be counter productive. By stirring up trouble at home. He looks a bit on the paranoid side, if I were him I'd stash my money in Switzerland enact a few laws that stop any investigation on security grounds, then let the country go democratic, remembered always as an elder statesman that with a strong hand guided Russia to full democracy. Id imagine that western intelligence communities have the dirt on Putin and his mates, but remembering the fact that Russian intelligence has the dirt on western politicians. Which I imagine is understood by both sides as a no go area,used only in the last resort. As it would destabilise the very thing you are infiltrating.
A bit like all of Hoovers personal files disappearing, supposedly shredded by his loyal secretary but in reality in the hands of the CIA.Your a#$@ is mine!

.

reply to post by rigel4

They include: The failure of the US and Europe to help the struggling USSR as it faced near economic collapse in the late 1980s, even in the midst of Glastnost and Perestroika reforms and conciliatory rhetoric towards the West. When financial aid came, it came after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and it mostly came in the form of loans with strings and austerity measures attached. This sentiment is echoed by many Western experts as well who believe that the West was too quick to declare “victory” in the Cold War and missed a critical opportunity to shore up their erstwhile enemy. No Marshall Plan for Russia materialized as had occurred with the defeated Axis powers of WWII, and the Russian people suffered enormously during the early post-Soviet era.

The US didn't give them money? That's what they are upset about? I would think that giving them a handout, like some panhandler on the street, would be humiliating.

Expansion of NATO into former Warsaw Pact countries in Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. Western and Russian experts agree this expansion occurred despite promises made to Russia that the Atlantic Alliance would stay out of Central and Eastern Europe in return for Russia’s acquiescence to the reunification of Germany.

What, specifically, was the "agreement," and who was it between?

Many of these former Soviet republics and satellites countries were “fast-tracked” into NATO, even while technically ineligible for membership by NATO’s own rules regarding the existence of territorial disputes. Many of these territorial disputes were with Russia, who was never offered full NATO membership. Other promises regarding the de-militarization of NATO went similarly unfulfilled. The establishment of offensive military bases in Romania and Bulgaria on Russia’s strategic Black Sea – again, considered a violation of promises made by NATO to Russia in the 1990s.

Again, who made these promises?

NATO’s pursuit of war in the Balkans against traditional Russian ally Serbia, initiated without consultation of the United Nations Security Council where Russia would have wielded a veto.

In order to stiop the genocide, the US could not risk a probable Russian veto.

US rejection of Russian offers in 1999 for a joint offensive against Muslim terrorist groups including Chechen rebels, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban following the first World Trade Center attack, the attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the Chechen insurgency.

Why should the US join a Russian war of aggression in the "Middle East?"

Construction of the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan (BTC) crude oil pipeline to move oil from Central Asia through Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey – bypassing Russia.

Those countries offered more favorable terms.

Failure of the US and NATO to give the Russians adequate credit for help in the initial Afghanistan offensive following the attacks of September 11, including the use of Russian airspace, access to bases in Central Asia, and connections with the Russian-backed opposition to the Taliban (the Northern Alliance) in Afghanistan left over from the Russian-Afghan war of the 1980s.

Fair enough. I apologize, more credit should have been given for their co-operation.

US decision to invade Iraq over the objections of Russia and other UN Security Council members.

The US was doing Russia a favor by giving them something they can point to when they invade another country.

US support for “color revolutions” in Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgystan ousting Communist dictators and establishing quasi-democracies on Russia’s borders.

What sort of support? And what business was it of Russia'S?

US decision to pull out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty.

Fair enough. Sorry.

In Russia’s eyes, the Atlantic powers had not only ignored Russia’s national and security interests, but they had done so with willful arrogance. As Dimitri Simes has written, “Great powers - particularly great powers in decline – do not appreciate such demonstrations of their irrelevance.” Others have noted that Russian grievances against the West have much deeper historical roots and that current tensions still reflect a sense in Russia that Europe has been “saved” several times by Russian sacrifices made in wars (against the Mongols, Napoleon, and Hitler), and that Europe has in turn not shown the proper appreciation or even recognition of this reality.

Russia likes thinking of itself as a declining power. Russians don't have to work so hard that way. That's why Communism was so unpopular.